Alan Kelly (Tipperary, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thought I had seen it all, but if the media are reporting what I believe is probably accurate, we are heading back to the past. If that is the case, politics is failing. The issue of water charges has been a consistent blight on the political system for many years. We have to recognise that it has recently divided society because it followed a period of horrendous austerity during which taxpayers were lumbered unfairly with major bank debt, against which my party voted. I believe we are about to witness the triumph of mediocrity over modernism, of short-termism over common sense and of immaturity over innovation. If the scrapping of Irish Water goes ahead, let us call it what it is: political, economic and environmental sabotage. Let no one think we are in anyway experiencing new politics or that this is the birth of a new political maturity, if the current speculation is accurate. This is 1977 all over again. It is Groundhog Day. Unpopular local rates were abolished by Fianna Fáil and people paid income tax rates of up to 60% in the 1980s. We risk repeating that mistake. Every other EU country has some type of domestic charge for water. Fianna Fáil had the chance to make a stand on mental health services, the renewal of rural Ireland, to end child poverty or institute a living wage, yet it has made a stand on something that costs people €3 a week. What are its priorities?

Let us be clear on the decision that may be made shortly. A suspension or scrapping of water charges will result in the loss of billions of euro of potential investment in water services. I believe we will have water shortages in this very city in the near future. It is not only the amount of investment that matters but also investing in the right places at the right time and getting the balance right between new capital projects, upgrades and planned maintenance works. The aforementioned independent assessment and countless Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, reports pointed to the need not only to address an infrastructural deficit but also to improve the standards of operation.

Given what I am hearing, if there is any fairness, the law-abiding people who could afford to pay and who have paid their bills will have to get their money back. That will mean that Irish Water will have to reprocess well in excess of 2 million financial transactions. I ask Deputies if that is common sense. Whether the charge is being suspended or abolished, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, Members of which are not even present, need to tell people how and when they will give them their money back. The loser in this is not any political party represented in this House but the environment and those who depend on a clean water supply. The 20,000 tonnes of sewage that pour into the lower harbour in Cork each day will continue to flow in the constituency of the Fianna Fáil leader; the boil water notices will continue and Dublin will not have a secure water supply into the future.

What has Irish Water done to date? Its investment has delivered 34 new treatment plants, including 26 for wastewater and eight for drinking water, as well as 73 upgrades, including 51 for wastewater and 22 for drinking water. A further 47 water conservation projects have been completed, while 452 km of pipe has been remediated. Irish Water is also targeting investment to improve water quality. Look at the improvements it has made to the lives of 17,300 people in County Roscommon who were subject to boil water notices, with the residents of Castlerea, for example, being subject to boil water notices from November 2009 until two years ago. They can now turn on the tap without having to turn on the kettle first. Irish Water's implementation of disinfection technologies has meant 300,000 fewer people are now dependent on supplies in need of remedial action, as defined in the EPA's remedial action list.

The urban areas with no wastewater treatment facilities are the focus of Irish Water, with the investment being aimed at protecting public health and the environment of the people living in these communities. Two of the required plants are complete and in operation, while another six are under construction. Critically, Irish Water is also addressing the unacceptably high level of leakages. Through metering identification of customer-led leakages, Irish Water has been able to offer households a first fix repair of leaks between the boundary of a property and a house. Through the repairs conducted by it under the scheme and those by customers of internal leaks identified through meters, 34 million litres of water have been saved. That is enough water saved every day to supply County Wicklow.

Staff in Irish Water and their contractors must be reeling today, 500 of whom are based on the southside of Cork city in the backyard of the Fianna Fáil leader. I wonder what the 5,000 people who work in the water and waste industry think of the latest developments today. The Labour Party stands in solidarity with these workers.

The funding model to modernise the water system is based on three components: subvention, commercial charges and domestic charges. To replace one of these, we will have to eat into the now famous fiscal space. Therefore, funding that may have been available for housing, education or welfare payments will not be there. Over €1.4 billion will have to be found to meet Irish Water's running costs and modernisation programme to 2021 if domestic charges are ceased. Sewage treatment plants do not compete easily with hospitals or houses when it comes to political priorities. That is why it must be taken out of politics and the task given to a utility.

The people who paid - approximately 950,000 households - may be about to be made fools of. The 340,000 people who have already paid for water through wells and group schemes are being shown nothing but disregard by Fianna Fáil, in particular. What is more, Irish Water reported to me that during the general election the payment rate actually increased and while not all of the data were collected, a payment rate of just under 70% was likely.

See this speech in context