Brendan Smith (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

In listening to the Minister of State's speech it was obvious there were still many outstanding issues in regard to existing staff of local authorities and that a considerable period of time was envisaged for the transfer of functions to Uisce Éireann and its establishment in the period 2014-17. Moreover, there is no provision for political accountability on the part of Uisce Éireann to the Oireachtas. In the past 18 months in particular there has been much confusion in comments of the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and other Ministers on the costs that will accrue to each household following the installation of meters, including the annual costs.

A major concern of mine which has been articulated by other Deputies and Senators from my party relates to the possible privatisation of Uisce Éireann in the future. What would happen in sparsely populated areas which are deserving of a proper water supply, as is every citizen, regardless of location, if we were to have a private company operating on the basis of generating profits and not interested in providing a public utility? I remain to be convinced that the proposed configuration will secure this very important utility in public ownership for the future. It must remain in public ownership. The possible dismantling of Uisce Éireann as a State-owned company would be disastrous for all consumers, particularly so for less populated areas.

It is unfortunate that no consideration was given to the establishment of Irish Water on the basis of best practice in local authorities throughout the country. While the Minister and his officials are more familiar with them than I am, the councils in my own county of Cavan and in Kilkenny, which was cited, are good examples of local authorities that provide an excellent water service. Consideration could have been given to the new entity being owned nationally by the local authorities, which might have offered some protection in preventing possible privatisation in the future.

The Minister and his colleague in the Department published a document on local government reform which contained aspirations in regard to giving more powers to local authorities. However, in effect, the very opposite is happening because we are dismantling their powers. The provision of a water supply is one of the major roles and responsibilities of local authorities, but that power is being taken from them.

I am glad the Minister of State referred to the success of group water schemes. He cited Monaghan as an example where there was a huge reduction in usage when the scheme was upgraded. As he knows, I represent the constituency of Cavan-Monaghan which has seen huge investment from the late 1990s in upgrading group water schemes and the public water supply. There has been a huge buy-in among the local community in so many parishes, villages and towns to a partnership with the local authorities and also the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. In the early days, when it was envisaged that existing group water schemes would merge and work together, I attended many meetings in parish halls, with other public representatives, officials from the local authorities and even officials from the Department, in an effort to have schemes merge and work together. In west Cavan there is one scheme following the merger of 13 schemes which stretches from outside Belturbet to Dowra and Blacklion. As I know the Minister of State is reasonably familiar with the geography, that will give him a picture of the huge level of co-operation between local communities, local voluntary committees and the local authority, assisted very much by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the very substantial funding provided by the previous Government to upgrade and fund new group water schemes.

Where do the group water schemes stand in this legislation? We have those unique partnerships. I will cite two examples. The group water scheme in Blacklion sells water to the county council for the village of Blacklion. In my home parish of Templeport, the village bound by the public water supply is merged with what was a old group water scheme. There is a significant and very successful fusion of public and private elements working together. Where do the group water schemes stand when this legislation is enacted? A subsidy is being provided to group water schemes at the moment and that is necessary because of the costs involved in traversing wide geographical areas that lack a critical mass of population. They need that subsidy to maintain that supply. How will those schemes operate in the future?

Not enough thinking has gone into the preparation of this legislation. One thing we have seen is that community work and partnership is being totally ignored to the detriment of the best interests of rural Ireland. The issues surrounding the commitment, expertise, diligence and work that so many people have done on a voluntary basis to ensure their local communities, assisted by the State, had an adequate supply of good-quality water to their homes have not been fleshed out, which is a serious source of concern for me. I compliment the many members of committees of group water schemes throughout this country who give valiantly of their time in ensuring that their own communities had a proper supply of top-quality water. That supply could not have been provided in so many rural areas were it not for that dedication and commitment, the partnership forged since the late 1990s and the funding made available to upgrade and build new group water schemes. That partnership will be lost with the new structures proposed in this legislation.

See this speech in context