Brian Stanley (Laois-Offaly, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak about the Bill. The legislation represents a massive climbdown when one compares it to the Bill that was rammed through the House before the Government departed on its Christmas holidays last year. This turnaround is an indication of the Government’s nervousness in the face of the campaign against the water charges which will come to the door of the Oireachtas next Wednesday when thousands of people arrive from all over the country to make their voices heard.

I suspect that the legislation has been designed to give the impression that the concessions wrung from the Government by the protests will be permanent. As I stated last week on the commitment, to be given effect in section 2, to hold a plebiscite in the event that the privatisation of water services is proposed, the legislation can simply be amended to remove the requirement to hold such a plebiscite. The same applies to other measures in the Bill, all of which could be removed by the Government of the day through an amendment to the Bill. A future Government could, for example, amend the legislation to increase the various figures provided for in respect of payments, grants and so forth. Given the Minister's statement last week that the measures he had announced would remain in effect until 2018, such changes are inevitable. If the Government survives the next general election, it or some other configuration could amend the legislation to allow for different tariffs. Sinn Féin in government would amend the legislation to eliminate all charges.

Much of the Bill is merely window dressing that has been designed to give the impression that the more lenient regime for water charges announced last week will be permanent. The Government has backed down and knocked off the rough edges of the water charges regime to make it more palatable. The objective of the changes is to stave off the mounting opposition and crisis brought about by the water charges and other Government measures.

The explanatory memorandum states revenue collected by Irish Water will be much lower than projected because of the introduction of reduced flat rates. This means that the net yield from the charges will be less than €100 million in 2015, even if every household were to pay, which is wishful thinking.

Reference is made to conservation grants and it is stated Irish Water will not be required to pay rates. Instead, local authorities will be compensated for the loss of rates through an allocation from the local government fund. This is an absurd proposal. The Government is playing with the figures and using smoke and mirrors to give a particular impression.

Despite the window dressing and efforts to move around the deck chairs on Titanicthat is Irish Water, all of the rising costs will ultimately be paid by the taxpayer. The Government has engaged in some nice book-keeping by moving the figures around. Before leaving for Brussels, the previous Minister, Phil Hogan, stated the proceeds of the local property tax would be used to fund footpaths, public lighting, libraries and parks. The fund was raided again this year and used to subvent Irish Water. Surely it would have better if the Government had taken a more honest approach, cut its losses and abandoned the Irish Water debacle.

The €100 grant is an inducement or bribe that is being depicted as a conservation measure. It does not incentivise water conservation. The Government is taking this money from people with one hand and handing it back with the other. The grant has nothing to do with water conservation and everything to do with keeping the European Commission and EUROSTAT happy because the funding involved can be kept off the balance sheet.

The amount of taxpayers' money spent by Irish Water makes a nonsense of the claim that it is addressing the deficiencies in the water system that result in more than 40% of water being wasted every year. The figures provided for water leaks continually change. The Minister referred to a figure of 49% this morning, having cited a figure of 41% last week.

A sum of €160 million or €40 million per annum was spent on fixing leaks and infrastructure in the years from 2010 to 2013, inclusive. This figure pales into insignificance when compared with the sums paid in consultancy fees, legal costs, bonus payments and for the installation of water meters. The cost of water meters has already increased from an initial projection of €431 million to €539 million. When one adds to this the expenditure on consultants, call centres and the entire Uisce Éireann corporate structure, one arrives at a total of close to €800 million. Not one leak has been fixed with this money, yet the Minister repeatedly states current funding is insufficient to fix the leaks in the water system. He should contrast the €800 million wasted on the Irish Water structure with the measly amount of €40 million per annum spent on fixing leaks.

Yesterday Irish Water provided me with precise figures for expenditure on fixing leaking water pipes. In 2010 only €37 million was spent on fixing leaks, which I accept was not the fault of the Government. This figure increased to €39 million in 2011 and 2012, respectively, and €43 million last year. Irish Water's capital investment programme for the next three years amounts to €150 million - yippee. This means that €50 million will be spent each year on fixing leaking pipes, from which, according to the Minister ten minutes ago, 49% of water is leaking. I understand the correct figure is closer to 41%. Using the €800 million spent on Irish Water to date, we could double the proposed investment in fixing leaks for 16 years and roll out a substantial capital programme or quadruple it for eight years and multiply by four the number of leaking pipes fixed. I visited a clinic run by Irish Water last week to have the figures checked to ensure I was not mistaken. I have them here in black and white.

The commitment given in section 2 to hold a plebiscite if a future Government were to decide to sell Irish Water is not worth the paper on which it is written because any Government that decided to proceed with privatisation could simply introduce a new Bill to amend the legislation before us. Such amending legislation could be pushed through the House in a few minutes. Sinn Féin calls for a referendum to be held on placing the water resource in the hands of citizens where it belongs. They must have the ultimate say on whether Irish Water should be privatised and should be given the right to insert such a clause in the Constitution. The Government proposes to hold several referendums next year, many of which Sinn Féin will support. A simple one line question could be put to the people on the same day as one of the other proposed referendums is held. Only one additional sheet of paper per voter would be required to allow voters to decide whether a new clause should be inserted into the Constitution.

If the Labour Party has no problem with this from an ideological point of view, why should there be any opposition to it? It would seal the matter forever and give us peace of mind in knowing that water resources, infrastructure and apparatus were in the control of the people. We cannot trust future Governments. Nobody knows what shape the Government will take in five, ten or 15 years time. The Labour Party was completely opposed to privatisation, but within the past year it has privatised a large chunk of Bord Gáis which happens to be the Mammy and Daddy of Uisce Éireann. What should the people make of this?

Section 7 of the Bill proposes the establishment of a water forum, which is a recognition of the significant level of public dissatisfaction with Irish Water. Not only do people have a range of issues with water meters, charges and the quality of the work being carried out in dealing with leaks and so on, many have also claimed that they are unable to get in contact with anyone to assist them. That is a major problem.

I am not certain that the type of forum proposed will help matters. Who will be represented at the forum? Will there be a guarantee, as the Bill states, that it will represent the interests of customers of Irish Water? Will it be the case that the 60 or so members will be the usual cronies, hangers-on or suspects of whatever party happens to be in power at the time? Why is there no specific provision for representatives of householders to be included? Why is there no provision to include representatives of trade unions and those involved in local authorities who have the expertise and are providing water services every day?

I welcome the provision in section 6 which will prevent water pressure from being reduced or water being turned off. This is a major step forward for those who cannot or will not pay bills.

Section 4 contains a provision for a €60 late payment charge, or €30 in the case of a household with a single adult, but we are still unclear about the long-term penalties and procedures which might be introduced and when they might be enforced. Perhaps the Minister might provide further clarification when he next addresses the House.

Another issue that is causing concern to many is the role of landlords and private rented accommodation. There is no reference to it in the Bill, but last week the Minister said he would introduce legislation to allow private landlords to deduct unpaid water charges from a tenant’s deposit. That caused controversy, including among landlords. Has the Minister reconsidered this proposal? Given that it is not included in the Bill, has he decided not to give such an unwarranted power to landlords? It is important that he does so, as there is fear about this issue among tenants. The legislation is weak compared to that in other countries and tenants have very few rights and little protection or security of tenure. Long-term leases are not the same as those in other states. People have contacted my office about this issue. Yesterday we dealt with somebody who was being harassed by their landlord demanding that they register. In some cases landlords are threatening to increase deposits. It is clear that there are unscrupulous and greedy individuals who see an opportunity to squeeze more money out of tenants. No doubt some of them will use this as an opportunity to make extra money by intimidating their tenants, or perhaps planning that if a tenant leaves before a bill comes due, they might somehow justify their retaining the tenant's deposit, in whole or in part. Such concerns have been brought to my attention and could lead to legal challenge, if legislated for. The Minister should use this opportunity to make it clear that landlords will have no such power.

I was contacted this week by a student active in the students' union. He reported that students were in an even more precarious position. Landlords have told them that they will be forced to pay a 12 month bill for water, even though they may only reside in a property for seven months of the year or four nights a week. This issue needs to be addressed.

The issue of PPS numbers caused major controversy. Therefore, I welcome the removal of that requirement. I have received calls about the issue, as private landlords were bullying tenants into providing PPS numbers. I am curious, however, about how people will be able to claim the allowance for children under 18 years of age if they do not supply PPS numbers. I have heard answers from the Government on this issue, but I am not entirely clear on how people can be identified. There will be self-declaration. Does the Minister wish to announce another measure, as some landlords are demanding PPS numbers from tenants?

I have mentioned that Irish Water will be exempt from paying rates to local authorities, but they will be made up by taxpayers paying them through the local government fund. I am curious to know how the €59 million rates estimate for Irish Water and other facilities was arrived at. How do we know that the figure is correct, as there has been no audit? With other Opposition spokespersons, we asked the former Minster, Phil Hogan, many times in the House to conduct an audit of all of the facilities that would be available to Irish Water. As far as I am aware and judging from the answers I have heard, to which I have paid attention, no such audit has been completed.

I will conclude by repeating what I said about the climbdown by the Government. The so-called concessions have been forced on it through mass opposition to water charges and the other austerity measures put on people's backs in the past six years. It is clear that the Government is frightened and introducing the new rates and other measures in the hope it will dampen opposition and settle people down. No one knows whether it will be successful. All I can say is that what I have heard up to now is that the process has not been successful. I suspect we will know more next week when there is a planned protest due to be held. I appeal to the Government not to wait until it has to make another humiliating climbdown but to listen to the people and announce the abolition of water charges which are a major imposition.

I want to address a number of points the Minister made. I have heard him refer to the Ringsend plant four times in the past fortnight. I spoke to people in Dublin City Council and what he has said it an insult to it. He has said €170 million was saved. He also told me this was new technology.

See this speech in context