Assurance of no lasting damage
Mitchell pressed the Minister to categorically rule out lasting environmental damage. Daly said analyses indicated no permanent damage and, to his knowledge, none had occurred.
Would the Minister not agree that it is very disturbing for him to come in here to answer a series of questions on the Kowloon Bridge and not be able to assure the House that there has been no lasting damage to the environment? I want to ask him again if he is aware of any lasting environmental damage? Can he categorically assure the House that there has not been any such damage?
Comment on this
I do not know what the Deputy is getting at. Has he something specific in mind? The information we got as a result of an analysis and of work done on the Kowloon Bridge indicates that there is no permanent damage to the environment.