Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Wednesday, 22 February 2017

Joint Oireachtas Committee on the Future Funding of Domestic Water Services

Public Water Forum

1:30 pm

Photo of Thomas PringleThomas Pringle (Donegal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I find some of the discussion we are having today disturbing. There seems to be an ideology at play within the committee that one can only appreciate something if one pays for it. That is the crux of the problem. Merrion Square is a lovely park. I appreciate it, but one could ask whether we should pay to go into it. That is the logical conclusion of what we are saying, namely, that one cannot appreciate it unless we are paying for it.

If there is a leak in a house the risk of it undermining the foundations should be enough of an incentive for people to fix it, if it is identified and they are notified there is a problem. In terms of equity and fairness in the excessive use charge, it is accepted that there is practically no wilful misuse of water so therefore it is about identifying leaks. The question is whether we want to identify revenue that we can get through excessive use charges or if we want to identify the leaks and have them repaired and reduce water consumption that way. On that basis, could the Public Water Forum also consider the provisions under section 56 of the 2007 Act, which make it an offence to waste water? The fact that one could be taken to court and fined for the wilful waste of water is probably enough of an incentive to stop the wasting of water. That is where the focus should be in terms of water conservation. We already have the provisions under the 2007 Act. From the discussions today it appears we are considering creating a significant bureaucratic system to identify excessive use and then monitoring it and changing it. The one useful thing meters which have already been installed is that each one has a wastewater alarm on it and if a leak is detected section 56 could kick in as the person wasting the water would be identified.

It does not make sense to consider how we can fairly charge 880,000 houses for excessive use and not charge 630,000 houses. We must knock that on the head. In terms of the repayment of people who have paid already, we have no choice in that regard. We have to do that. If one goes down the road of excessive use then one has to go through all of those people and see who among the ones who have paid was excessive in his or her use. It does not make any sense. I have not asked any questions but I will come to them now.