Vol. 324 No. 8
asked the Minister for the Environment if he is aware that approximately 5,000 gallons of toxic industrial effluent were dumped into a ditch near Mitchelstown, County Cork with the consequent pollution of the Gradogue River; if he has received a detailed report from Cork County Council regarding the nature, source and impact of this dumping; if it is proposed to take legal action under the Water Pollution Act, 1976; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
31.
asked the Minister for the Environment if he is aware of the grave public concern at the spillage of toxic waste, accidental or otherwise, into rivers and streams, which are used as sources of public water supplies; and the steps being taken to prevent injury to public health through such indiscriminate dumping.
32.
asked the Minister for the Environment if he will make a statement on the dumping and spillage of toxic waste into the rivers Funcheon, Gradogue and Shannon during recent months.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take questions Nos. 30, 31 and 32 together.
I am aware of the incidents in question and I have received details of the investigations carried out and the remedial action taken to mitigate the effects of the pollution.
The pollution which affected the Gradogue and Funcheon Rivers occurred on 10 June 1980 when liquid waste disposed of into a ditch near Mitchelstown County Cork subsequently reached both rivers with major consequential destruction of fish life and other aquatic species in the river. No public water supply sources were affected. Local authority investigations revealed that the material discharged was highly toxic with a high acidic reaction. The source of the liquid waste was traced to a firm in the midlands.
On 30 July 1980 the local authority obtained by consent a High Court Injunction prohibiting the agents of the firm disposing of the waste and also the waste disposal firm employed by them from discharging polluting matter into waters contrary to the provisions of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977.
The Garda Síochána have also conducted their own investigations into the case. I understand that these investigations have now been completed and that they have submitted the matter to the law officers for a decision as to whether criminal proceedings should be instituted.
The more recent incident involving the river Shannon occurred on 12 October following the fracture of a joint in a pipe carrying slurry from mining operations to an adjacent tailings pond. The mine management notified Tipperary (NR) County Council in whose functional area the incident occurred and the local authority in turn alerted other local authorities concerned. Two public water supply intakes downstream of the spillage were turned off and were not brought into use again until monitoring showed that it was safe to do so.
It is understandable that there should be public concern at any threat of contamination of public water supplies. I would point out, however, that local authorities have wide ranging powers under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977, including in particular the power to take urgent measures to mitigate or remedy the effects of any polluting discharge.
I appreciate the Minister's detailed reply. In relation to the first part of Question No. 30 and in relation to the waste disposal company, in view of the fact that the source of this pollution was carried by that company from a company in the midlands to the Gradogue river, could the Minister's Department get a list from the company of all the toxic wastes which they are contracted to dispose of and the location where they are disposing of these wastes? Since this question was put down, has the Minister heard from the law officers in the relevant local authority if they have decided to initiate proceedings against the company in addition to the High Court action to which the Minister referred?
The answer to the second part of the question is no and to the first part is that this company, pending the provision of suitable sites, have stopped carrying toxic wastes.
Can the Minister say what were the constituents of the toxic wastes in regard to the Gradogue and the Funcheon rivers and in regard to the Shannon and can he also tell us if the wastes in both cases would have been fatal to human as well as to fish life if it had got into the public water supply?
In the case of the Gradogue and Funcheon rivers, it was a highly toxic spent chromic acid which destroyed the fish life in a stretch of about eight miles of river and resulted in 40,000 fish killings. As far as the Shannon is concerned the pollution arose following the fracture of a joint in a pipe carrying slurry from mining operations to an adjacent tailings pond. In relation to the damage to human life, I cannot give an answer but I assume that it would not do one a whole lot of good if one had highly toxic spent chromic acid——
Would the Minister please supply us with the information if possible, as to whether it would have been fatal to human life? What is the maximum penalty under the Water Pollution Act, 1976, and have any prosecutions been brought?
On summary conviction £250 and £100 for each day for continuing offences or six months imprisonment or both and on indictment £5,000 and £500 per day for a continuing offence or two years' imprisonment or both.
In relation to the contracts which this waste disposal company have I understood the Minister to say that they ceased contracting to dispose of this toxic waste. Is the Minister's Department in a position, under various statutes, to request details of other contracts this company may have with a view to ensuring this does not recur?
The next question on the Order Paper is a more general one and I will go into greater detail on it.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Have any prosecutions been brought in respect of these dumpings?
As I have already said, the Garda have conducted investigations into the Gradogue and Funcheon incidents. I understand the investigations have been completed and submitted to the relevant law officers for a decision as to whether criminal proceedings will be instituted. In the second case, the Shannon, the company involved acted very swiftly on discovery of the pipeline breakage. The county councils and local authorities involved in both instances acted very swiftly.
A final supplementary.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Can the Minister say if this is the serious pollution regarding which the polluter gave an interview on the radio in which he said he did not anticipate that there would be any prosecution?
I will check that out for the Deputy.
The remaining questions will appear on tomorrow's Order Paper. I have given permission for Deputies Mitchell and Enright to ask Private Notice Questions.
