Dáil debates

Friday, 12 December 2014

Water Services Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed)

 

11:05 am

Photo of Lucinda CreightonLucinda Creighton (Dublin South East, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am opposing this amendment which is clumsy and does not add anything to the section or to the Bill. Section 7(5)(a) states that one of the forum's functions is "to represent the interests of customers of Irish Water", and that is clear. Customers are the ones who use and pay for the service.

I do not understanding the wording in amendment No. 29: "and representatives of the trade unions with members in Irish Water". That is illogical and does not make any sense. I therefore do not support the amendment but I also think the section is completely flawed. A public water forum is just a sop. It is scant in detail and it is not clear how it would operate. In addition, its purpose is unclear. It is just an attempt to appease the anger that exists in respect of Irish Water.

Irish Water and the Minister with responsibility for it are accountable to the Dáil. We live in a parliamentary democracy, so the actions or inaction and all the problems with Irish Water should be dealt with and teased out in this Chamber. The people's representatives are elected to do that job. If we set up a similar talking shop for every semi-State utility company, it would make a joke of the whole democratic parliamentary system. I do not understand it.

This section is meaningless and will do nothing to enhance the functioning of Irish Water. It will not make Irish Water any more accountable than it already is. It is simply a populist stunt, which is unfortunate because it is dishonest. If the Minister was interested in genuine engagement on the functioning of Irish Water, he would be answering the questions he has been repeatedly asked here since last night. He would also be treating this House with a lot more respect than he has done so far. He would be interested in listening to Opposition amendments and accepting them. Instead, however, it is a repeat of what happened here last December. A public water forum, which is not clearly defined in this legislation and is, to my mind, just a talking shop, will not change that one iota.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.