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

I reassure the Minister that any of us proposing changes to the Constitution is fully aware of how serious a proposition that is. We take the Constitution, and proposals to change it, as seriously as the Government does. The Minister is right to say there have been occasions where bad decisions were made, often when decisions were rushed as a result of political considerations, such as one case with which we are dealing at the moment. Many good changes to the Constitution have, however, been made, some of which were proposed by the Government and were supported by many of us, such as the insertion of the rights of the child, which is very valuable.

I am, however, really frustrated as it is not as if this issue has landed on the Minister's desk in the past week. We passed Second Stage of this legislation six months ago and an expert group stated five months ago that this was probably a good idea. Even before the water committee finalised its report we knew there was a consensus among parties for some kind of constitutional referendum on the final wording. I am frustrated because nothing we are doing in this committee is of any value to the pre-legislative scrutiny process. I accept that the Minister cannot give us answers he does not have, but that is the problem. We were meant to be hearing the legal advice to Deputy Collins, who helped draft the Bill, and some concrete information from the Minister or his officials. Instead, we are getting the same doubts the Minister was expressing six months ago. These are significant issues and we should be considering them but we are having a circular conversation which is not allowing us to progress. The same would be the case if we were to invite representatives of group water schemes. I am more than happy to do so but they will want to know if passing this wording would impinge on their constitutional rights to private property. We have one senior counsel who has an opinion on that which we could share with them, but ultimately it will depend on the legal advice from the Attorney General. Inviting the group water schemes or any other stakeholder to appear before the committee prior to some indication of the Attorney General's advice will involve another circular conversation.

I am at a loss. I am not trying to be awkward and the Minister is correct to raise all these issues but he raised them six months ago and we are having the same conversation today. There is no point in my going back over the arguments because his answer will be that, while something may be significant, we cannot progress until he has the legal advice from the Attorney General. In that case, what is the point of pre-legislative scrutiny? What is the point in having the Minister here if he cannot answer any of the questions?

Maybe there is one question the Minister can answer, although he obviously cannot answer all the questions relating to Deputy Collins's Bill, which is the subject of today's discussion. Has the Minister or have his officials seen any advice which suggests that, under the current legal situation, there is confusion between the ownership of assets in private wells, bore holes and group water schemes and those in the public system, owned by the State and currently managed by Irish Water? The implication that our wording may impinge on categories of ownership of water services infrastructure suggests there is some uncertainty as to whether something is a private asset or a public asset. Have there been any previous legal advices on this? The Minister mentioned new projects and I assume he is referring to new water infrastructure developments but there is a legal process for taking a group water scheme into the public system, just as there is a process for taking private water infrastructure developments into the public system. It is known as "taking in charge" and Irish Water now has a mechanism for doing this, as have local authorities. In all these cases there is a clear legal process for incorporating a private asset into the public system. I am not confused as to what is public or private but is the Department confused?

The Minister always tells us there are genuine concerns but repeating the point, on the basis of no legal advice whatsoever, that Deputy Collins's Bill may cause difficulties with public ownership or group water schemes, and may have unintended consequences, muddies the waters. That might not be the Minister's intention but people in group water schemes might think it is a problem. Before the Minister would have received the legal advice on whether this was or was not a problem, he would have created such a level of doubt as to cause significant concern. The briefing note from the Department should say that something may or may not be a problem until the legal advice is received. Likewise, it should say it may or may not have unintended consequences but it simply states that it may create problems. My worry is that the Minister does not want this legislation and is hoping to delay it, which would be a tragedy. If he says he will have the legal advice shortly I will take him at his word and I hope we can come back for another discussion. Until we have that advice, however, there is no point in talking to anybody else at this stage.