Mr. Liam Berney:

That was an extensive list of questions. I do not want to be evasive, but we have been asked to comment on the reasoning Irish Water presented for this. It has never presented its reasons to us at all. We have had no discussion with the company about the rationale for the proposal it has made. It is difficult for us to respond to the questions because we have not had direct dialogue with Irish Water. The Irish Water consultative group comes together every couple of months and discusses issues in the sector. The question of a structural change of this nature, including the transfer of staff to Irish Water, was never discussed with us. Discussions were held about a programme called the water industry operating framework, WIOF, where issues such as cross-local authority working and other changes were proposed. Again, the detail of that was never given to us in the industrial relations forum. It is difficult for us to comment, aside from purely speculating on what the benefits would be or on the rationale for the Irish Water proposal. To do so, without an informed view, would probably be quite dangerous.

The question of career progression and apprenticeships is something that we would have to discuss in detail should the Irish Water proposal proceed. However, until such time as we understand the reason for the Irish Water proposal and what it is seeking to address, it is difficult to engage with it. If we were to ask this committee to do anything for us, it would be to encourage Irish Water and the Department to explain to us what the difficulty is with the current system and whether the problems could be addressed within the current framework.

We are concerned about local authorities and the scale of the impact this proposal would have. Local authorities are important institutions within the structure of the State, which citizens rely. It is an open secret that some of the larger local authorities would exit water services tomorrow if they had the opportunity, and because of their scale, an existential issue does not arising for them. However, for some local authorities they would be faced with such a crisis, and it is deeply worrying. Proper consideration has not been given to that. Alongside any restructuring of the water services sector, it is important that what happens to the local authorities is considered as well.

The Deputy asked whether there is an upside to the proposal. The unions in the sector have complained bitterly for years, without anyone taking any heed, about the lack of investment in the sector. Arising from the creation of Irish Water, there has been a focus on the need for continued capital investment. If structural reform resulted in ring-fenced, guaranteed capital funding to address the infrastructural deficits in the system and to ensure a proper, modern, functioning water system, we should seize that opportunity. We would be supportive of such reform.

On the question of the referendum, we are sceptical about the intention behind the setting up of Irish Water in the first place. My colleagues will talk about it in more detail but believe it was not established to improve the sector but rather to create a vehicle for its future privatisation. It appeared to the whole world as if that was being done. We need to make sure that does not happen. We have become convinced that the best way of doing that is by holding a referendum which would ask the people if they want to prevent Irish Water from being privatised or if they want the water sector to be privatised in the future.

We believe that is the safest way of doing it. People tell us it is an imperfect model and we should not insert such provisions in the Constitution, but I have not heard any better way of doing it. We support the proposal for a referendum. We are as frustrated as others about the delay in holding a referendum.

When we met the Minister he told he was not opposed to a referendum but wanted to facilitate the referendum on the removal of the eighth amendment in the first instance and to concentrate on that. To some extent, that was a legitimate response. That is the best I can do to answer the Deputy's questions. The lack of detail we have arises from the fact that a presentation on the nature of the proposal has not been made to us.