When travelling around the country I presume the Taoiseach has, from time to time, come across landowners and farmers cursed with the problem of criminals dumping waste illegally on their land. From speaking to people affected, he will know it is not only a case of crops being destroyed, scrap metal proving a hazard for combine harvester operators or otherwise but often the landowner is hauled before court and considered liable. Landowners are asked if they knew about the dumping and how they allowed it to happen.

The Minister of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, who is priming the Taoiseach for his reply, probably knows I will mention Blessington. In light of the regionally important aquifer, which is in danger of being affected by dumping in the area, will the Taoiseach indicate how a large company such as Cement Roadstone, found with perhaps 300,000 tonnes of waste illegally dumped on its land from perhaps 10,000 truckloads, can claim no knowledge of it and escape prosecution for the crime, whoever carried it out?

Does the Taoiseach regard it as unacceptable and bizarre that planning permission is needed for a finger post sign but that this particular operation does not need it? Planning permission is not required to make an illegal dump legal. We have talked about rules for the rich and the poor. Does the Taoiseach not see a double standard whereby an operation such as this does not need planning permission after an illegal dump and a crime has been discovered?

Will the Taoiseach instruct the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government not to allow a section 55 procedure which would, effectively, permit a company like Cement Roadstone to be sprung from that particular situation and not even have to apply for planning permission never mind face prosecution which other landowners would face if an illegal dump was found on their land?

As the Deputy knows, a criminal investigation is taking place on waste and on the monitoring of refuse in the Blessington area of west Wicklow. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has informed me the quickest way to achieve a clean up and get action in this area is to use section 55 of the Waste Management Act. That requires those responsible under the Act to clean the site and to fully comply with the Waste Management Act. It is far quicker than trying to get planning permission and trying to use that process. The Minister is quite satisfied that the way to get prompt action is to use section 55 which has all the powers necessary to clean up and manage these sites. That does not take away from the overall monitoring and investigation in the area.

As I expected, the Taoiseach did not respond to the charge that a double standard operates and that a smaller landowner would not be given the generosity of section 55 of the Waste Management Act. I know a number of them who have been hauled before the court. Having discovered illegal waste on their land, they must face the rigours of the law in the course of a criminal investigation.

Will the Taoiseach ask the Minister to end what is effectively a selective approach to illegal dumping and to apply the waste regulations to illegal dumps found before 2002? The Minister is using 2002 as a benchmark but the dump to which I referred was found before that. Is it not reasonable to move back that date and ensure every instance of illegal dumping is covered rather than the more recent ones? Will the Minister look again at that loophole? Section 55 is, effectively, a loophole which means the operator of, or those responsible for, an illegal dump can decide where to locate a legal dump in the future because it regulates the illegal operation which does not need planning permission or to go through the normal site selection. This rewards criminals and must stop.

I do not have enough time to deal with this whole issue. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government disagrees totally. He believes the Deputy misunderstands section 55.

We do not. One could drive a dozen trucks through it.

The Taoiseach should take it to the Mahon tribunal.

Section 55 requires the person responsible to clean up the site. On the Deputy's point about it being pre-2002, section 60 makes specific directions that it is covered, regardless of the time period. If section 55, which gives directions, does not cover it, section 60, which covers all sites, applies.

Why make regulations?

That is the view of the Minister and the company mentioned earlier denies that it is responsible for the dumping.

Of course it does. Would not the Taoiseach do likewise?

That is a matter for the monitoring process which follows. Section 55 requires the guilty party to clean the site fully and if it is an old site section 60 covers it. The Minister can and has made specific directions.

The question could take up more time in the Mahon tribunal.