Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Since a transfer of money to the Exchequer from the local government fund is only provided for this year, will there be a transfer next year and, if there is, will it require specific legislation to facilitate it? We have to know what is going on with the money because all the legislation provides for is a one-year transfer of money from the local government fund to the Exchequer, a proportion of which goes on to Uisce Éireann.

I do not go along with the theory that the 32 local authorities were doing a highly efficient job and I had many a battle, both as Minister and local councillor, with the local authorities on this. We have to be honest about having a national network of water because if there had been a water supply to every house 120 years ago, no one would have set up 32 separate utilities. As with the electricity supply there would have been one national network connected in a comprehensive way, not stopping at county borders but giving a seamless system of water. We need a national plan in order that we move away from the stand-alone system county councils had in the past, because the problem was that if anything went wrong with them, one had no water. On the other hand, if there were a lot of interconnecting systems with larger and fewer treatment plants, it would give the advantage that if one supply got into difficulty, as happens with electricity, a backfeed of water would keep the supply going. The one-off, stand-alone local authority systems that did not connect have been a feature of rural life, but if anything went wrong, the whole system was down. When there was an outbreak of cryptosporidium in Galway, the fact that Galway city and county were not properly connected led to a lot of problems in the city because the new treatment plant in Luimnagh was not joined to the city system.

To say, therefore, that the status quois working correctly is wrong. To say it was sensible to have pipes stopping at county boundaries just because there was a county boundary is wrong. To say that everything was right with the system is also wrong, given my many dealings with it. The games that used to go on between local authorities and the Department of the Environment, which used to totally frustrate me, was wrong. A lot of money was spent on consultants preparing grandiose plans and sending them off to the Departments. The Departments would then say they were too big and the plans would to and fro for years. More money was spent on plans than was spent on putting pipes into the ground and upgrading the system.

I believe in the concept of a national network of water so that from one end of the country to the other each system would connect into the next. As a problem might arise, as it inevitably would, be it a purely natural phenomenon or otherwise, there would always be a back-up supply connected to it. At times, the debate has been a little unreal on that aspect.

I am still fascinated as to what is going on with the money trail. As I said, since the provision we are debating is for one year only, will new legislation or an amendment be needed next year? Will there be a transfer from the local government fund next year to the Exchequer? We are due an explanation on that matter in this House tonight. If this Bill had been legislated in the proper way, we would have got that explanation on Second Stage or Committee Stage and we could have come back to it on Report Stage.

See this speech in context