Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

When my party and Fianna Fáil published our agreement on facilitating a minority Fine Gael-led Government, we made clear our commitment to providing the space for a comprehensive nine-month deliberative process to be undertaken on how we will fund domestic water services into the future. We are now three months into this deliberative process and I welcome the opportunity Sinn Féin and others have provided this House to contribute further to the debate. On numerous occasions I have stated my commitment and that of my Government colleagues to having a calm, considered and rational debate, where experts' considered views are put before the Oireachtas. That will be completed over the next six months or so.

On 29 June, I announced details of an expert commission to examine the future funding of domestic water services. It comprises international and national experts in the areas of environmental policy; water utility consumer affairs; utility regulation; group water schemes; environmental law; and water sustainability. Headed by a former chairperson of the Labour Court, Kevin Duffy, its remit is to produce recommendations on the future funding of domestic water and wastewater services and improvements in water quality. It will take into account: proposals on how the national utility, Irish Water, would be able to borrow to invest in infrastructure; the need to encourage water conservation; Ireland’s domestic and international environmental standards and obligations; the role of the regulator; and submissions from interested parties.

The commission placed a call for public submissions between 5 August and 9 September. I thank all those who used the opportunity to put their views and positions to the commission during this period. To ensure the commission’s complete independence from Government, the Institute of Public Administration is providing the secretariat for the expert group.

The commission is due to produce its recommendations by the end of November, at which point the Oireachtas will have established a special Oireachtas committee on the funding of domestic water services. It will debate the commission’s recommendations and endeavour to make its own recommendations. The committee’s work is expected to take no more than three months to complete.

After that period, both Houses of the Oireachtas will, within a one-month period, consider and vote on the Oireachtas committee’s recommendations. I expect the Oireachtas, therefore, to make a final decision on water charges by the end of March. Irrespective of that decision, it will be a collective Oireachtas decision, based on the knowledge that all pertinent issues have been examined fully and deliberated on during the nine-month process. Throughout this deliberative period, which should conclude by the end of March, domestic water charges remain suspended, as was agreed.

We will have a serious choice to make at that point. Funding of water and wastewater infrastructure and day-to-day operation of our public water services can be achieved in one of three ways: it can be funded directly and fully by the users of such water services and infrastructure; it can be funded through a mixture of contributions from service users and central taxation; or it can be funded completely through the Exchequer and general taxation.

I do not want to pre-empt the expert commission’s recommendations. However, I reiterate my belief in the user-pays principle. Those who use water services and infrastructure should make a direct contribution to funding the cost of those services. That makes sense on many levels. Without such a contribution we end the link between usage and funding. In consequence the 15% to 20% of the population who pay for water services directly, be they owners of private wells or members of group water schemes, end up paying a disproportionate amount of the cost of others’ services.

The Sinn Féin motion before us this evening calls for infrastructure to be funded through progressive taxation. What is progressive about making those with private wells or in group water schemes pay twice - once for their own water and once for somebody else's? What is progressive about removing the link between water usage and paying for it, or indeed removing the incentive to conserve water and treat it as the valuable natural resource that it is? A progressive approach can be maintained by protecting lower-income households against a disproportionate burden from water charges but eliminating any direct contribution to funding water services will not progress our public water system in terms of conservation or responsible use. Many of those on the other side of the House understand that and accept there are points that need to be teased out in that area.

Last October, Irish Water published its business plan, which outlined its plan to invest €5.5 billion in infrastructure between 2014 and 2021. This funding is required to achieve key objectives such as: eliminating the risk of drinking water contamination for the 846,000 people on 117 deficient public water supplies currently; lifting all current boil water notices which affect over 20,000 people on 19 supplies as I speak; ending the discharge of untreated wastewater into rivers, lakes and coasts at over 40 urban locations, thus threatening public health and the environment; reducing leakage from 49% to 38% so that Irish Water can save 180 million litres of water every day, an issue already raised by one of the Opposition Deputies; and significantly increasing water and wastewater capacity to support social and economic development, including the 15% spare capacity needed in this city.

In making our decision early next year on the future funding of domestic water services we will need to consider whether central taxation can address the legacy issues that abound in the public water infrastructure and improve services for a growing population and economy. This model has failed in the past. That is the reality. The model to which Sinn Féin wants to return did not work. That is the reason we are trying to change it and a new funding model and utility were established under the previous Government. The decision we will make cannot be one that will work only in times of fiscal recovery; it must continue to deliver and enable us to invest in water services in times of difficulty also. We will be voting on a long-term funding model. Members must be cognisant that if we are to fund water infrastructure and services through central taxation, the delivery of new major water and wastewater plants such as those in the eastern and midlands region and the lower Cork Harbour projects will be contingent on their relative preference over other essential projects in health, education, transport, policing and other areas. I do not think that would provide the certainty we need in water supply into the future.

I could not be any clearer on the importance and the implications of the decision we will make next year. It should not be rushed. Our hand should not be forced by political opportunism similar to what is happening by way of this motion. I ask the House to afford the expert commission and the special Oireachtas committee the further six months required to put the facts before the Oireachtas prior to a final decision being taken by all of us. That decision will impact on the provision of secure, clean water supplies for a growing population for generations to come. It will have a major bearing on the water supply capacity in a growing economy which is sustaining well over 200,000 jobs in water-intensive industries such as ICT, bio-tech and agrifood. These are the growth sectors that are looking to Ireland as a water secure economy in a world in which water is scarce. When I was Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, it was made crystal clear to me at conference after conference that few countries in the world did not have predicted water security issues. Ireland is top of the list. What we are planning for is a system based on how we pay for domestic water supplies, water treatment and wastewater management. I do not think we should do this in the context of a political opportunity to try to embarrass or undermine another political party's position. We should do it with all of the facts available to us. We should listen to experts who know what they are talking about.

See this speech in context