Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses. They said they keep themselves aware of what happens in Parliament. I submit that what has happened in the Parliament was an absolute shambles. It started with the Water Services Bill. The document refers to an explanatory and financial memorandum. There is no financial memorandum in it. Does the company stand over that? Did the witnesses brief the Minister before he came to the Seanad in the week before Christmas? Given that they follow the parliamentary debates they will be aware that he turned down amendments in respect of local authorities and he turned down any role for the National Consumer Agency and the Competition Authority to see that the organisation was working as a competitive body. He also turned down any role for the Department of Finance in relation to investment appraisals. We are finding out now that €100 million is already gone and we do not know what it was for and we are trying to catch up after the event. He turned down any role for the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform which is supposed to deliver reform.

I live in Kildare. The Minister said we have low water charges. The organisation should not say it is inventing water. I have water. We have paid €1 billion per year for it in taxation. Some €539 million has been spent on meters and €100 million on consultants to charge me for what I was paying for through my income tax. I do not know what are the set up costs. It is simply an amalgamation of 34 local authorities. I hope there are some efficiencies but I have to say the way company and the Department have treated the Parliament is unacceptable. That is why people are so annoyed. The company has made an appalling start and it had better try to get onside pretty quickly if there is to be any public confidence in it.

Why was the electricity regulator chosen to regulate water? They are two completely different fields. The electricity regulator has an electricity price which is 42% above the European average. That is a wonderful start. Are we going to pay 42% more for water as well, under the same regulator? The whole issue has been an absolute shambles from beginning to end. How many of the consultants were associated with the collapse of banking in Ireland? As elected represented, we are trying to get away from that situation. I am disturbed to see that the same people who walked out of Government Buildings with €64 billion in their pockets are now advising Irish Water. That is an appalling situation. Why could it not have slowly amalgamated the 34 local authorities who were doing the job and why is it not open to having its investment plans put before the committee, the Department of Finance, and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform? Why is it so anti-consumer? What is wrong with the National Consumer Agency? The organisation would not even accept advice on the billing system. It seems to me that the National Consumer Agency would be well advised. If the organisation is running a closed shop as it has done up to now, it will be very difficult to persuade people that this investment is in any way worthwhile. It has been a disastrous start for Irish Water because of that. It should have been open with us, given that it follows the parliamentary debates.

Some 164 amendments were tabled in the Seanad in respect of the legislation, 56 of which were Government amendments, having realised the flaws in the legislation. If the organisation is in consultation with the Department there are many improvements needed to bring it up to an acceptable level so far as Parliament is concerned. It must be accountable. The secrecy we have witnessed heretofore is unacceptable to the public. We are trying to reform this country and what happened to it in 2008. This is more of the old bad stuff so far as I am concerned.