Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I am next on the list. I thank the delegation for attending the meeting.

Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea said he is available to the committee for further consultation should we have any further questions later. If he is willing, I suggest that, when we get to the point where we may have a draft proposal, we can ask Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea some questions at that stage. If there are fines, they are decided on by the European court but are based on objective elements. Can we run by Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea the committee's recommendations to see, from the objective facts, whether they would be in compliance with EU directives?

In his letter to the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Simon Coveney, as well as in his letter to the expert group, Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea referred to the principle of the polluter pays as being fundamental to the directive. We have heard other interpretations around this, such as we can have a derogation because of established practice. However, I am sure we also have to comply with the fundamental intentions of the directive, part of which is the polluter pays principle. Will Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea clarify if the polluter pays principle has to be part of any solution we come up with? He has been clear that there is a certain amount of discretion to the member state to comply. Ultimately, we all have to comply.

The expert commission report stated excessive or wasteful use of water will be discouraged by applying a tariff for such use and, therefore, is consistent with the polluter pays principle. There is a general view in this committee, as well as in the expert report, that there should not be a charge for normal use but that there should be a charge for excessive use. In Scotland, there is a charge for water services. It is taken in through the household tax which varies in accordance with the size of the house. Does that protect a country like Scotland? Scottish Water was at the committee recently and informed us it has district metering. It can use the information from that to pinpoint where there may be excessive use in a particular district and approach those who may be causing excessive use. Scottish Water has a system in place to deal with excessive use and it also has a system of paying in place.

In my view, the Scottish situation is totally different from the Irish situation where we are proposing to have no charge whatsoever. Is there any other way of charging for excessive use if one does not have meters? If the outcome of this committee is that there should be a normal household free allowance, paid by the State through central taxation, but that excessive use should be paid for by the individual, then we are obviously not adopting the Scottish model because we will not have a general payment through local taxes. Maybe that will be an option. How can we actually comply with the polluter pays principle if we do not have meters? Is there any other way?

In his presentation, Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea spoke about room for social tariffs. Will he elaborate on this? Does that mean allowances could be made for households with illnesses which require extra water?