Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I promised I would help the process. We have had consultation with Deputy Collins. Following that consultation, we indicated that we would make the briefing note we had put together for the Attorney General available to the committee. If the Deputy wants to muddy the waters with group water schemes in the context of that briefing, he can. I have not done that. I have provided the briefing to the committee to provide transparency in respect of what we are asking of the Attorney General. If the Deputy wants to turn that into a political issue that muddies the waters outside the committee, that is a matter for him but I will not do that. To turn the terminology in a briefing note that I have sent to the Attorney General primarily, but that I have also provided to him to show what we have we have asked of her, into a political suggestion that we are try to muddy the waters is not only inaccurate but it is also probably unfair. We have given the committee clarity in respect of what I have asked of the Attorney General and as soon we receive a comprehensive response from her office, I will be in a position to give more clarity. However, I have to operate on the timeline of getting good advice rather than the timeline of responding to political pressure. Amending the Constitution on the back of political pressure and timelines generated by that has proven to be a mistake in the past. We are talking about a matter of weeks, not months into the future. My understanding is this comes down to the definition of the "public water system" and whether that relates to the system that delivers water to the public or public ownership versus private ownership, which is the interpretation that Deputy Ó Broin is putting on it. The word "system" may be more encompassing than that because private assets provide water to the public and one of the issues we need to consider is whether they are defined as the "public water system".

The answer to Senator Grace O'Sullivan's question is I will happily provide information to the committee as soon as I have it. I will make it clear to the Attorney General's office that parties are anxious to move this process on and I will seek a response from her. A constitutional change is much more significant than the special water committee's report and recommendations, which we are acting on, and any legislative change we make. Once we change the Constitution, we cannot change it again without another referendum. We should take a few weeks to get this right. If that causes a little frustration and impatience on the part of the committee, I am sorry but I would rather have the legal advice we need to progress the Bill. We will then tease through these issues anyway on Committee and Report Stages.

Although I do not think we need to have everything perfect at pre-legislative scrutiny stage, it would be good to nail down some of the concerns expressed and receive Government legal advice on them. That is what I am looking for.