Dan Wallace is a decent, hard-working man. But he is not the kind of political high flier who sets teeth on edge in Government. And the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment isn't going to frighten the farm lobby, the industrial sector or county managers with his proposals for cleaning up Irish rivers and lakes.
The very fact that Mr Wallace was wheeled out last Wednesday to unveil the Government's response to the worsening water situation while his senior Minister, Noel Dempsey, remained on holiday said it all: this was no big vote-getting deal; rather it was a minimalist response to Brussels pressure.
It has been almost two years since the EU last threatened legal sanction and caused Brendan Howlin to publish A Catchment-Based Strategy Against Eutrophication, in which he set out the Rainbow government's proposals for managing Ireland's lakes and rivers.
In that document Mr Howlin promised that statutory effect would "shortly" be given to his plans under the Water Pollution Act of 1977. He said an obligation would be placed on local authorities to ensure that high water-quality standards were attained.
Well, that promise has finally come to fruition. But not without a lot of arm-twisting from the EU Commission and a deal of foot-dragging by successive governments.
It has been a long and doleful journey. For more than a decade there has been political reluctance to tackle groundwater pollution, because of the cost of proper sewage treatment and pressure from farming and business interests. "Reasoned opinions", the legal equivalent of shots across a government's bows, were issued by the EU Commission in 1990 and 1997.
Finally three weeks ago Brussels lost patience and formally decided to initiate proceedings against the State at the European Court of Justice.
The Government's response - in the shape of Mr Wallace's announcement - can be seen as a reaction to that pressure, rather than any real commitment to increased investment and tough decision-taking in Cabinet.
What was promised this week is a fleshed-out version of the plan outlined by Mr Howlin, with the addition of a number of new river catchment areas that will be given priority. The target date for improvements remains 2007.
But a huge and worrying opt-out clause has been added. That provides for a six-year extension, to 2013, where the local authority or the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) believes the effect of compliance within 10 years would be "impractical or too costly".
In spite of that, Mr Wallace's new regulations must be welcomed. They will require the licensing of effluent discharges, impose controls on agricultural, forestry and industry through local authorities and the EPA, and require new investment in sewage treatment facilities. Two-yearly progress reports will be published, and there will be a review of the situation at the end of 10 years.
With Brussels on a collision course and most of the funding for water-quality protection sourced there, the Government had to show willing. But the absence of Mr Dempsey, Michael Woods and Joe Walsh from the press conference also told a tale of divided loyalties and political indifference.
Following a succession of extensive fish-kills last year, the Minister for the Marine promised much in terms of inter-departmental co-operation, new structures and penalties. But he has delivered little. And winter flood levels in rivers and lakes is the main reason this summer has not seen a repeat of previous aquatic disasters.
As for Mr Walsh, suggestions of a phosphate tax to discourage the excessive use of fertilisers are ignored, while the farm lobby continues to drive the political agenda. More and more slatted houses are being grant-aided for intensive cattle rearing, while piggeries expand without rigorous attention to effluent disposal problems.
These criticisms may be harsh, given economic pressures, the costs involved in cleaning up our waters and the reluctance of the Minister for Finance to delve any deeper into the public purse.
Capital investment amounting to £1,300 million will have been undertaken by the year 2005 in sewage and wastewater treatment. But some of those schemes will provide only basic, primary treatment. Phosphate removal plants and secondary treatment schemes are only now being built around the country. The longterm cost of ensuring clean water will be enormous.
There are some signs of improvement. Lough Derg is said to have recovered somewhat from the horrendous algal blooms that affected it in recent years because of remedial sewage works by local councils. Farmers are beginning to use less phosphates and take greater precautions in slurry-spreading. But there is a long way to go.
Lack of Government commitment is reflected in the decision to entrust the preservation and improvement of water quality to local authorities - themselves major polluters - rather than to the fisheries boards. And while the role given to the EPA will help the situation, there is no specific commitment to extra manpower and resources.
Money talks, and never more loudly than down on the farm. That is why a phosphate tax on fertilisers may eventually prove to be the way forward.
And, while the issue of eutrophication and phosphate enrichment is being addressed, the Government should also impose a "green" tax on those domestic and industrial detergents which do considerable damage to water systems. The principle of "let the polluter pay" should be the touchstone.
Equally, there is a requirement on Government to reintroduce the Control of Farm Pollution Scheme. The take-up of the scheme was so great that the last government suspended it in April 1995. And while Fianna Fail promised to reintroduce it in opposition, a shortage of EU funding has meant that nothing has happened since the party returned to government.
If farmers, and particularly small farmers, are to be encouraged to manage their farms in an environmentally-friendly way then the Control of Farm Pollution Scheme should be introduced as quickly as possible. Waiting for the EU to decide on the next tranche of structural funding, to take effect from the year 2000, will not do.
The Government is now committed, on paper, to having all local authorities draw up plans for pollution control by next July. But no recognition is given to the lack of professional expertise to deal with this task on many councils. Two-yearly progress reports will be required thereafter. But it will be 10 years before the scheme is formally reviewed.
Given the opt-out clause inserted by the Government to cover matters of cost and impracticality, it may be no bad thing that the EU Commission is keeping a close eye on the growing levels of water pollution in this country.