Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

My second set of questions is for both presenters and goes back to the issue of privatisation. The 2014 Act makes it very clear that privatisation in the context of those additional protections is to do with the sale of shares but of course, as other members have said, privatisation is also to do with the sale of assets. It could also relate to extraction rights or the privatisation of the public delivery of the service. I am a little confused and I ask the witnesses to clarify an issue related to the restrictions on the sale of assets contained in section 31 of the 2007 Act. Do all of the restrictions in the 2007 Act now apply to Irish Water? If not, which ones do not? I also ask them to clarify whether those restrictions would require, for example, ministerial approval for assets to be sold rather than the additional requirements in what a member referred to as the "triple lock" contained in the 2014 Act? I further ask the witnesses to confirm that clauses four and seven of the constitution of Irish Water give widespread powers to Irish Water, with ministerial approval, to dispose of assets. It is really important for people to know the answers to those questions. While the stronger legislative protection of the 2014 Act obviously covers the sale of shares, it provides a much weaker level of legislative protection for the sale of assets. If that is correct, would it not be possible for Irish Water, with ministerial approval, to sell off very substantial portions of its assets, thus reducing Irish Water to a shell or a holding company? In that context, the sale of its shares would be immaterial because the bulk of its assets and work would effectively have been privatised.

My last question requires a "Yes" or "No" answer from both witnesses. I ask them to tell the committee, on the record, whether they believe constitutional protection of the public water system would be stronger than legislative protection..