Environment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2025: Second Stage Seanad Éireann — 2026-02-17 ============================================================ Joe Conway (IND), Cultural and Educational Panel That was a nice exposition of the thrust of the Bill. I will address a couple of issues that have been raised. There is a level of urgency in looking at this. I want to advert to the incidence of a serious and major fish kill in Waterford and Cork last summer. Something like 40,000 fish were killed in the River Blackwater. As far as I know, to this day, nobody has been found culpable and, as a result, nobody has been taken to task over it. The matter now seems to be shrinking away into oblivion as an unsolved crime, and it was a crime. The livelihoods of an awful lot of people were put at risk. It is not just that. For one reason or another, a beautiful and pristine river was the recipient of a lot of toxic substances over a few days. The way this was addressed leaves me and many others with a feeling of unease. From what I gather, by the time the evidence was being addressed, much of it had gone as a result of the natural flow of the river. At this stage, it is likely that nothing will ever be done about the perpetrators of this crime against the natural beauty and integrity of that particular river and the surrounding basin. My question is very simple. Is there anything in this Bill that will sharpen our practice? If a major fish kill like that happens and it all just disappears under some kind of marine carpet, it looks like our existing legislation to address such matters is not fit for purpose. The next logical question is whether there is anything in the Bill as outlined that will give the legislation sufficient teeth to address its inherent weaknesses in respect of this issue and other incidents. Section 30 proposes two new sections to the circular economy Act allowing for a public body to be designated for the purpose of preparing green public procurement guidance. That is very good. However, it is stated that public bodies - I presume that includes local authorities, one of which I was a member of for over 20 years - will be required to outline in an annual report each procurement of goods, services or works in the previous calendar year where relevant green public procurement criteria were not integrated into the procurement process and explain the reasons why. I can imagine that will not get a lot of traction with the people in the local authorities. In fact, I would say it will generate a lot of stubborn digging in of heels. That is not a reason not to include it but, as it is outlined, it seems to be a sort of fait accompli to be issued to the local authorities. I suggest that the Minister and his team engage with the local authorities prior to introducing this to see if something might come up that would not drive the officials and councillors in local authorities simply cracked. I have enough experience of council chambers at this stage to know that the whole green argument is on a knife edge at the moment. There is a continual battle in progressing the green arguments, which we all appreciate and admit are necessary. When it comes to brass tacks and comes down to the bottom line in councils, you will find that a lot of councillors will say that this is mad or insane. Unless there is consultation on things like this, you are going to stir up the proverbial hornets' nest. I do not think that is advisable as regards progressing the green agenda. There is another matter I wish to raise. I cannot find it now in looking back over the Minister of State's remarks. It has to do with enforcement. It might have been about beefing up enforcement. That is a very good. We have a great ability to produce cogent and decent legislation in this country, at both local and national level, but, from a lifetime spent in public representation, I notice there is a ritual falling-down on the whole idea of enforcement, whether we are talking about scooters, fish kills, waste management, illegal dumping or on-the-spot fines. We can have all the on-the-spot fines summary convictions or whatever we want to introduce as a deterrent, but unless the money is invested in enforcement, we might as well be ag séideadh in aghaidh na gaoithe because it will not get anything. In Waterford, having CCTV to monitor litter black spots has been on the agenda and a current topic in council meetings for a decade. At this stage. we may have got a few bob down in Waterford to have a roving CCTV that barely scratches the surface. Any council executive will say that the number of convictions there have been under waste management or litter legislation is abysmally small, which tells its own story. We are very good at spouting the legal points and the desiderata, the things that need to be done, but when it comes down to brass tacks there is a problem with producing the finances to send out the enforcement officers, particularly at weekends. The difficulty of dog fouling in coastal counties does not get addressed because very often it is hard to get the dog wardens out at weekends. If we want to clean up beaches and have a pristine neighbourhood, we should be financing it. That is something the Minister needs to address in consultation with local authority executives and councillors. --- Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted. Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-02-17/debate/main Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:38+00:00 Sitting date: 2026-02-17