Dáil debates

Thursday, 16 June 2011

3:00 pm

Photo of Catherine MurphyCatherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)

I have seen at first hand the very real problems experienced by households in north Kildare. Water interruptions and loss of pressure has become a seasonal problem. Homes with small children and babies have gone without water for up to two weeks during the winter, while in dry spells in the summer the pressure is reduced to the point where some households do not have a constant supply. This is totally unacceptable. Water supplies in the greater Dublin area, of which north Kildare is part, are on a knife edge.

There are two reasons for this, the first of which is the lack of integrated planning. A large number of houses were built without complementary services being provided. Inadequate renewal of water pipes is not a problem in north Kildare because houses there are relatively new but there are serious problems in other places in the catchment area. It is a challenge to ensure security of supply and, at the same time, ensure hard-pressed households do not have an additional burden of taxation through stealth taxes. The introduction of service charges, through the Local Government (Financial Provisions) Act introduced by Fine Gael and Labour Party in 1983, drew me into politics. The tax marches took place in the 1970s, when the lion's share of taxation was paid by PAYE workers. There might be merit in a State-owned water company because it might better manage the limited resources. However, the EU-IMF deal commits Ireland to undertake an independent assessment of the establishment of such a company. I am concerned that they seek to neatly package water services in order to sell them as an asset. That is a major concern.

The principle of taxing waste is not one to which I am opposed but the details of this measure make me question whether that is the proposal and how it will play out. Does anyone think the State will invest €500 million in metering without recouping the sum? This measure is aligned to the European water directive, which enshrines the principle of full cost recovery, and makes me question whether the free allowance referred to by the Government amendment is an introductory offer to gain acceptance for the system. Once the metering system is in place it will creep towards full cost recovery as it is the EU, after all, that is in the driving seat. One way or the other we will pay.

If we are to have a secure supply for households and industry we must invest heavily in the development of new sources of supply and the elimination of waste. We must also change habits to reduce waste. Although there may be merit in the metering system, I am very sceptical about the ultimate intentions behind it.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.