Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent) | Oireachtas source

As we speak, thousands of people are making their way to Dublin for this afternoon's protest. I believe they are coming for two main reasons. They want the Taoiseach to listen and they want to get answers. Yesterday, the Taoiseach claimed once again that all the issues of concern with regard to water charges have been addressed. I hate to break it to him that the thousands of people who will be outside Leinster House this afternoon disagree with him. I agree with the Taoiseach that this is about more than water. Many people, including some who are in favour of water charges, have major concerns about the circumstances surrounding the creation of Irish Water and the awarding of the metering contracts. They want some very specific questions to be answered, but those answers do not appear to be forthcoming. I asked some of those questions when I spoke on the Water Services Bill 2014 in this House last week, but I am still waiting to receive answers. I have also tabled parliamentary questions.

One of my parliamentary questions was flatly refused and the answer to the other was so anemic that it was a non-answer. The questions referred to the circumstances surrounding the awarding of the Irish Water metering contract and how the company, Millington Limited, was able to acquire Siteserv and, thus, GMC/Sierra Limited at a significantly reduced cost from IBRC, a deal that saw the State lose €105 million. GMC/Sierra went on to win the metering contract.

There are some known facts. We know that the bids had to be in by 30 June 2013. We know that one of the companies awarded one of the major contracts did not exist until 15 July, weeks after the closing date for bids. As such, I wish to ask some of the questions that I asked but to which I have not managed to get answers. If the closing date for applications to be considered for the contract was 30 June 2013 according to a parliamentary reply last year from the former Minister, Mr. Phil Hogan, how did GMC/Sierra, company registration No. 530230 and which did not come into existence until 15 July, manage to win a contract? How could a company that did not satisfy the requirement to have a tax clearance certificate be considered for the contract?

See this speech in context