Dáil debates

Thursday, 15 September 2022

Water Services (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2022: Second Stage

 

7:25 pm

Photo of Cian O'CallaghanCian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

I am disappointed with two aspects of the Minister of State's opening remarks on this legislation. One is relatively minor and it concerns saying that the majority of the joint committee's recommendations are reflected in this Bill. We only made three recommendations, which I think was quite modest of us. Out of those three recommendations, one has been adopted. Therefore, that is by no means a majority. It is welcome that the legislation includes our recommendation that the chief executive and chair of Uisce Éireann would be accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts. This provision is in the Bill and I very much welcome that. It was something I supported and sought.

Our other two recommendations are not, however, reflected in this Bill or in process. The first of these was for the chair to be appointed through the PAS to ensure that the process would be open, accessible, rigorous and transparent and that this be stipulated in the legislation. This is the practice operating currently, but it has not been included in the legislation as we sought. Our third and final recommendation was that a comprehensive statement would be delivered by the Minister of State alongside this Bill providing an update on the process involving the trade unions and workers representatives. Crucially, it would also have included information on legislation to enshrine the right to access to water in the Constitution and a timeline for the holding of such a referendum. That has also not been incorporated in this process. The joint committee made only these few small requests.

My major disappointment at this stage is the comment that continued consideration will be given to a referendum to ensure that water and access to water services would be kept in public ownership. I refer to the context of everything we have gone through here since Irish Water was established and everything we have gone through globally in recent years.

Nobody can be in any doubt about the necessity to hold and retain in public ownership key utilities, especially water. I need not tell the Acting Chairman, Deputy Ó Cathasaigh, or anyone else this. Nothing is more important to our survival, apart from the air that we breathe, than water. Water is key to everything we do. It is key to our ability to live. It is key to businesses' ability to function, schools' ability to operate, to hospitals and to farms. We absolutely need water.

The process of privatising water in other countries has been a disaster. Let us not be in any doubt whatsoever about that. Let us not be in any doubt that when Irish Water was set up it was part of a process and plan to privatise water and that has been stopped by a huge campaign that was put in by communities across Ireland.

If one looks at the privatisation of water in other countries and what has happened, in Berlin, for example, where water was privatised, it was nothing short of an absolute disaster. It led to significant deficits in investment in the water infrastructure and at the same time led to significant profits for the new shareholders of the company. It was so bad a popular vote was organised by campaigners in Berlin demanding that their water services be brought back into public ownership and that forced the re-municipalisation of water services in Berlin. Of course, it was an expensive process. Those shares had to be bought back. Similarly, in Paris water privatisation led to price hikes for individual households which simply were not justified by the very low levels of investments in infrastructure that the privatised company was making. After 24 years of privatised water supply in Paris, the price of water had increased by 174% while the profits of the owners had soared. That was the trajectory that we were on as a county if it had not been stopped.

Interestingly, in Paris, when water was brought back into public ownership, efficiency savings of 35% were found. Therefore, this nonsense we hear that the private sector is more efficient at running key utilities has been proven to be nonsense from the experience in Paris. In fact, after Paris, we have seen re-municipalisation and public water utilities across France which are being brought back into public control. In fact, we now have 235 places around the world where water supplies have been brought back into public ownership. That trend is growing. That shows the disaster that water privatisation is, how it should never be allowed, and when it happens that people must then fight campaigns to get it back into public ownership. That is at huge cost and means that there has been a lack of investment while profits have been extracted in the meantime.

For absolute clarity, we need to put this to bed, once and for all. I welcome this legislation but we need a referendum to enshrine the right to and public ownership of our water resources in the Constitution. When will the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, and the Government provide a concrete timeline on this? The Minister of State has been in government for over two years. The least we and the public deserve is a concrete timeline on this. That is essential.

In terms of the role of the work force in water services, many of us will have seen the considerable knowledge of the local water systems among staff in water services. It is important in terms of any changes that are made that the localised element of the staff, which is second to none and in which the knowledge held is far more than that held in any maps or system, is fully retained. It is important, in terms of the negotiations being agreed, that any transfers would be voluntary. No doubt many water services staff will be wary of any transfers knowing what happened to An Post workers when they were transferred and what happened to their pensions despite all the promises and commitments that were given that there would be no effect on their pensions and no effect on their terms and conditions. Workers, who had given a life of service to An Post and its predecessor, when they were transferred saw significant cuts in their retirement income that they were promised would never happen to them. Because that has never been rectified, that will, of course, be to the forefront of the minds of water services workers in terms of any possible transfers.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.