John Cummins (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

The connections policy and the charges in place from the CRU were touched on. In framing my question, I am conscious that Irish Water would not want to deny itself a revenue stream. The difficulty I have is not with connection charges for greenfield sites or the infrastructure that has to be put in place, but more with the charges for brownfield sites and urban renewal spaces. Thankfully, in my county of Waterford, we have been proactive in using schemes like the repair and lease scheme to bring derelict units back into productive use for housing. There are a number of examples of former pubs that people are now living in because they have been renovated into high-quality apartment units. The difficulty is with the connection policy as it stands in terms of wastewater and water connections. They are levied as though they are greenfield sites. The policy does not take account of the fact that the infrastructure is already in place in many cases. By way of example, one of the former pubs had a wastewater connection going from the pub and the seven bedsits and two water connections. The new configuration is for seven apartments. The developer applied to use the existing wastewater connection and to add five new water connections but was, unfortunately, levied for seven new wastewater connections and five water connections. That seems totally unjust not on the basis that it costs the developer more but in terms of fairness in respect of what is being provided there. It is reusing existing infrastructure that is already in place. I am conscious that Irish Water will not want to deny itself a revenue stream. However, following feedback from the CRU, does Irish Water believe greenfield sites and city-centre sites for which the infrastructure is already present should be treated differently?