Seán Kyne (Galway West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Last Friday, I arranged a cross-party meeting involving Irish Water officials in my constituency. It was a briefing for Oireachtas Members and local councillors in the Connemara area. It was very worthwhile on a local and macro level regarding Irish Water's strategy. The officials explained that when Northern Ireland Water was founded in 2007, there were approximately 200 water treatment plants across the Six Counties. They have been rationalised to 26, which are interconnected, so that if there is a maintenance issue in one, no area will be left without a water supply. The running costs of the larger plants are lower than those of the smaller plants. The smaller plants provided water to a local area, and where there were issues with breakages or maintenance, there were added costs. There are 860 water treatment plants in this country, of which the 20 largest plants supply more than 50% of the population, in the greater Dublin area and some of the cities. Irish Water's plan is to rationalise, close the smaller plants and invest in larger plants that are more reliable and modern and will supply a larger area.

At the meeting with Irish Water, we discussed county boundaries. We all have a great affection for our counties. My county is Galway, which borders Counties Mayo and Roscommon, where there have been problems with water. Irish Water's plan will ignore the county maps. For example, when it considers the water supply in Lough Mask, it will be open to bringing it to Galway and Roscommon. When one listens to Irish Water, the plan makes sense. Huge investment is required for water and wastewater. If we have heard it once, we have heard it a thousand times: “Why do you not fix the pipes first?” If it were that easy, and if there were money available to fix the pipes, it would have been done a long time ago. Considerable investment is required across the country.

While rationalisation can take place in water treatment, it is more difficult in sewage treatment because sewage cannot be pumped over large distances. It must be more confined to the urban area, whether small or large, served by the sewerage network and treatment plant. Our sewage treatment plants require much investment. Four of the 42 towns where untreated sewage is discharged are in Galway, namely, Kinvara, An Cheathrú Rua, An Spidéal and Roundstone. At the meeting on Friday, we also discussed people's concerns about the water supply in An Cheathrú Rua. Irish Water has short-term, medium-term and long-term plans to ensure the water supply is corrected. There have been problems with trihalomethanes, THMs, a relatively new issue. The Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, is putting pressure on Irish Water which it was previously putting on Galway County Council. Irish Water has immediate plans to bring water from Spiddal and mix it with the water from Carraroe to lower the level of THMs. It has medium-term plans to invest in the reservoir there, and the work will take place as soon as possible, with a completion date scheduled for February 2016 at the latest, and earlier if possible. It has long-term plans to invest in the supply to Galway City and examine the regional basis of pumping water to Carraroe. These are real plans Irish Water has to address a situation of concern in my locality.

I welcome the Bill. Deputy Harrington has highlighted some of the concerns. Metering is the way to go. It is an investment in the future and conservation. The economy will grow and there will be a greater requirement and necessity for water to facilitate investment and the growth of populations and urban centres. This requires high-quality drinking water that meets the standards set down by European regulations. We also need high-quality bathing water, hence the need to invest in our wastewater treatment plants. As I said, water metering is an investment in the future.

The leakage rate in certain houses has been highlighted.

District metering has had an impact, including in my own area. We must get down to the level of individual houses to ensure we know the location of any leaks so that they can be repaired, because water is a precious commodity. I am not that old but I remember going to the next door neighbour's well to draw water or going down to the river to turn on the pump - if it worked, which it sometimes did not. Many people from the country realise the difficulties in getting suitable water in many areas. The people in the village of Kilrickle, in a neighbouring constituency to mine, on the old Galway to Dublin road, still do not have a proper water supply. Investment was never made in that town. They do not even have a group water supply because they do not have a source. That is a village that many people travelling from Dublin to Galway would have passed through over the years without ever thinking that it was any different from anywhere else, but the people do not have a water supply. Those are the challenges Irish Water faces in terms of using borrowed money to invest in this critical infrastructure. That is its role and that is how it must proceed.

When discussing the motion here some weeks ago I mentioned that I was contacted by two people who were at the march in Galway, both of whom had the same concern about an aspect of the original proposal - namely, that they did not want to give their PPS numbers. I tried as best I could to explain the requirement in terms of security but they did not buy what I was telling them, which is fair enough; they are entitled to do that. In that regard I am glad the Government has initiated an alternative approach whereby, on foot of proof that a bill is paid, the water conservation grant can be paid through the Department of Social Protection, which owns and controls the PPS numbers. That is a welcome change.

Whether the concern about privatisation is real or not, it has become an issue, and people are genuinely concerned about it. The Government has put a plan in place with regard to any future Government that might want to go down that road - namely, that a plebiscite would have to be held. I welcome that because, ultimately, the people will have a say in that decision if that day ever arrives. I do not see it coming from this Government, and most parties here are in support of public ownership of our water supply.

What we have been attempting to do in terms of both the property tax and the water charges is to look at a different system of taxation, the aim of which is to remove the burden of taxation on people who are working and try to reform the system by bringing in a property-based tax and a water tax, which can then be used to invest in infrastructure. That is the correct approach as long as we continue to reduce the amount of tax people are paying. We have seen that in the last budget, and the plan is to continue it in future budgets. That is a real choice that people will have to make. Do we want a Government that is reducing tax for those who go out to work, which incentivises work and create jobs? We acknowledge that there are people who cannot find jobs and that we need to ensure more is done to provide jobs. We have seen a good deal of success in that regard, with 70,000 new jobs created, and we want to encourage people to come back to this country. However, we cannot do that without investment in a range of areas, whether it be broadband, water or sewerage services. Water and sewerage services are part of the rationale for setting up Irish Water.

I understand there are people who under the original proposal had genuine concerns about ability to pay. The Government has put its hands up regarding the mistakes made in the process, but I welcome this Bill, which is a reflection of the fact that the Government is listening to the concerns raised with Deputies and Ministers. Those concerns were genuine, and I am hopeful that the changes announced in this Bill will alleviate them, because it provides certainty and assurance and allows for the capping of water charges up to the end of 2018. I am confident that people will eventually support the principle of water charges, but we must continuously explain the requirement to invest in our future.

See this speech in context