Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Anti-Austerity Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I thank the delegates for their submission and for attending. I read Rural Water News. There is a very important editorial in it that is written in bold by the delegates. I agree with it very much. It states that to ignore the group water scheme subsidy arrangement introduced originally when public domestic water charges were abolished in the late 1990s leads to a one-sided debate and an unnecessary and unhelpful urban–rural division on the water issue. The good news, it states, is that advance payments at the restored subsidy rate were paid out to schemes in mid-December by way of a supplementary payment. For me, that is very important because there has been an attempt to create an urban–rural divide, which is not at all helpful. Those of us who campaigned against water charges did so for everybody. Is it fair to say the fortunes of those on group water schemes, in terms of the amount they end up paying out of their own pocket, have fluctuated in line with those of people in the public water scheme, albeit not to a point of complete fairness because I do not believe such a point exists? When water charges were abolished, the subsidy was introduced. When water charges were reintroduced, the subsidy was cut, and when water charges were suspended, the subsidy was increased again. Have the interests of those on group water schemes not fluctuated together with those in the public scheme?