Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I wish to share time with Deputy Connolly.

I questioned what I would say on this Bill because many of us in opposition who support the Right2Water campaign have to question whether we support the legislation because it is a farce. I do not reckon that the EU is working hand in hand with national governments on these issues, yet five days after the vote for Brexit because of the arrogance and the contempt of the 1% in the EU political class, it issued a statement about Ireland that it would be in breach of the Water Framework Directive because water charges are the established practice in the country. That arrogance will come back to bite the Union and the Government parties. When water charges were introduced, I recall a picture of Phil Hogan standing with a smug smile on his face holding a glass of water saying, "You will pay for water." That is imprinted on the minds of everybody opposed to these charges and austerity. They said, "No way, we won't pay." They also said they would not accept them and this was the straw that broke the camel's back.

Then Deputy Alan Kelly brought in legislation a year later saying he had listened to the people and water charges would be reduced, but we pointed out that was not what the people were saying. They were saying, "No way, we won't pay." In the general election, the democratic will of the people was to elect more than 90 Members who oppose water charges with a sizeable number of us prepared to vote against the current water charge regime. Fianna Fáil issued a jingoistic response. Party candidates clearly stated during the campaign that they opposed water charges and they would oppose them in the Chamber. They then came up with a half-baked proposal to set up a commission of inquiry to sit for nine months with a report to be sent to the House. The majority of us oppose this and it will be defeated. In the meantime, the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Dara Murphy, stated, "I think it is up to us in politics to convince people, that there is merit in having a fair, balanced, limited scheme for charging for water ... That achieves the ambition and that reduces waste of water and guarantees we have a stable supply of water." Obviously, that means a stable supply of income coming directly out of people's pockets through a charge.

People have asked whether water charges have been buried. I have always said they are dead but not buried. The task other Members and I have is to ensure they are buried over the next period. I do not know whether it is even worth supporting the commission of inquiry. What will the terms of reference be? Who will be on the commission? If it reports back saying it has convinced the people over nine months through the media that the politicians are right and people have to pay a charge and it has done its job, they will not fall for it. The people are watching the situation closely and they are checking every nook and cranny. I held a meeting on bin charges in Ballyfermot last night. That issue has died down because the Minister did not want the same huge numbers on the streets protesting like they did against water charges. However, those who attended asked questions about water charges such as what the Commission means by saying Ireland is not exempt from water charges under the Water Framework Directive.

This issue raises a question about the entire European project. As a country, we have a responsibility to tell the EU we will not implement this directive and we have a different way of doing things. As has been pointed out in the debate, there are other ways to raise money to fill the fiscal space everybody talks about such as corporate taxation, the Apple issue and the potential bill of between €17 billion and €19 billion, NAMA and credit unions being able to provide funding of between €2 billion and €4 billion for housing and taking the pressure of cutting other services if water services are not paid for.

I remind the House that we have always paid for water services through general taxation and VAT, in particular. That is the way they have been paid for up to now. It is progressive as it relates to the amount people earn. We should return to this. The Government should tell the Commission that we pay for water a different way, which is the same way we have paid for it since the year dot through VAT. That is a more progressive way to do this.

Other aspects of the water charges issue could be debated such as how long it has taken to install water meters, the cost of doing so, the jailing of people and the resistance to the programme. Will the Government stop the water metering programme? Will it accept the fact that the people have said "No" on numerous occasions? Every time Fine Gael and its partners have come back to the House, they say they have listened to the people but they have not. They have listened to the 1% in the EU and the 1% in the private water industry who want to grab our water infrastructure.

Most Independent Members and Sinn Féin have signed up to the Thirty-fifth Amendment of the Constitution (Water in Public Ownership) Bill 2016, which challenges Article 28 of the Constitution, to keep our water services in public ownership. That will be introduced during the next Dáil session. I question whether I will support the commission of inquiry. I would like more detail about who will be on it and the terms of reference. There has never been water poverty in this State because people have not been forced to pay for water directly from their wages. Those who cannot afford to pay are not forced into a position where their water could be cut off. That cannot happen now anyway because the previous legislation was amended under pressure from the people. However, that could happen in the future and it has happened in other countries such as the US where people's water is cut off because they cannot pay a water bill.

The Government can get money elsewhere to pay for water services. That should be done in a progressive way and should be linked to changes in our use of water and to planning and development regulations. Why does every house that is built not have a dual water system, which uses rain water to flush toilets and run washing machines with clean water only going through taps? That would be an investment for the next century, never mind the next three or four years. That issue has been raised on numerous occasions at council meetings throughout the country but such measure has never been implemented. I question the Government's sincerity on environmental issues.

See this speech in context