Barry Cowen (Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I thank both bodies for their submissions. Despite the best intentions of Irish Water and the regulator, public confidence in the entity or utility is not what one would expect. The manner in which it was constructed, the funding model and charging regime confirm that. Subsequent efforts by Government have only compounded this issue. It is not the entity or the utility that is in question now, neither are the need for investment in the network and the capital costs associated with that.

The question of Irish Water's performance is contained in a commitment by Government to put in place an independent external advisory body on a statutory basis and legislation should flow in the coming months in this regard, irrespective of this issue. This should include publishing advice to the Government, quarterly reports to the Members of the Oireachtas, with particular regard to many of the issues raised by the regulator. Public confidence is not what it should be and the witnesses have not guaranteed that, nor are they likely to do so despite their best intentions. There has to be cost reduction and efficiency improvements, issues relating to procurement, infrastructure, delivery, leakage reductions, improvements in water quality, elimination of boil water notices, responsiveness to the needs of community and enterprise, and so forth.

This committee is charged with examining the funding model for the implementation of the programme. The expert commission for example has said it believes the best way to do that is to end charges and allow the Government be the main customer of Irish Water. That being the case we need to establish the impact that has on Irish Water's ability to deliver the service for water and wastewater infrastructure.

In regard to metering, the expert commission recommended that Irish Water should complete a comprehensive programme of district metering, which would identify system-wide leakage and would manage the network. Irish Water has stated previously that the ending of metering is in effect the end of water charges. Irish Water's capital investment plan 2017-21 provides for a capital investment programme of €5.5 billion. Will this now be revised? Has Irish Water or the regulator costed a completed district metering system? If so, has that cost been compared with the cost envisaged for a domestic metering system? The capital plan to 2021 references a figure of €574 million in respect of water charges. What is the impact of the loss of water charges? What will be the impact of a district metering system as compared with a domestic metering system?

In regard to capital investment requirements, the €13 billion proposed for address of total deficiencies is an estimated amount. Is it a gross amount that excludes efficiencies? What is the timeframe for the completion of those targets in terms of the proposed €13 billion investment? Will this be affected by the new separate revenue system, as is envisaged? On borrowing capacity, what is the current borrowing cost associated with Irish Water borrowings? If the State is to be a sole customer of domestic water tariffs, is it feasible for Irish Water to borrow on the markets, which it does through its parent Ervia? Has an analysis been undertaken of the shift proposed by the expert commission report? Will the cessation of water metering damage the borrowing capacity of Irish Water? It is widely known that it is cheaper for the Government to borrow through the NTMA than it is for Ervia to do so in respect of Irish Water because of the lack of water charges income based on the initial construct, which has failed. Perhaps the witnesses would comment on that point.

In regard to efficiencies-----