Mr. Paul McGowan:

I might address the Senator's questions. First, on quality, the point I made earlier was it would seem sensible that if customers are not receiving a complete service they would not then be expected to pay the complete charge. However, we have yet to consult on the details of how that actually will pan out in reality. Consequently, I am unable to give the Senator a clear yes-or-no statement vis-à-vischarges. I can state that we will consult on what are the acceptable limits with regard to quality, as it applies to the water that is delivered and the wastewater service that is achieved. We also will consult on what will be the ramifications for water charges once such limits are not met. All of this has yet to be decided and we will engage in consultations on it.
On what best international practice actually means, it is a fairly complex area but ultimately, costs vary significantly from country to country depending on various issues such as demographics and population densities and so on. For example, across Europe right now, a typical customer in Denmark spends €670 per year on water charges, whereas in Scotland the equivalent figure is approximately €390 per year. However, these amounts hide the consumption level per customer, what level of investment has been carried out or whether there has been any catch-up in the various countries concerned. Consequently, many factors must be taken into consideration, and so we look for the nearest comparators we can find. We will consider countries such as Scotland as well as possibly considering regional water authorities in England and Wales that may have a similar distribution of population density and demographics. Ultimately, however, there will not be an exact match and, as a result, we will take the best available information we have on both the establishment of utilities and their operation. We will take and use that information to assess whether we think the costs Uisce Éireann has incurred are reasonable, whether they benchmark well or whether they are excessive. It is only after having carried out such analysis that we can then form a judgment and therefore decide whether to allow that cost, or what level of cost should be allowed.
As for the suite of charges, I again must preface this by stating that no decisions have been made and all of this will be subject to consultation. To revert to a previous question from a member on the water-in water-out principle, it probably is worth noting that we know from other countries that the amount of water that actually is consumed for drinking purposes is low; I believe it is between 5% and 10%. Generally speaking, there is a high correlation between the amount of water that enters a property and the amount that leaves through wastewater. However, that is one of the factors we would take into account. As a minimum, we will have at least two charges. One will be a meter charge and one will be an assessed, non-metered charge. However, in our consultations, we will set out whether there are various options for metered charges, such as a fixed charge element and a variable charge element. On the assessed charge, we may consider different factors that might be taken into account before one's charge is determined, such as occupancy levels, house size or whatever. However, we have yet to determine that, and it all will be subject to public consultation.