Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

The amendment that the Minister is proposing relates to the funding of Irish Water. I have questions on this that need to be examined. If this were Committee Stage, we would be dissecting how Irish Water is to be funded. Why are we carrying out the transfer in advance of seeing what is obtained from the payment of the water charges, for example? How do we even know that the €540 million will be required? Perhaps a 100% payment will be received from the water charges, for example, or at least 70% based on registration, and the Government will not require the €540 million. I believe this step is premature. I am sure the Minister is trustworthy but what about future Ministers who might use this very powerful instrument without any reference to the Oireachtas? Our amendment proposes that both Houses of the Oireachtas would have to approve any transfer of funds from the taxpayer to Irish Water. Clearly it is a question of the taxpayer.

The Minister made a point last night that I believe is very useful. This debate might not be useful in many ways but the Minister did make some points in which he verified that what is happening is not new. Car tax has been used in the past to pay for water services. Anti-water charges campaigners and many others have been saying this for a while. How much was used in the past? We need this kind of information. Is the amount under discussion an increased amount? How would it compare with when local authorities controlled their own water services? The Minister may correct me if I am wrong but my information is that water services generally cost €1.2 billion to supply from the sky to the tap in Ireland. Some €0.2 billion came from businesses and the rest was provided through general taxation. Therefore, €1 billion was derived in the past from car tax and other local government funding. The Government is now asking for €500 million but there was €500 million last year also. How is the other €500 million to be made up? One cannot get it from the water charges. There is no possible way that they would be sufficient. Will the Minister be coming back for more money later in the year to make up the other €1 billion? Those are questions that need to be answered. This is why the Minister should have given Deputies a chance to discuss this on Committee Stage.

I am opposed to the Minister having unilateral power without any reference to the Oireachtas. How does he envisage using this measure in the future? I, as a member of the environment committee, would have liked to have had a chance to discuss this on Committee Stage. We have not had Irish Water before the committee, only the Commission for Energy Regulation. We should have Irish Water in to show on PowerPoint slides how it envisages funding itself with the €540 million it has been given by the taxpayer. This is nice seed capital to start off a company. However, how will Irish Water make up the rest of the money? Apparently, there is a cap until 2017 or 2018, introduced by the Minister. There are so many unanswered questions. We should not be giving the money and handing the power to the Minister until we have answers to those questions.

The Minister, Deputy Kelly, spoke yesterday, as did the Minister of State, Deputy Paudie Coffey, and attacked Members on this side of the House for never coming up with solutions. We did come up with them and I will not repeat them. We proposed solutions several times because the Minister kept saying we were not proposing them. We outlined four mechanisms, a including wealth tax and a financial transactions tax. Imagine what would occur in respect of corporation tax. Imagine asking corporations such as Apple, Google, Starbucks, Facebook and all the companies lined up recently during the referendum campaign to pay the headline rate. However, we have made these points before and the Minister is not interested.

The Minister has introduced meters on footpaths in front of people's houses to gouge money out of them. As somebody said, it is a cash register on the pavement. That money could have been used to address the 47% of water unaccounted for through leaks that we know exist. This rate is very high. I was a member of a local authority for 11 years, and the Acting Chairman was also a member. Therefore, I note that some local authorities have made huge strides in reducing the rate to approximately 26%. Some local authorities, particularly in Dublin because authorities there may have had funding from commercial rates, etc., were able to upgrade their networks. There were some very simple steps taken. Sometimes the simple steps are what work. South Dublin County Council had a small team of inspectors going around at night listening for leaks with very simple equipment and fixing them. The Minister does not need to stick a meter in front of everyone's house to do that, and he never did. The Government should please stop pretending it has only discovered leaks through metering. Instead of investing in meters to take money off people, the money should have been invested to fix the network.

My other question, on funding, relates to how we will make up the rest of the €1 billion that is needed for Irish Water and the impact on the Department of Social Protection.

This is a very apt and fair question on the day when 30,000 lone parents will have money literally stolen from their children's mouths. What impact will this €100 bribe have on the Department of Social Protection? People are entitled to an answer. What are the repercussions of getting this money for the Department of Social Protection in the context of this funding proposal? Will the Department need extra staff? The Government must get this €100 into people's pockets before the election. That is critical. Will the Department need to take on extra staff to do it? Will staff be diverted from elsewhere, for example, lone parents or applications for disability benefits?

See this speech in context