Dáil debates

Thursday, 16 June 2011

2:00 pm

Photo of Michael ColreavyMichael Colreavy (Sligo-North Leitrim, Sinn Fein)

It is approximately ten years since I first heard the phrase "polluter pays principle", which emanated from the European Commission. I have no doubt all the Commissioners and MEPs nodded wisely and that the Government and Members of this House nodded wisely also. Humble councillors, including those of us on Leitrim County Council at the time, nodded when we read about the principle. We envisaged polluters as people who were setting out to destroy our environment. I refer to companies and factories that were careless with their emissions, thus destroying the atmosphere. I refer also to businesses that were fly-tipping, or dumping illegally, and to householders who were careless about how they disposed of their refuse. We thought these were the polluters but they are not the individuals to which the European commission was referring. Its view was that the compliant, law-abiding person, through the ordinary activities of daily living, had to generate some waste so he could be charged therefor. It was a case of punishing compliant citizens, namely, those who did try to minimise the adverse impact on the environment of ordinary living.

We are doing the very same through the imposition of water charges. What the Government proposes to do has nothing to do with conservation. It is not about people who waste water but about fattening public services and utilities for which the people of this nation and Europe have paid dearly so they will be attractive to privateers. It is not just a question of water and sanitary services. Our hospitals are doctor-fattening units from which investors can make a lot of money; they are no longer places where sick people go. Beds have been closed in public nursing homes and the money is being given to privateers in the private nursing home system. The same applies to the home help service and to tolls on our roads. Private contract workers, instead of local authority workers, are fixing roads. There are many such examples.

Water is most the basic ingredient of all life on this planet. Why do I say the charges are not about conservation but about privatisation? If it were a question of conservation, we would be fixing leaking pipes rather than paying €500 million €600 million - I forget the exact figure - to install meters. Why do we not encourage and support people to use untreated water for appropriate tasks? Why do we waste treated water flushing toilets, cleaning out cattle sheds, etc.? It is an outrageous waste of money.

In rural areas, where significant EU and Irish taxpayers' funding has been spent on improving the water network, are we to hand the system over to privateers whose only motivation is profit? Will the Government reduce general taxation on the population to reflect the reduction in expenditure on water provision once it is privatised? That is very unlikely. Will the Government reduce water charges for those who currently pay them, including farmers, big and small businesses and members of group water schemes? There is no chance of this happening; they will be asked to pay more.

The Government-planned legislation is not about making it easy for people to do the right thing and conserve water. The Cabinet knows that, as does everybody who will vote on this motion. It is a matter of abdicating Government responsibility. The Government wants to transfer the cost of running the service from the Government to the citizen, and it wants to transfer responsibility for the operation of the services from local authorities and the Government to privateers, whose only motivation is profit. Even at this late stage, I ask that the Government examine the intent of our motion and incorporate its principles into its legislation. It knows this is the right approach.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.