Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have sympathy for Senator Rose Conway-Walsh. She has difficulty in standing up, while I have difficulty in sitting down. Between the two of us, we would make up one normal person.

I thank Senators for drafting the Bill, in particular Senator Catherine Ardagh. I really appreciate the fact that she has taken this initiative. While I have some concerns about the detail, I welcome the principle of the Bill.I assure the House that I am fully behind any reasonable measures that will combat littering and illegal dumping in our communities. Last year more than €95 million was spent nationally on litter prevention and control. I have stated repeatedly that I consider littering and illegal dumping economic and environmental treason. It is a scourge.

I am also particularly exercised about the issue of dog fouling. The nuisance and potential public health risks associated with dog fouling is something I specifically want to address, but before I do I want to set out my role and that of the Department in respect of litter. The Department provides the legislative framework to enable local authorities to tackle litter. The Litter Pollution Acts 1997 to 2009 provide that statutory framework. It is a matter for each local authority to decide on the most appropriate public awareness, enforcement and clean-up actions in regard to litter in their respective areas, taking into account local circumstances and priorities. It must be appreciated that the challenges presented in tackling litter in primarily urbanised local authority areas may differ from those in more rural locations.

I recognise that legislative measures alone will not suffice. In order to tackle the issue effectively, a wide-ranging approach is needed. This approach will involve all elements of Irish society, incorporating enforcement by local authorities, public awareness and education aimed at achieving behavioural change and attitudes toward littering and dog fouling.

The anti-litter and anti-graffiti awareness grant scheme, ALAGS, is just one element of the targeted direct response to deal with litter which my Department supports. This year, I am increasing the funding provided to local authorities under the grant scheme by 28%. It allows local authorities apply for funding for projects aimed at raising awareness of litter, including dog fouling, and graffiti issues in their functional areas.

Local authorities are asked to focus their activities under the scheme on young people, in particular schools and community groups, with an emphasis on encouraging long-term behavioural change. Grants can cover a broad range of measures to raise public awareness and stimulate anti-litter and anti-graffiti activity at local level.

I have also increased and extended funding for the protection of the uplands and rural environments, PURE, project for a further three years following its significant success at tackling litter and illegal dumping in the foothills of south county Dublin and Wicklow. For this project I have allocated a further €345,000 over the three-year period from 2018-20. I also oversee the funding allocation for several other anti-litter initiatives currently in operation in Ireland including the national spring clean; the green schools programme; Irish Business Against Litter, IBAL, litter league; and negotiated agreements with the banking and chewing gum industries.

A particular bugbear of mine is the issue of dog-fouling. Unlike Senator Conway-Walsh, I can do a lot of walking at the moment. I was out walking and came across an older neighbour, who told me somebody had let a dog foul right outside the gate. The person has poor mobility and this was the way the entrance to her home was left. I do not think it is acceptable for any older person to have to deal with that, because they are not physically able to clean up dog foul outside their homes.

Although it is an offence under section 22 of the Litter Pollution Act not to clean up after one's dog that has fouled, the reality is that many dog owners are reneging on their civic duty to clean up after their dogs. Dog faeces contain bacteria and roundworm parasites which can be harmful to young children, in particular. Although statistically dog waste represented just 1.22 % of overall litter in 2016, it is perhaps the most intrusive type of litter and a constant source of nuisance for the public on our streets, in our parks and on our beaches. I have had small children and pushed buggies around the streets on numerous occasions. No one should have to come home after a walk and not be able to bring a buggy into a house because it needs to be power hosed as a result of the scale of dog faeces on it. It is not right that people ignore the law in such a way as they do now.

Thankfully, my children are now older but they are still quite small and when I bring them for a walk I have to point out dog faeces and watch the street rather than what is going on around us so that the children do not walk into it. Obesity is a major issue and we should be actively encouraging everyone to go out and walk. We encourage children to go out and walk, but they end up walking into dog excrement. It is off-putting and is not right.

People need to take a far more responsible approach to this issue. If they own dogs, they have a responsibility to clean up after them and need to live up to that responsibility. As we have seen in many other areas of society, such as the smoking ban, there has to be a zero-tolerance approach to this practice.

Many initiatives have been tried to deal with dog fouling, including obvious ones such as signage, more dog waste bins and bags and advertising campaigns in cinemas and on social media. A new approach has been adopted by some local authorities using talking lamp-post technology, particularly in Dublin, in areas such as Baldoyle and Fingal, and in Mullingar, my town, Athlone, Lahinch, Kilkee and Limerick. Dog fouling was the single biggest issue raised by Dubliners in public submissions to Dublin City Council. The technology uses pre-recorded messages to remind dog walkers to obey the law.

The green dog walkers scheme is another new initiative being adopted by local authorities, including my home county of Roscommon. It aims to increase awareness of dog fouling by signing up members to take a pledge to always clean up after their dogs. These members are provided with green dog walker armbands and waste bags. By wearing the green armbands, they are indicating that they are responsible dog owners who are participating in and supporting the scheme. However, ultimately the responsibility for tackling dog fouling rests with the dog owner. If a dog fouls inside a person's house, he or she would not contemplate for a second not cleaning it up, yet many owners simply do not apply the same logic when they are walking their dogs in public, for some unfathomable reason. With dogs come pleasure and companionship, but also responsibility. Areas in our towns and communities across the country should not, under any circumstances, become no-go areas as a result of dog fouling.

As regards the scourge of illegal dumping, I recently launched the 2017 anti-dumping initiative to work in partnership with local authorities and community organisations to identify high risk or problem areas using smart technology, such as drones, to develop appropriate enforcement responses and to carry out clean-up operations.

Applications for funding were invited by the relevant waste enforcement regional lead authority, WERLA, and the scheme has been a major success with 111 applications to date. An initial allocation of €650,000 was made available, but given the very positive response and the quality of the applications submitted, I will make further funds available to support a second phase of this initiative this year. I will make an announcement in this regard shortly.

Before addressing the Bill specifically, I would like to draw attention to the www.fixyourstreet.iewebsite. It is a service launched in 2011 whereby non-emergency issues can be reported to a local council. It is a website where littering, illegal dumping and dog fouling can also be reported. I would urge people to spread the word about this website and download the EPA app, See It? Say It!, to report litter and illegal dumping by taking a picture. The GPS co-ordinates are automatically included and it is sent to the EPA.

I welcome the opportunity presented by the Bill to highlight and publicly debate the litter issue. Although the Bill is clearly well intentioned, in the short time my officials and the Office of Attorney General have had to consider it we have already identified some legal, policy and operational concerns in resect of the Bill as presented. These concerns essentially fall into two categories, namely the primary focus of the Bill on court imposed fines, which I believe is misdirected, and some significant concerns as regards the legality of the Bill as currently worded.Although I am not proposing at this stage to oppose the Bill outright, it is very clear, having taken legal advice, that it will require considerable amendment before I will be in position to support it, if that is possible at all. I need more time to reflect on it to satisfy myself whether it can be amended adequately to address these concerns in a robust, legally sound manner. It might be helpful for me to set out some of the concerns so as to inform our debate and further consideration of the matter.

The Bill focuses on the litter fines imposed by courts. Statistics compiled by my Department indicate that the level of fines imposed by the courts for litter-related offences is very low. In 2015 fines and costs for litter offences amounting to only €79,000 were imposed by the courts nationally. Although this figure almost doubled to €144,000 last year, it is still a very low level considering that 31 local authorities are involved. Therefore, I do not believe the Bill is targeting the right issue. These figures are also evidence that when these matters come before the courts, the levels of fines awarded on summary conviction are far below the current allowable threshold of €4,000. Again, it points to the fact that amending the maximum court fines, as proposed, is unlikely to effect any major improvement in enforcement or to have any great impact on litter levels nationally. The Bill, as worded, will not increase the current on-the-spot fine of €150 for littering offences, which is the principal tool used by local authorities to tackle litter offenders. For example, in 2015 local authorities collected €655,000 in on-the-spot fines, compared to just €144,000 imposed by the courts in fines in the same year.

Notwithstanding my personal annoyance at dog fouling, the amendment to section 24(3) proposed in the Bill to allow a person to initiate civil proceedings against a person convicted of a dog-fouling offence is superfluous. My advice is that there are already well defined courses of action in common law, including by way of negligence or nuisance and possibly trespass, and the approach proposed is not recommended. However, I do accept the principle of what is being outlined by Senator Catherine Ardagh. I am quite willing to facilitate engagement by her or anyone else in this House with my departmental officials to determine whether we can come up with constructive suggestions, particularly on the issue of dog fouling. I am very open to suggestions or approaches people have to make on this matter.

The Bill proposes to increase in monetary terms court imposed fines under the Litter Pollution Acts 1997 to 2009. Under the Fines Act 2010, it is envisaged that in the future changes to such summary fines should reference one of the five "classes" contained in the Act. In this regard, the Bill is legally flawed.

As I said, it is welcome that the Bill has been published. As Members will know, particularly those who have been here a little longer, my approach from the Opposition benches in this and the Lower House was always to engage constructively with Ministers. I encourage Senator Catherine Ardagh to engage with my officials and go through the legislation with them. We will highlight the issues we have with it. If we can come up with sensible suggestions that would strengthen the legislation in this area, I will be quite willing to work with her on Committee Stage in that regard. I urge her to take up this offer and talk to the team in the Department. I do not believe the legislation, as constructed, will do what she wants to do, but I am quite willing to sit down with her and come up with other suggestions in this field and come forward on Committee Stage with a constructive and agreed approach. I accept the principle of what she is trying to do, that is, combat the scourge of litter and illegal dumping. Let us work together and come forward with a proposal that will work legally, strengthen the law in this area in practical terms and also address the scourge of dog fouling across the country. As we did in the case of the smoking ban and the plastic bag tax, let us come up with something innovative. If any Member of the House has a suggestion we could incorporate into the law, let us look at it. I am prepared to look at suggestions with an open and constructive mind. As Minister, I am totally committed to tackling Ireland's litter issues in a meaningful way that will result in better outcomes for the environment and the public, particularly children.

I thank the sponsoring Senators for the Bill and kindly request their patience as we reflect further on the proposals contained in it which appear, as I said, to be flawed. I look forward to further engagement with them as we seek to identify some common ground in addressing Ireland's litter challenge.