Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 20 Sep 2012

Vol. 217 No. 2

Irish Water and Related Reforms: Statements (Resumed)

I join the Leas-Chathaoirleach in welcoming our guests to the House.

It is important that this expertise at local government level is harnessed into the future.

I was interested to learn from Senator Mark Daly that the Fianna Fáil Party is engaged in formulating a policy on water and water charges. Despite being in government for 14 years, it seems his party is only now devising policy in his area. Yet it still found itself able to sign this country up for the installation of water meters and the introduction of water charges as part of its deal with the EU-IMF-ECB troika. That is typical of Fianna Fáil - the party never knows whether it is coming or going.

Perhaps the party was filtering its policy in those years.

I knew the Leas-Chathaoirleach would not interrupt me on that point.

Problems with the existing water infrastructure, including the ongoing issue of pipe leakages, must be addressed. It is ridiculous to put systems in place to charge for water while large volumes continue to be lost through leakages. I welcome the undertaking that there will be considerable investment in infrastructure to rectify that problem.

I thank the Minister of State for the respect he has shown to the House today and for his stated willingness to return at a future date to debate the issues in regard to planned reforms in this area as they arise. My colleague, Senator Tony Mulcahy, observed that in Scotland, the cost of administering and managing the water supply is half what it is in this State. There is food for thought. It is to be hoped that the establishment of Irish Water will allow us to provide a public water supply at a substantially lower cost than what it is currently costing the taxpayer. I look forward to welcoming the Minister of the State back to the House before too long to discuss ongoing developments in this area.

Tá céad fáilte roimh an Aire agus gabhaim mo leithscéal nach raibh mé anseo fad is a bhí sé ag tabhairt a óráide féin. Tá súil agam gur comhtharlúint é go raibh toscaireacht istigh againn ón tSín nuair atáimid ag caint ar phríobháidiú an chórais uisce. Tá mé cinnte gurb ea agus nach raibh aon uisce faoi thalamh i gceist.

Níl aon dabht ach gur ceist iontach tábhachtach soláthar uisce sa tír, agus go háirid uisce ar ard-chaighdeán. Tá sin rí-thábhachtach ar fud na tíre. Níl aon dabht ach go bhfuil dúshlán an-mhór romhainn in Éirinn maidir le córas inmharthana ard-chaighdeán uisce agus séarachais a chur ar fáil atá in ann seasamh leis na dualgais atá ann i dtaobh an chomhshaoil, agus gur féidir linn íoc as ins an gcomhthéacs eacnamaíochta ina bhfuilimid chomh maith.

Tá Sinn Féin tar éis dul i ngleic leis an díospóireacht seo go cruthaitheach agus go dearfach ó bunaíodh an próiseas comhairleacháin, go háirid ón méid moltaí atá curtha ar aghaidh ag mo chomhghleacaí sa Dáil, an Teachta Brian Stanley, atá tar éis cuid mhaith iarratais agus smaointe a chur chun cinn. Ba mhaith liom tagairt a dhéanamh don méid adúirt an Seanadóir Mulcahy níos luaithe. Bhí sé ag rá go bhfuil daoine sa bhFreasúra ag caint ar mholtaí ach nach bhfuil siad ag insin cén chaoi a bhfuiltear chun íoc as na moltaí sin. B'fhéidir go gcuirfinn an Seanadóir chuig taifead na Dála, áit ar chuir mo chomhghleacaí, an Teachta Brian Stanley, moltaí seo againne chun cinn agus costas leo.

Cé go n-aithnímid na dúshláin a bhaineann leis seo, táimid go bunúsach i gcoinne an smaoinimh atá ann go dtabharfaí isteach táillí uisce, go ndéanfaí príobháidiú ar uisce agus ar shéarachas agus go mbeadh an dúblú ar cháin mar thoradh ar an gcóras seo atá á moladh ag an Rialtas le teacht isteach. Táimid ag cur i gcoinne bunú an chomhlacht nua seo, Irish Water, atá molta ag an Rialtas.

There has been much discussion in recent times regarding the volume of water that is lost from the system and how much it costs to provide a good service. These well founded concerns have been used as justification for the erroneous conclusion that there is a need for water charges. That is not the case. On the issue of waste, for example, the real offender is not the ordinary citizen but the water distribution network. The average loss through leakage is at least 36%, and likely worse, and was aggravated in recent years by poor winter weather. In some local authority areas, more than half the water is leaking away, yet capital investment in water was reduced from almost €435 million in 2011 to €331 million in 2012. This €100 million reduction comes on top of a similar sized reduction in 2010, with more cuts planned until the budget is just €266 million. If the Government is really concerned about waste, it should sanction the required investment in infrastructure. We are calling for a return at least to the 2011 level of capital funding.

In any case, the evidence shows that metering does not reduce water consumption. According to the UK’s Environment Agency, water consumption in England, which has water metering, is at 158 litres per head per day, while in Dublin a 2008 report showed consumption stood at 148 litres per head per day. All the research shows that good public education can have the same, if not even more, impact on water consumption as metering. We would also support the introduction of water harvesting and dual flush mechanisms as part of future building regulations.

We constantly hear we need to pay for water. This is, of course, a nonsense. We already pay for water through taxation. Accordingly, water charges would be double taxation. Only 52% of commercial water rates are collected, yet we see little discussion of this. It is also clear the money to be spent on water metering would be better spent in other ways.

According to the Irish Academy of Engineering, the cost of meter installation will be at least €500 million. It would be far more appropriate to invest the €500 million in water conservation rather than meter installation. This would fund conservation for six years and provide badly needed employment. It seems this has nothing to do with the environment but is another attempt to squeeze money out of already hard-pressed ordinary citizens in another flat rate stealth tax. This follows on from the flat rate household charge of €100, a 2% VAT increase, an increase in the carbon levy of €5 per tonne and increases in transport costs. All this while the Government apparently refuses to take on the elite and the privileged with taxes focused on those most able to pay, as well as tackling excessive pay at the top of the public sector.

We are also concerned at the possibility of privatisation. The Government declares it is committed to Irish Water being a public utility, yet, on the other hand, we see the Government is committed to selling off successful self-financing commercial semi-State companies such as the ESB and Bord Gáis. We will be forgiven for taking that assertion with a bucket of salt.

Sinn Féin is of the view a new national water governance framework should be developed by the Government in partnership with local authorities to better manage water services and delivery. We do not support the establishment of a single water utility. Local authorities are uniquely well positioned to deliver this service and can react with speed and flexibility. It also allows services to mobilise and co-ordinate at times of need. There is also a need for an all-Ireland approach to water provision. With eight river basin districts covering both sides of the Border, a real co-ordination of resources on an all-Ireland basis is necessary.

Sinn Féin is often asked what it would do if it were in government. Our record in the North gives an example of what we would do. Cad atá déanta ag Sinn Féin sa Tionóil?

Blow up the interconnector.

Between 2007 and 2011, Sinn Féin delivered in the Department for Regional Development. It provided a higher quality of drinking water than ever before, reversed any proposed introduction of a domestic household water charge and ruled out privatisation of these services now or in the future. Sinn Féin secured central government funding to not only maintain the levels of service but to increase them. It invested over £1 billion pounds in improving water and sewerage services infrastructure and provision such as delivering real improvements in the Belfast sewerage project and the water mains rehabilitation programme. Déanaimid beart de réir ár mbriathar, agus sin a dhéanfadh muid anseo.

Sinn Féin has great concerns as to what the Minister is considering. I urge him to reconsider his position and to re-engage with all the stakeholders to see how best we can improve the delivery of services to customers. Arís, gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire Stáit. Cé go bhfuilimid mór le chéile, ó thaobh cúrsaí teanga agus mar sin de, nílimid ag aontú ar na pointí seo agus beimid ag cur go láidir i gcoinne na moltaí atá sé ag cur chun cinn.

Cuirim fíor-fháilte roimh an Aire Stáit. Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh an ráiteas faoi Uisce Éireann. Tá mé an-sásta go bhfuil an tAire ag éisteacht linn. Tá sé ráite aige go bhfuil féiniúlacht an-tábhachtach, maidir leis an ainm Uisce Éireann a thabhairt don chomhlacht. Úsáidfidh mé an t-ainm Uisce Éireann in ionad Irish Water. Beidh mé á dhéanamh sin i rith na díospóireachta inniu. Ba mhaith liom go n-úsáidfeadh gach duine an t-ainm Uisce Éireann as seo amach. B'fhéidir nár mhaith leis an Seanadóir Ó Clochartaigh é sin a dhéanamh ach iarraim air é a chur isteach in áit éigin.

I welcome the díospóireacht mar gheall ar Uisce Éireann. One of the most significant issues facing the Government is the provision of good quality water. It is not just about meeting household requirements but about the environment, jobs and attracting the much-coveted foreign direct investors who have an insatiable demand for assured high quality and sustainable water services. Earlier this year the Government proposed to transfer water provision responsibility from the 34 local authorities to a new regulator, Uisce Éireann. I will have a bit to say about the role of the regulator, like Senator Barrett, because on this morning’s Order of Business I raised a matter concerning another regulator. Regulators nearly need to have a regulator watching over them.

The first phase of the work – an independent assessment of the establishment of the authority – has been completed by the Department. When does the Minister anticipate the full roll-out of the authority? Does he have a timescale for this process? It is estimated that, on average, €600 million a year will be needed to comply with the EU water framework directive. We are not on our own on this as we have to comply with EU regulations. This is good for consumers and the environment. However, as there is no money in the kitty for the vital infrastructure upgrades involved, the funds will have to come from somewhere. Accordingly, water charges and some private investment will be a necessary feature in water provision.

In a submission last April to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht, I proposed that any future water facility should remain a public utility. I am delighted the Minister of State, Deputy O’Dowd, reiterated today it would remain in public ownership under Bord Gáis. Clearly reforms are needed and the Government has taken on a radical reform agenda in many areas, water being only one of them.

A recent study carried out by PricewaterhouseCoopers on behalf of the Government found that the current water sector had no consistent policies. We all know some good local authorities and other poor performers in this area. Neither has there been any standardisation of water provision, monitoring, consumer protection, economic regulation or cost effectiveness of provision, as Senator Barrett pointed out. This has to be written into the new arrangement for Uisce Éireann. Water provision has suffered fragmented leadership, poor co-ordination and a duplication of management. There was only a 52% collection rate for non-domestic charges. The PricewaterhouseCoopers report noted operational expenditure was unusually high by UK benchmark standards, particularly in leakage areas.

On the positive side, the study found the current system has some very good strengths. It is important, therefore, we note these so as not to throw the baby out with the bath water. The report noted local authorities are close to the consumer, locally accountable and can mobilise resources in time of need. It needs to be ensured that this local authority expertise is not thrown away. The workforce is experienced and familiar with resources. If a local authority is doing a good and cost effective job in water provision, will the Minister ensure these strengths are not lost?

I am in favour of paying for usage of water. It is common in all EU countries. However, as all new charges are difficult to implement, it will be necessary to have a clear education programme that outlines the benefits that a certain amount will be available free.

Senator Barrett remarked on the cost of meters but let us suppose there is a poor family of six and a rich family of six who have six cars and go out splashing water about. The number of people in a house is not really a factor in the conservation of water. Conservation of water is absolutely important to Ireland because it is finite and, crucially, it is worth paying for.

In a city in the Czech Republic demand for water plummeted by 40% following the introduction of meters. This has been the case in other European countries. We have plenty of rain in Ireland but we lack storage. Sydney has three years of storage. The River Liffey, which currently supplies 83% of water to seven local authorities in the greater Dublin area, is almost at capacity supply for the population. The trend is upwards and the population is growing. When the Leixlip plant will be ready in 2014 the Liffey will be at its maximum deliverable capacity and supply will have maxed out.

Will the Minister indicate whether storage provision will be factored into it when the Minister is making the deal with Uisce Éireann? It is a significant issue further down the line. What we have will suffice until 2022 but we must source water from other facilities and the sourcing issue is another matter.

It should be up to Uisce Éireann to ensure that when sourcing we include scientific information on the type of sourcing we want and up-to-date information on desalination as well. We are an island surrounded by salty water and desalination has always been put down as an expensive commodity. New research is available which has demonstrated that the desalination process has now gone down considerably in cost terms. I hesitate to mention fracking but there are new methodologies for desalination that were not available some years ago. This should be factored into the Uisce Éireann contract and any new research available on cost competitiveness relating to the provision of water and sourcing should be made available.

Water metering has been much speculated upon and discussed. Senator Mulcahy referred to the types of meters and the need for co-ordination and I agree totally. I would go one step further and suggest that we should integrate the energy smart meters with the water meters. We should get the two together and have co-ordination in these areas. I am referring to co-ordination of large-scale meters and getting co-ordination perhaps not in the type of meter but the people who provide the jobs in the area of metering. The Minister of State at the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Hayes, and his Department are doing great work to ensure that local companies and small companies can contract for jobs. We should stipulate the type of meter but spread the provision of services. The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, and the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dowd, have stated they are considering allowing for small contractors to be able to provide services and there are many efficient small contractors who can do this.

I do not have time to go into the health benefits but fluoride was mentioned. The environment committee referred the matter to the health committee in order that we might get a report on the issue. As the regulator has been mentioned, I will not elaborate on that issue. Transparency is all important. In the case of any public contract given out the accounts and annual reports of those involved should be published. I know of a contract given by a local authority to a waste company. Up to then it had been publishing its accounts. Then, in early January this year the company decided that it would not publish its accounts any more but this requirement should be a part of the contract. This relates to waste and it is a matter for the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. The company was within its legal entitlements not to publish its accounts but if we are looking for transparency we should seek it in the case of water. Uisce Éireann should be obliged to be transparent; it should be a part of the contract. We should delve further and ensure that all contracts and anyone delivering a service-based State contract are subject to the utmost transparency and all accounts and annual reports are published.

I agree with the comments on Northern Ireland. We have an all-island water wide resource and we should be doing this with North-South co-operation in the basins to which Senator Ó Clochartaigh referred. I am pleased he suggested that we should follow the example of what they are doing in Northern Ireland. I would not follow the example of Sinn Féin on everything it has done or what it is doing in Northern Ireland but the party agrees to charges for water there. What is good for the goose is good for the gander down South. Senator Ó Clochartaigh suggested we should follow Sinn Féin's record in the North. I will take it on water but on nothing else.

In case the Senator thought I was being difficult, she got a full ten minutes to enable Senator Quinn, who was in transit, to make an input to this important debate.

I appreciate the fact that the Leas-Chathaoirleach leaned over.

The Senator can thank the longevity of Senator Keane.

She was very articulate as well. I was here for the Minister of State's speech and I heard what he said although I had to leave for a little while. I was most surprised when I read of the Minister's dealings relating to water meters with the private company Siemens. Siemens is one of the world's largest companies and employs cutting edge technology. It was involved in building the Shannon hydroelectric scheme in 1926. Currently, it employs approximately 370,000 people worldwide. In 2010 Siemens offered to pay the €800 million-plus cost of installing meters in 1.3 million Irish homes but the Minister did not pursue this option when he took over the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. Siemens proposed funding the fitting of water meters through an investment to be paid back through savings made in the multi-billion dollar cost of providing water services once the meters were installed. According to an article from the Sunday Independent:

Instead the National Pensions Reserve Fund will be raided for €450m to pay some of the bill. The loan from its coffers will have to be paid back with interest at commercial rates, Mr Hogan has admitted, which would be at least €350m.

I do not understand why we insisted on spending that money and raiding the pension fund instead of accepting the Siemens offer.

Why not take the example of Scottish Water in terms of setting up a new company? Has the Minister any plan to liaise with companies such as Scottish Water? I agree it does not make sense that the 34 local authorities have different water management systems to provide water for more than 4 million people but can we not learn from a success story? Scottish Water is in public ownership. It has been a substantial success story in Scotland. It has managed the infrastructure well and it has reduced water rates for businesses and consumers. It provided the North with water during the flooding there last year. Scotland has the lowest average household charge in the United Kingdom, costing £52 less than the charges in England and Wales.

A newly launched business, Scottish Water International Business Development, has won contracts in Canada, the Middle East and Europe and is building Scottish Water's reputation worldwide. I understand it is a private company. Another interesting point about Scottish Water is its considerable involvement with clean energy. Scottish Water believes the current separation of water for use in power generation and for other purposes is unhelpful and creates an economic vulnerability. The Scots are pushing forward with hydropower. They maintain that it is not impossible for new reservoirs to be built for hydropower since all modern stations use the pumped return system and this could be designed and enabled to feed the water supplies.

Will the Minister also examine the way the Welsh Water is run? It is owned by Glas Cymru, a single-purpose company with no shareholders run solely for the benefit of its customers. The Glas Cymru business model aims to reduce Welsh Water's asset financing costs, the water industry's largest single cost. Under Glas Cymru's ownership Welsh Water's assets and capital investments are financed by bonds and its retained financial surpluses. The membership of the company totals 70 individuals who are unpaid and whose duty is to promote the good running of the company in the best interests of the customers. How can the Welsh be so successful with unpaid members? The Welsh are doing it one way and the Scots are doing it another way.

Do we really believe we should make this a public company? Could we not consider making it a private company or find some way to do that? I am concerned about the short consultation process over Irish Water. Gaps in the PricewaterhouseCoopers report on Irish Water have been highlighted. For example, the report stated that for the public utility model a high-level assessment was undertaken in respect of what the financial position of the business might be and, in particular, the likely funding requirements based upon several assumptions made and in view of various sensitivities. Given the commercially sensitive nature of aspects of this assessment some of the specific assumptions and the detailed findings were redacted from that section of the report. Why can the public not know these facts before the legislation goes through?

If it is to be a State-owned company, why is it commercially sensitive? If there is to be just one company, the Minister needs to furnish the public and the Members of the Oireachtas with much more detailed facts on the costings involved. We need to know more about the meters and the charges before any decision is made. The businesses and private individuals who will be paying these charges to the Government have the right to know these facts. I could say much more on this issue. I realise that the time available to me is limited. I appreciate that the Minister of State put his heart and soul into the explanation he gave the House today, and I accept that this is not solely his baby; however, I believe there are questions to be answered. I would love to know whether we looked at Scottish Water or at Welsh Water. Did we consider a private company, which was the first point I made? I welcome the chance to have this debate. It has been very useful. I found the Minister of State's words very interesting, but I am concerned that we have not given nearly enough thought to what we are doing.

I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for the contribution he made. I acknowledge the importance of this subject. As the Minister of State said, water is a scarce resource that is important for all of us. He stressed the need for a secure supply of water of high quality. It is for these reasons that I welcome the initiative that has been taken in advance of the establishment of Irish Water.

I met a man last night who has been away for almost 24 months. He told me he was in 30 countries during that time. We spoke about charges in general. He said that people in practically all of those countries have to pay for services, including water. He is giving a talk in Dublin on 1 November next. I encouraged him to refer in his address to all the countries he has visited. I suggested he should speak about issues such as security of water supply and water quality, which have been mentioned today by the Minister of State. When I get the details of the talk, I will relay them to the House.

We all know that investment in piping is necessary. Sadly, much of the piping in certain local authority areas has broken down as it has aged. A great deal of water is wasted as a result of the breakages in the pipe network. I appreciate that many pipes are being replaced at the moment. A considerable amount of new piping has been laid down by Kerry County Council and Killarney Town Council in the past six or nine months. Unfortunately, I have noticed a distinct change in the taste of the water in my home place. It could be caused by too much fluoride. I hope it is not caused by too much E. coli.

Perhaps too much whiskey is being added to it.

I understand it is important to get the balance right in all of these matters. We have always received a great supply from the Devil's Punchbowl reservoir, on the way down from Torc and overlooking Dinis and our magnificent lakes. I think we have a dual supply. Something has happened with the piping. I accept it was necessary to replace the existing piping. I have been assured by my local authority that the taste will improve. We might be able to get back onto the other supply when the piping issues have been corrected.

I do not want to delay the House. I acknowledge that despite all of this country's rainfall, water is a limited and scarce resource. We should not forget all the work that is done to treat our water for the sake of good health and to bring it through our pipes. We have to grow up. Of course water must be paid for. It is important for good health. I wish the Minister of State well with his endeavours in this regard.

I would like to share time with my colleague, Senator Landy.

I welcome the Minister of State to the House. He knows this issue is near to my heart. I do not doubt his personal endeavour and his commitment to this subject. It is natural and understandable that everyone is perplexed and obsessed with the vexed issue of water metering and water charges. I think we are forgetting a more fundamental and important issue. The installation of water meters and the introduction of water charges will be pointless if we do not have any water to supply to people. I know that sounds like an absurd proposition in a country where it never seems to stop raining. I genuinely think that people seem to confuse rainfall with the water that is supplied for commercial, agricultural, industrial and domestic use.

I am blue in the face from mentioning that this country has not built a reservoir for over 60 years. We are not harvesting the rain when it falls. It runs off into streams and into the land. The latest research and evidence, which suggests that the greater Dublin region and the Leinster region are within a decade of running out of water, is irrefutable. No one will thank the Government if it is remiss in its responsibility and duty to ensure there is a safe, secure and sustainable supply of water. That should be the foremost matter that concerns Irish Water. The difficulty I have is that something which is about to become everybody's problem seems to be nobody's responsibility.

Bord na Móna, an excellent State agency, has operated to good effect for many decades. With Dublin City Council, it has been advancing and developing the proposition that a new reservoir should be built in the midlands - at Garryhinch near Portarlington - for ten years now. This proposition is based on the extraction of water from the Shannon basin. I emphasise that the proposition involves extracting 2% of the water on the flood. We have received accurate and reliable data regarding water flows and water levels in the Shannon basin on a daily basis almost since the foundation of the State, thanks to the monitoring that is done by the ESB at Ardnacrusha and at various other stages along the Shannon waterway. It can be abstracted safely and fairly without jeopardising the integrity of the Shannon waterway. I am a strong proponent of guarding the environment or ecology of the region.

As the Minister of State said, this proposition is well advanced in terms of the costing, the design, the engineering capacity and the purpose to which it can be put. Strangely enough for this country at the present time, the funding for this project is in place. Bord na Móna and Dublin City Council have the resources and the reserves, off the Government balance sheet, to source the necessary investment. It would cost €500 million to build this reservoir and to abstract water from the Shannon and pipe it into the greater Leinster region. The project would ensure this country's water security for another 50 years.

At a time when people in this country are obsessed with wind farms and windmills, with a view to exporting wind energy, we should bear this strong natural resource in mind. My view is that it is the equivalent in importance to the discovery of oil. We should consider the prospect of exporting water along an east-west interconnector. It would be possible and feasible. In view of current climate trends and rainfall levels, it could be a commercially viable scheme. I am concerned that a project that has been kicked around for ten years is being left on the back burner, even though it is a viable and sound economic and environmental proposition.

Bord na Móna is on the fringes of the new Irish Water entity that is emerging as it works on this project in partnership with Dublin City Council. I am concerned that inter-agency and interdepartmental rivalries might lead to a lack of emphasis and co-operation. I urge the Minister of State, who is a champion of this proposal, to use his good influence. We can go around the country installing all the meters we want.

We say we will charge whatever price for water but what if people turn on the taps and there is no water, or there is rationing? Believe it or not, this is not too far away in spite of the level of rainfall. Two years ago the city of Dublin came to a standstill on New Year's Eve because of burst pipes. Restaurants and various other social outlets were not able to open. That remains a real possibility.

Over the decade of the so-called boom we built 600,000 housing units, mostly on the eastern seaboard, yet nobody asked where they would get their water. Nobody suggested building a reservoir to supply them with water. Intel uses a large volume of water, many thousands of litres, on a daily basis to sustain its operation which fortunately creates so much employment. I was shocked to find out from research that to produce one kilogram of beef, so important in this country, it takes 15,500 litres of water. This is not airy-fairy stuff. The Minister of State is the person charged with driving this and putting it all together. He must knock heads together, whether they belong to Dublin City Council, the new utility Irish Water, Bord na Móna or any other stakeholder. We must stop dragging our heels on this and long-fingering it and get it to the front of the agenda, putting it through both the planning process and due process in terms of environmental impact. Even if we were to start building a reservoir and pipeline in the morning, which would create 1,000 construction jobs, it would take three years to complete. Time is not on our side. We are talking about bringing in meters and charges presently but there could be one hot summer - which we would welcome - or one more harsh winter in which pipes burst or people leave taps runnings to offset same. There is the absurd situation whereby we water our gardens and wash our cars with expensive and scarce treated water.

I fully respect and always take great interest in Senator Quinn's contributions, finding it a learning process, but I profoundly disagree with his proposition that Irish Water should have been a private entity. Water is such an important resource that I am glad it will remain in State and public ownership. I fear what would have happened had there been an Eircom-type situation in which, once the body was privatised, no investment was forthcoming to provide vital infrastructure such as broadband. That left us on the back foot as a country.

I thank the Acting Chairman for his patience. I also thank the Minister of State.

As I allowed Senator Whelan eight minutes, Senator Landy has five.

I welcome the Minister of State. I apologise because Senator Whelan and I were at another meeting and I thank him for his forbearance with us on this issue.

Like the Minister of State, I had many years of experience in local government and I am acutely aware of the role of local government staff in the current provision of water throughout the country. Extrapolating from the number of local authority staff who deal specifically with this area, I believe in the order of 3,000 staff from local authorities are charged with the provision of water under the current system.

We have had a number of discussions in the House on this matter and also presented a paper to the Minister of State at the Joint Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht - on 17 July, if memory serves me correctly. He responded on a number of issues, one of which he raised himself, about the situation of those staff who are public servants working for local authorities, who have expertise ranging from fitting taps to running the water system for Dublin city. A small amount of expertise is contracted or bought in on an annual basis but generally speaking the expertise is in place. At the time, the Minister of State said there were discussions between the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, the Department and the local authorities. Can he advise me on how those discussions are going? I apologise if this was mentioned because I missed the earlier section. I am especially concerned because I have been contacted about this issue in recent weeks by staff in what used to be my local authority, in south Tipperary. I would like an assurance from the Minister of State that the line of negotiations goes right down to all staff. That is extremely important. I realise the Minister of State will have dealt with another of my points, that is, the issue of security and so on for the people concerned.

The Minister of State's party and ministerial colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phil Hogan, is attempting to introduce a process of local government reform and a programme of change. As part of that, he has advised Members of this House that he wishes to take powers from the centre and give them back to local government to ensure that local government has a stronger meaning for the citizen in the community and in society. On the face of it, what we are doing in this case is taking the service from local authorities and giving it to the new body. Is the Minister of State able to give me some information on what discussions, if any, he has had with the Minister vis-à-vis the input local government representatives will have with regard to this new body? Will there be positions on the board for them and will they have an opportunity to feed in their views and needs? Will the representations of locally elected councillors be dealt with by a unit within the new body and, if so, how will that work?

I am sure the Minister of State will acknowledge that in my time and his in local government there were seven health boards throughout the country with which we dealt directly. We dealt directly with the budgets in each health board area; there was accountability at local level and a flow of information. In my experience as a local councillor, that stopped when the HSE was established. I do not want that to happen when this new body begins work and I want the Minister of State to address that issue before we get to a point from which we cannot return. The specific point I wish to raise with the Minister of State today is whether he will ensure that councillors, who are the bedrock of democracy in this country, are brought into the loop within the new system, have a place in it and a part to play, and that there is accountability from the new body to local public representatives. I do not want this new body to be another HSE.

I thank all the contributors to the debate. Some important views have been put forward. If I do not answer all the questions, including those from the Acting Chairman, it will not be a question of not having enough time but of getting a proper briefing back to Senators on the issues they raised. They are important and fundamental questions about where we are going and how we are going to do this.

I will deal with speakers in the order in which they spoke. Some issues may have been raised by several individuals. Senator Daly's key point, putting it in the most constructive form possible, was about transparency and accountability in the selection of Bord Gáis. He asked why Uisce Éireann should have gone to Bord Gáis as opposed to any other body. The key issue is that we wanted a public utility, not a privatised one.

Bord Gáis and Bord na Móna, which are both public utilities with considerable experience, broad customer bases and national profiles, were analysed independently and each of them put forward ideas as to how they would run Uisce Éireann if given the opportunity. The recommendation and the reasons for it were given by the administration, not the politicians. That is why it is Bord Gáis that is doing this. The question of whether Bord Gáis has the capacity to do so is a fundamental one. Is it a lean, mean machine and an efficient and capable organisation? Has it got the network, the customer base, the experience with networks and the skills and knowledge that any private company has? The answer is a resounding "Yes". When Uisce Éireann comes before the Oireachtas committees, Members will be satisfied that it will provide specialist expertise as good as or better than any found in the private sector. That is the key issue with regard to transparency and accountability - where the body has come from, where it is going and how it is going to do it. This refers back to Senator Landy's question about how it will be accountable to the people. In the first instance, it will be accountable to me and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan. It will also be accountable to the committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas, by virtue of attendance there by officials from the Department and Uisce Éireann, and to the local authority system.

We are talking about regional river basins and structures, which may be the best place for local government to have its official say. On the ground, whether one is a Deputy, a Senator or an ordinary consumer, if one has a problem, one rings a 1850 number and gets an answer straightaway. Accountability must be there on the ground. There must and will be arrangements for local representatives to have the correct telephone numbers and to get the responses they need.

We should not forget that many jobs will be created in setting up Uisce Éireann. A call centre will be in place very soon with the creation of a significant number of jobs in which people will answer queries and be accountable, which is what everybody wants. I will deal with the issues with regard to the installation of meters. As thousands of jobs will be created over a number of years in this area, it will be a big plus for the economy in terms of the spin-off.

I do not know what happened in Ennis. Obviously, it was a serious problem. The question of building standards is key. When the meters are put in, they must be capable of withstanding the most extreme weather conditions. The meters will not be named meters. Meters can be provided by any company, provided it meets the required rigorous standards. There will be automatic reading of these meters. The issue of energy meters or smart metering is being discussed by the energy regulator. It may not be possible to achieve this in time. I understand it may be seven or more years before we have the technology, but the point raised by Senator Keane about how one can maximise information about energy or water through one meter rather than two or three is very important.

Senator Barrett raised some important issues, and was right in saying that we need a counterweight to the regulator. We must be sure that when prices are being fixed by the regulator independently of the political system, they are informed by everybody, particularly by consumers. I hope to meet the regulator next week to initiate a discussion about some of the issues in my mind and the minds of Members. I want to make sure the regulator does exactly what it says on the tin. Primacy must be given to the consumer, and the regulator must take on board the concerns of, be available to and consult with significant consumer groups, be it the Consumers' Association of Ireland, dedicated consumer groups or a consumer panel. The experience in other countries such as the United Kingdom, where consumer panels exist, must be debated.

As the legislation we will introduce before Christmas will concern the establishment of Uisce Éireann and the regulator, it is important that we consider all views held by Members. If Members wish to communicate views and issues by e-mail or other means, I will be very happy to put them on the table with the regulator and Bord Gáis. The appropriate thing would be to come back here after due discussion in order that Members can interrogate the answers I give to see if they make sense.

I have one point to make about the issue raised by Senator Barrett and I do not make it facetiously. It is easy to ask why should we charge. Water is free - it falls from the sky - but the problem is that while it certainly falls free, it is not free to collect. One must pump, store and treat it. That is the problem. The infrastructure, which in many cases is old and outdated, must be renewed constantly. We also have the question of wastewater treatment, which we have not debated, and the public health issues that arise when the water supply is contaminated due to weaknesses in such treatment.

I am very aware of regulatory capture. Senator Cummins spoke about the communications strategy, which will be key. We must sell the message of why we are doing this and the benefits involved to every household in the country and make sure people are satisfied they are getting good value for money and that the regulator and politicians are on their marks, accountable and transparent in their dealings. Bhí an Seanadóir Ó Clochartaigh ag caint faoi privatisation. Privatisation is a non-runner but that does not mean that private enterprise or people in business should not have a direct line of communication with the regulator, the Department, Bord Gáis or Uisce Éireann. Deputy Gerry Adams shares a constituency in County Louth with me. His former constituents in east Belfast pay the equivalent of €1,400 in charges every calendar year. He may argue that they are not water charges but local charges for services and regional charges for the Six Counties. I do not think that makes sense.

I will respond to the point made by Senator Quinn about Siemens. I was not briefed about what that proposal was but I will get an answer and ask the Department to communicate it to him.

We meet regularly with Scottish Water and I will be travelling to Scotland on Monday to talk about other issues. The Department takes account of what Scottish Water has done. The key issue is that over a period of seven or eight years, Scottish Water has reduced the cost of the provision of water by over 40%. That was not easily done and there are issues around employment but the cost to the consumer has gone down. I am not familiar with the Welsh water issue but I can get a briefing on it. I have visited Anglian Water and am aware that water policy is informed constantly by listening to what other jurisdictions have to say.

In respect of Senator Coghlan's point about the Devil's Punchbowl in Killarney, I can only say that any time I have been to Killarney the water was grand, and the fruit in the punchbowl was very nice as well. The mid-Leinster scheme involving the augmentation of the water supply to the greater Dublin area is a flagship project. The principle of water abstraction is a hot topic in many respects but it can be dealt with. We must augment to ensure the greater Dublin area has the water supply it needs. The project at Garryhinch is very much on my mind. I have visited the United Kingdom and seen Rutland Water. I encourage the Joint Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht to visit and see what a fantastic reservoir and a wonderful achievement it is and how it attracts over 1 million visitors to the local economy in a place that is very distant from cities such as London and Manchester. It is at the heart of water conservation and is a wonderful scheme.

I have dealt with most of the questions.

If Senators have further questions, I will be happy to communicate with them. My door is always open. This is a learning process for me and I want to take on board all views and keep everybody informed as we progress. We are embarking on a major project. Some say it is like setting up the ESB. It is a massive national undertaking and I do not underestimate the task ahead of us. We will not manage to get everything right, but we can benefit greatly from listening to Members on all sides of this House.

Sitting suspended at 1.20 p.m. and resumed at 2 p.m.
Barr
Roinn