Joe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

The Water Services Bill 2013 has serious implications for the future of a major infrastructure in our society. There is no doubt in my mind that this is the first step in a strategy to achieve the privatisation of the water supply network and infrastructure in the Republic. It is simply the beginning of a process of putting in place all the infrastructure on which a later privatisation will be built. We can have no trust whatsoever in the words of senior figures in the Government who deny this has anything to do with privatisation.

When first elected in 1997, I was only a few months in the Dáil when I spoke on the issue of Team Aer Lingus which was then being readied for what was its eventual privatisation. Not because of any brilliance on my part but because of the understanding of socialists of how the capitalist economy and politicians worked, I pointed out how Team Aer Lingus would be put through various stages and eventually finish up in the hands of international venture capitalists who would not give one whit for the needs of the workers in Team Aer Lingus or the communities which depended on the important employment the company provided. The Government at the time, of course, denied this, but who was proved correct? What is the verdict of history on that particular debate? Team Aer Lingus was handed over lock, stock and barrel to venture capitalists who, at a certain stage when it suited their international operations, devastated a premier aircraft engineering company and crushed a crucial part of our infrastructure, as well as the skills available in it. If Governments of a similar philosophy continue to be elected, which we dearly hope will change and I believe will, this will be the plan for our water infrastructure.

The Bill has the fingerprints of the troika all over it. The right-wing neoliberal philosophy that has dictated and driven policy in the European Union and the International Monetary Fund is evident in the diktat from the troika that a national water company be set up and that home owners be charged for water. In other areas of the European Union there is much talk about subsidiarity, which means keeping local control of as many of the functions of society as possible. The Bill is a diktat to move in the opposite direction and begin the process, whereby charging will become part and parcel of the water regime. The PricewaterhouseCoopers report on water services for the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government published in 2011 gives the agenda away.

The company, driven entirely by the values of private capitalism, expressed the real feelings of big business in this country and of the major private water multinationals. The report states: "PwC suggest that once Irish Water is well established as a self-funding utility the Government and Regulators may wish to assess international experience of the introduction of competition in water and sewerage services to identify whether Ireland could benefit from competitive markets in the water sector at a later date." Naturally, the company believes strongly that it would be greatly beneficial to privatise our water services. It would be beneficial for big business but not beneficial for ordinary people or communities.

We hear glib pronouncements from the politicians of the right to the effect that people must pay for their water. They ask how people can expect to get these crucial services free. The water infrastructure was put into this State by the taxes and tributes taken from the pockets of working-class people over many generations. Water services are maintained by central taxation and indirect taxation levied on our people. It is utterly false to suggest that water is free in any sense. It is paid for by taxpayers, who have always maintained the system of water supply. It is crucial that we maintain, develop and improve the water infrastructure such that we have absolutely guaranteed to every home a supply of pristine, clean drinking water, as well as water for industrial needs and so on.

The aim is to set up a charging regime and when it is set up then privatisation comes into play. No doubt EU law will be invoked to the effect that water is a commodity, commodities must be traded in the marketplace and private capitalists must be allowed in, as has happened with electricity, gas and others. This is entirely the reason for the strategy of the Government to attempt to put water meters into more than 1 million homes.

We do not know what figure the Government will finally set aside over a period for metering throughout the State. Figures of hundreds of millions of euro have been mentioned, perhaps €500 million or more, but we have not seen a definitive figure. This is done on the basis of the argument that water meters in every home will help to make people more conscious of or force them to cut down on water usage. In the first instance, international studies show that after a period the amount of water that would be saved in this way is not significant as against the entire amount of water used by industry, domestic houses, etc. In fact, if is true that usage would fall somewhat, some of that fall in usage would be down to people not using water when they should because of fear of the cost. An education awareness programme and a social awareness programme on the importance of water would conserve the minor amount that is at play.

If the Government was really serious about the hundreds of millions of euro that it intends to devote to water metering - which I believe will be opposed strenuously by communities throughout the country, because they know the agenda - and if instead that funding went into correcting and renewing the dilapidated and ancient water infrastructure in many parts of the country to fix the leaks and replace the open pipes, then far more water would be conserved. It is incredible that in local authority areas up to the present day more than 50% of expensively treated water is leaking into the ground. It beggars belief that this is the case. This is where the hundreds of millions of euro should be applied immediately. Further, that initiative should be used as a major infrastructural project to take from the disastrous dole queues hundreds or thousands of construction workers, engineers and plumbers. They should be given employment in the upgrading of the national water infrastructure. In this way, not only would we get a much better infrastructure, but we would begin to make up for the disastrous losses in employment that austerity has caused in the country. This is where the investment should go instead.

Another point that strikes me in this debate is the utter hypocrisy of the establishment when it comes to the issue of water conservation. When I came to the Dáil first in 1997 it was after a major and successful battle against water taxes. I spoke often in the Dáil about the need for a change to the building by-laws such that homes could be geared to save treated water through simple changes, such as dual-flush toilet systems and the development of other internal systems within homes, that would obviate the need for clean drinking water to be used for chores which did not need it. Not one finger was lifted to achieve this, yet billions of litres of pristine, clean drinking water could have been saved in Dublin alone on a yearly basis, let alone throughout the country. Despite this, establishment politicians still have the neck to stand up and lecture us on the necessity of water charges for conservation. Unfortunately, this belies their record in this regard.

It is ironic in many ways that a Labour Party and Fine Gael Government is attempting to reintroduce double charging for water. I say double charging because taxpayers pay for water through central taxation. It was a Labour Party and Fine Gael Government that was forced to abolish water charges in December 1996. I use the term "forced" because that did not arise from its kindness towards or understanding of hard-pressed working people or a recognition of the double taxation that the charges represented. Rather, it was after a major three-year campaign of people power. I was privileged to be the chairman of the Federation of Dublin Anti-Water Charges Campaigns, which led the campaign in Dublin, from 1994 to the end of 1996. It involved tens of thousands of householders rightly boycotting, resisting and fighting the charge in every way possible.

The fear of persisting because of the consequences forced the Government to abolish water charges in December 1996. This resulted in a substantial saving for millions of taxpayers in the subsequent 16 years. Does anybody believe water charges would be less than €600 or €700 per year if this had not happened? It was an important achievement in terms of people power.

The Government will face an even bigger and broader battle on its odious property tax because this time it will be a national movement. As the letters start to drop next month demanding hundreds of euro from up to 2 million homes for the simple right to have a home on which no money is earned but which costs a lot to keep, it will face mass revolt, a mass boycott, mass mobilisation and massive political pressure until it relents and abolishes the odious proposal to impose this new tax.

The Labour Party is particularly culpable in all of this. Its betrayal is even more clear in view of the expensive advertisements it placed in the national press during the course of the general election campaign to the effect that people should vote for it instead of Fine Gael because the latter planned to introduce water charges. If the Minister of State has any consideration for having honest partners in government, he should insist on it upholding its promise to oppose water charges, rather than allow it to shamelessly betray the people once again.

The alternative to the Government's proposal is a modern water infrastructure properly resourced from taxation on the super wealthy. For example, the top 5% of income earners could contribute additional billions of euro in taxes that could be used to fund infrastructure development. Mar focal scoir, ba mhaith liom a rá go bhful mé glan in aghaidh an Bhille um Sheirbhísí Uisce, 2013. Níl aon dabht go bhfuil plean i gceist chun príobháidiú an chórais uisce a chur i gcrích sa tír seo. Is é sin plean an troika, atá ag cur iallach ar an Rialtas an reachtaíocht seo a thabhairt isteach, an córas a athrú agus taillí uisce a chur ar gach teaghlach sa tír seo. Tá sé soiléir ón méid atá tar éis tarlú timpeall na hEorpa gurb é seo polasaí an Aontais Eorpaigh - polasaí nualiobrálach chun infreastruchtúr tábhachtach den tsaghas seo a chur isteach i lámha príobháideacha na gcomhlachtaí móra uisce idirnáisiúnta. Dá bhrí sin, caithfear cur in aghaidh an Bhille seo go tréan. Má leanann an Rialtas ar aghaidh leis, measaim go mbeidh feachtas ollmhór in aghaidh an pholasaí seo - in aghaidh príobháidiú ár n-uisce agus in aghaidh táillí a thabhairt isteach. Níl sé ceart nó cóir cáin nua den tsaghas seo a ghearradh ar ár ndaoine, atá faoin oiread sin brú cheana féin maidir leis na polasaithe déine atá á gcur i bhfeidhm ag an Rialtas chun boic móra na hEorpa a shábháil ón spéacláireacht, srl., a bhí ar siúl acu le deich mbliana anuas.

See this speech in context