Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I do not want to be repetitive and, at this stage, many questions have been asked and some of the concerns debunked. In a new social and political chapter in the history of the State, if we are going to charge people for domestic water, it is important we are assured that we have an effective operational system and a system of capital investment, that people are getting value for money and that we are not, in Irish Water, creating a monster that we will all have to account for in years to come. That is from where public concern comes. The idea of getting information is that we can ensure there is fairness and value for money.

The case for domestic charging is that it is common throughout the rest of Europe. To date, businesses have carried a disproportionate burden in respect of water and sewerage charges. The system we have does not tend to push the individual towards water conservation and it is more a matter for the individual's conscience and disposition. The witnesses have presented a serious company and a serious job of work that must be done to set up a company to service 1.4 million customers. The end result, or the aspiration, is an effective, somewhat commercial, efficient way of delivering the water and sewerage services to people.

It should also be a more dynamic and proactive way of getting the infrastructure in place that is badly needed. That would be very impressive, but it flags one concern. I know consultants are used to establish the cornerstones in order that we can build on them and get it right. However, my serious concern, based on experience, is that using the traditional polluter pays methods, a storage system or water services facility in a big urban centre could be affordable because the polluter contribution could result in more investment in the infrastructure, but in rural areas, like the one where I am from, there was not such investment because people could not come up with their segment of the money. Therefore, many rural areas did not see investment in water or sewerage infrastructure.

There have been comments that the company will be lean, mean and trim and that it will come with efficiencies, savings and plans for economic and regional development. As I have said, rural areas have not seen this investment, with one of the problem being economies of scale, as some areas do not have the big businesses that can supplement investment in the delivery of infrastructure, whether through development charges or other means. With regard to the delivery of the infrastructure, coupled with whatever the State puts into it, what safeguards has Irish Water put in place to ensure there will be equitable investment of capital in rural areas? How will it avoid the overriding consideration of achieving a return on investment, with the company looking at profit as the bottom line only? Where there are no economies of scale, how will projects be funded? We are talking about more a expensive delivery to smaller populations; therefore, how do we know they will not be put at the bottom of the pile or deprioritised?

What is the company's public service obligation in this regard? The likes of Bus Éireann and Iarnród Éireann have such an obligation, but what is Irish Water's obligation? This is more than just a commercial company and there is another aspect to the issue. I respect what the delegates are trying to do, but my concern is not really up for debate. It will be a real concern for the people I represent who live in environmentally sensitive areas. We saw what happened in Galway when cryptosporidium was found and there is also the septic tanks issue. Some people in rural Ireland do not have a proper water supply system; therefore, how will the company address such issues within its remit? The matter has not yet been addressed, but I would like some response on the matter at this point.