Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick City, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The central issue in all of this is the charge for excess use which we absolutely believe is right. There should be free household allowances, including for illness and other specific reasons. However, those who waste water should not have the rest of general taxpayers paying for it.

I have had a day to reflect on all of this. I also reject the idea frequently expressed on the airwaves - it was also an element of Deputy Eoin Ó Broin's contribution - that somehow or other, because all households in Scotland and Wales are not metered, they do not satisfy the directive and that, therefore, we can get away with not metering households. In Wales 53% of people have a meter. I am citing the evidence we received from Welsh Water. The others pay based on rateable valuation. People pay for water in Wales and Scotland which have largely addressed the problems of pollution and fixed many of the problems we have not fixed. In Wales someone who has a meter can apply to participate in the social schemes which allow for a reduced charge. For households which are metered, average usage is 110 litres per day, while the figure is 140 litres for households which are not metered. People chose to have meters because it allowed them to benefit from social clauses and schemes. Specific reference is made to poorer families in the evidence we received from Welsh Water. They go on to use less water. Using the examples of Wales and Scotland in a very selective way is not an accurate way of representing the situation here. There are also charges in Scotland which are collected by the local councils. The portion of the charge for water is sent to Scottish Water. It is not as simple as saying most people in Scotland and Wales do not have meters and that, therefore, we do not need them. They tick two of the boxes. They have addressed the issues we are only now beginning to address in terms of pollution, fixing leaks and so on.

There is an attempt to try to ignore the reality of what is in front of us. We have to comply with European law. If we do not, we will be charged excessive fines.

Again, the evidence of Professor Barrett suggests that we will be charged those fines unless we charge for excessive use.

I wish the Minister well. I believe it will be a difficult job for him because he is obliged to use the 2007 Act, which is an Act of criminal law, rather than simply bringing in a charging regime.

The Labour Party position is clear. We support a referendum to keep the utility in public ownership. We are absolutely against privatisation. We support equal treatment for those who have already paid. They should be refunded because it is not feasible to collect from those who have not paid. Ultimately, we do not agree with the idea that the Government can somehow fudge the issue of excessive use by purporting to use criminal legislation instead of simply charging people. That is simpler than having the rest of us who pay our taxes - people struggle to pay high taxes on relatively low incomes - paying for the person who keeps the sprinkler on in the lawn all day, who washes three or four cars or who lets the tap run. We do not believe that is the right thing to do. We believe people should have a fair household allowance that deals with normal use. Then, if they use excessively, they should pay.

See this speech in context