Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

Following on from what Deputy Wallace said about privatisation, there are not enough safeguards in the legislation to prevent that happening. The experience in recent years is that once charges for essential public services are introduced, privatisation follows. That has been the natural order in terms of European policy etc. Unless something is written into the Bill to the effect that there can be no privatisation in the future I do not know if that can be challenged under competition laws in Europe. That is why I believe setting up a single company will lead to that.

Another reason I believe Irish Water will be privatised is the proposal in the Bill to allow Irish Water borrow from private investors using its assets, namely, water and infrastructure, as collateral. That can lead to private investors having a claim on Irish Water's assets, and I believe that is a clear indication that privatisation of Irish Water is on course. Irish Water's assets - the infrastructure, water etc. - belong to the Irish people and despite the problem with under-funding by the State in recent years, the State has played a key role in developing that water and infrastructure.

I pay tribute to the engineers and the workers in the water sections of the local authorities. In my dealings with those authorities in Dublin City Council they have been second to none in terms of their experience, knowledge and hand-on approach. In the last big freeze in 2010 the knowledge of the inspectors and engineers in dealing with that was incredible, and it would be very damaging to lose that experience. The Minister might clarify if there has been an agreement with SIPTU to do transfer of undertakings in terms of a number of engineers from Dublin City Council to Bord Gáis or from Bord Gáis to the new company, Irish Water. It would be good to know if that is the case.

The Victorians understood that, despite the limits of science and medicine at the time, clean drinking water, the management of sewerage systems and the collection and disposal of household waste were essential to public health. That was the reason we had a public system to provide water and to manage waste and sewerage systems in the past century. Turning these services that are essential to public health into simple commercial transactions between a private company and consumers is a retrograde step and something we must address.

Other TDs spoke about the privatisation of water services in other countries. Water services in France were privatised since the time of Napoleon but that has been reversed and taken back into public control. Water services in a number of cities in Germany were privatised but as a result of voting in the local authority areas they have been taken back under public control. The major problems in Northern Ireland are a clear indication of the difficulties private companies experience in trying to deal with severe problems that may arise. The big freeze in 2010 was referred to by a number of Deputies. It is important that we keep the water services in public control.

It would be useful to get clear answers from the Government on its plans for water metering and charges. Is it the case that approximately 300,000 houses cannot be metered? What does it propose to do in those cases? Is it true that it is proposed that apartment blocks will have one meter to assess the block, with the bill to be shared by all the residents? Is it true that the Government plans to bring in assessed charges for water in 2014? Was that agreed with the troika last year? Is it the case that the water metering programme will not be completed for a number of years?

Bord Gáis initiated a programme of replacement of gas meters in the Dublin area only and it took years to complete. For how long does the Government believe water metering will take place? What is the position on the assessment that is proposed in the meantime?

This water tax is not based on ability to pay, and it will not be based on use because metering will not take place for a number of years due to the existing problems. Having spoken to people, and from listening to the debate, it appears it is another smash and grab exercise similar to the one in which the Minister's fellow TDs in Government engaged regarding the property tax to get €500 million and to bend to the nod of the troika. It is clear from its manifesto that Labour was opposed to the introduction of a water tax, yet it is now setting up the company and discussing assessment of water charges on people's homes.

It further demonstrates the contempt of the Labour Party for the people it asked to vote for them in the general election.

I heard Labour Party backbenchers state charging for water will make people think about water consumption and use. Some asked what will happen in the case of those with swimming pools, who use a lot of water. The point is that water is precious and expensive, particularly the water we require in our taps in our homes. It is crucial that we have the necessary infrastructure to provide the required amount of water. We have seen the dire consequences of water contamination in other parts of the country in recent years.

Domestic use accounts for only 16%, or almost one sixth, of the potable water produced in Ireland in a year. Unaccounted-for water accounts for 36%, or approximately one third. The world-class figure for unaccounted-for water is approximately 16%. Unaccounted-for water in the greater Dublin area reduced from 42.5% to 30% in 15 years, generally because of the development of housing estates in the Dublin area and the need to try to fix pipes over that period.

A graph I saw recently shows a breakdown of figures for Britain, where domestic metering is in place. Toilet flushing accounts for 51 litres per head per day, whereas the Danish figure is 30 litres per head per day. This points to a difference of 21 litres per head per day, representing a potential 12% saving over the figure in Britain. There is no national building code in Ireland that makes dual-flush systems mandatory such that the figure could apply here. In Denmark, under the building code, almost every house was retrofitted in the 1990s, and there was an education programme. This measure alone resulted in a consumption reduction of 21 litres per person per day.

Deputy Wallace referred to retrofitting, dual-flush mechanisms and rainwater harvesting. Only treated water should come through our taps and this would greatly reduce demand on the water system. This would greatly assist with our climate change policy and with the protection of good, clean water, which is expensive.

See this speech in context