Barry Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

The record will show that we did not agree with the establishment of Irish Water, its configuration, its top-heavy tiers of management, its bonus culture or its pay rates. The costs associated with its establishment are now well known, having been initially exposed by members of the media as being €180 million. Some €85 million of that was spent on outside expertise or, as many of us term such expertise, consultants. The funding for its establishment and everything it entailed was drawn from the National Pensions Reserve Fund, NPRF, and was agreed by the Cabinet's Economic Management Council, EMC, which was confined to the Taoiseach, the two Ministers with responsibility for finance - Deputies Noonan and Howlin - and the then Tánaiste, Deputy Gilmore, as well as the then Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, who made the proposal.

When the costs, including those for consultants, were exposed, I stated that many members of the Cabinet appeared to feign surprise upon learning of their extent. However, it now appears that those members were genuinely surprised, as the information on the costs and what they entailed was withheld from them. On the "This Week" radio programme in recent weeks, we learned that much of the information in question was available to the then Minister. I wonder what information he conveyed to the council and how the latter did its job of acting in the best interests of those who gave its members the privilege of being in a position to make that decision.

We have seen the slow pace of the metering project, its exorbitant costs and the first year's income from the property tax given to Irish Water. We question the need for metering if the Government is genuine about having a system that promotes conservation. In an effort today to put down Deputy Martin's genuine question, the Taoiseach stated that the previous Governments of recent times had under-invested in the water network. Should the Taoiseach not be aware that Irish Water's capital spend for the next three years, which was announced this year, will be less than what was spent by conventional means in the previous three years? This rubbishes his claim out of hand.

When questioned during the past two years, the Taoiseach stated that children would not be charged for water. He revised this to state that children would receive an allowance of 38,000 litres per year. He will have to revise his statement again, given the fact that the policy paper from the Commission for Energy Regulation, CER, on the pricing structure means that children will only receive an allowance of 21,000 litres. The Taoiseach and the Government have form on these matters, form that cannot be trusted.

I could not make my next remark in the House six weeks ago when the CER's report was published, but it was undoubtedly not a coincidence that the report was issued on an August bank holiday weekend or that the ensuing period of public consultation was held during the month of August when the House was not sitting and many people were not available to make proper submissions or undertake proper scrutiny of what the report contained. It was also no coincidence that the Joint Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht was not afforded an opportunity to discuss the contents of Irish Water's initial submission to the CER or that my request to reconvene the committee to hold such a discussion was not allowed. I have no doubt that the Fine Gael candidate's statement last night was in the fine tradition of the type made previously by the likes of the Taoiseach in the town of Roscommon. I do not know what it is about Fine Gael when it comes to elections, by-elections, promises and false promises in the town of Roscommon. It is déjà vu. The lorry that the Taoiseach stood on will obviously be doing the rounds in Roscommon over the next three weeks.

Water charges will be calculated on 1 October, with bills due to arrive next January. The draft water charges plan is due to be finalised by the CER later this month. That plan proposes a 50% rate for homes that have been under boil-water notices for up to three months and a 100% reduction thereafter. However, households will also have to pay for their water out regardless of the dire quality of their supply.

People honestly do not care what Irish Water defines as water in or water out. They are still being charged for a supply that does not deliver.

We have also put in a detailed submission to the CER's consultation process and we have combined it with this Bill, and I am sure it is available for all to see. We believe it should be simply and squarely very easy to understand that it should be illegal for Irish Water to charge for a contaminated water supply at any level, regardless of any draft or proposed plan that may or will exist on the part of the CER, which has a responsibility to the people, is a representative of the people and is supposed to act in the great and best interest of people.

The Minister present is a member of the Labour Party and I appreciate the intervention by his colleague, Senator John Kelly, last night when he disassociated himself with the comments of the Fine Gael candidate. If nothing else, they appear to have learned from the mistakes, as Deputy Pat Rabbitte said, about doing those things during the course of elections, and they have learned obviously from the Tesco ad fiasco and so forth. I want to acknowledge that and say that the party has made progress in that regard under its new leadership.

However, Fine Gael is claiming that the people of Roscommon affected by boil water notices will not have to pay water charges but, as I said, that is simply untrue. Under the draft plan, residents will have to pay for water out, while those on a boil water notice of fewer than three months such as the people from Newtowncashel in Roscommon will have to pay a 50% rate for water they cannot use. What is more, the CER has denied any confirmation of the Fine Gael's claims resulting, and this has resulted in a fiasco with claim and counter-claim about water in and water out. Let us be straight, honest and clear about this. This Bill can put the issue to bed once and for all. It ensures quite simply and plainly that all residents affected by contaminated supplies do not have to pay for the water. It is a simple way to solve the issue based on the principle of nothing only fairness. Assurance will not be provided by any amount of idle talk or confirmation that the CER, having had a period of consultation, will take note and cognisance of the debate that is taking place, despite the fact that there has not been proper and adequate scrutiny of that report in the absence of the Dáil sitting or of a committee and that is something that the Minister with responsibility in this area has to grasp. The regulator promised a committee of these Houses that it would allow members of an all-party committee on the environment to discuss and scrutinise the contents of Irish Water's submission to the CER's office prior to the CER producing a report based on its research and allow the public have their period of consultation. I do not believe that process was adhered to in the fashion in which it was designed to do so and that being the case, somebody has questions to answer. The Minister with responsibility in this area is the one to ask those questions, seek and demand those answers and have them available for Members of House.

It is near time that sense of clarity and effective leadership came to the fore on this issue. Application forms are being delivered to houses throughout the country this week. A question on the form asks people do they think they have a medical need that may determine the amount of water they use or do not use. Where is that leading? Was it not a specific point allowed or catered for in the legislation that those with a medical need would not be charged inappropriately for the amount of water they needed because of their medical condition? It is another example of the line of form that has ensued since this issue was first brought to the House. To think that people were told that the expertise was within Bord Gáis in the first instance and thereafter was contained in the outside expertise at the cost of €85 million, which was kept from everybody at the time but that we had to accept: as the previous Minister said, "You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs." He is breaking a fair few eggs with the cost of this unfortunately. It is near time that the Minister present showed the sort of leadership that is required on this issue now and that he would agree to accept this Bill which brings absolute clarity based on fairness to one issue which is affecting 36,000 people nationwide, 21,000 in the county of Roscommon and which may affect many more in the intervening period.

I hope that Government party members of both persuasions would agree with the sentiments I have expressed, if for nothing else but to begin a new chapter in allowing this sorry process gain some redemption. As I said, we at no time agreed with the concept of putting in place a new tier of management, a new tier on top of systems that were already in place and adequately positioned if funding was made available in the right manner to address the deficiencies that exist in the system. The Minister counterclaims by saying this is a way and a means by which that can be addressed. I have said to him already that the next three years capital spend will be less than the previous three years by the conventional methods that were available to the Department at that time. That is a fact. A total of €1.67 billion was announced over three years through great fanfare as if it was a huge departure from what had gone before and it was anything but that to be plain and honest about it.

See this speech in context