Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 1 and 11 are related and may be discussed together.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 5, line 13, after “Éireann;” to insert “to provide for the dissolution of the Water Advisory Body;”.

Amendments Nos. 1 and 11 are necessary to provide for the dissolution of the Water Advisory Body. Amendment No. 1 provides for the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage to make an order appointing a dissolution day for that purpose. The amendment also provides that the advisory body will stand dissolved on that dissolution day. On Committee Stage, I signalled the intentions of the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage in respect of this matter.

The Bill provides that Uisce Éireann will be accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts. These heightened levels of accountability and transparency are commensurate with the level of Exchequer funding of Uisce Éireann. However, as a consequence, there will be an overlap between the functions of the Committee of Public Accounts and the Water Advisory Body with regard to Uisce Éireann. The Committee of Public Accounts is best placed to hold Uisce Éireann to account and consider the transparency and accountability of Uisce Éireann and its performance.

Having regard to the role of other statutory agencies with regard to Uisce Éireann, the removal of the Water Advisory Body will not give rise to any shortcoming in respect of transparency and accountability in the oversight of Uisce Éireann. The other statutory agencies - the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities and An Fóram Uisce - will continue to have specific statutory functions with regard to Uisce Éireann's performance. The Commission for Regulation of Utilities will continue to be statutorily responsible for ensuring Uisce Éireann performs its functions in an open and transparent manner. Both the commission and An Fóram Uisce have statutory functions relating to Uisce Éireann's customers and the quality of service provided to them. The Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage will also continue to have a role in respect of Uisce Éireann and reports or otherwise of the agencies tasked with its oversight and regulation.

When the Water Advisory Body was established under the Water Services Act 2017, Irish Water was then not accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts. Uisce Éireann will be subject to greater scrutiny following the enactment and commencement of this Bill. The Water Advisory Body will cease to have the advisory and reporting functions on 1 January 2023. This is because Uisce Éireann will be accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts on that date. The Water Advisory Body will be given until 28 February 2023 to complete its annual report and quarterly reports for 2022. The Water Advisory Body will then be dissolved.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know this was outlined to us in advance on the previous Stage and I appreciate fully that accountability to the Committee of Public Accounts is an innovation but the Water Advisory Body does more than an appearance or two appearances per year at the Committee of Public Accounts. It is also made up of very different people, including environmental activists and people with expertise in water quality. It seems very strange simply to dissolve the Water Advisory Body, so I will pose a few questions before I decide whether to push this to a vote. What consultation took place with the Water Advisory Body in advance of the tabling of these amendments? Did it make the case to the Minister of State that it should be retained in some shape or form? Does the Minister of State at least accept that the function of the Committee of Public Accounts, particularly in terms of its role in bringing Accounting Officers in front of it versus the Water Advisory Board, is very different and that something could be lost as a result of simply abolishing it rather than changing the relationship between the body and the Water Advisory Body?

Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Minister of State not think the Water Advisory Body plays a valuable role and has contributed in a very positive way? Why is he seeking to put forward this amendment?

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Again, the Water Advisory Body has played an important role. Deputy Ó Broin mentioned NGOs' participation. Again, we are talking about advisory in terms of oversight by the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, the EPA and now the Committee of Public Accounts, which is directly accountable to the Oireachtas. In terms of consultation, the Department has engaged with the Water Advisory Body on its dissolution and the body highlighted the need for the Committee of Public Accounts to engage actively and regularly with the relevant statutory agency - to challenge Uisce Éireann to perform at the level expected and to hold it to account appropriately. Given the debate this afternoon across the House where Deputies have been asking about Irish Water and its accountability, the Committee of Public Accounts has a wide remit in terms of expenditure, delivery and value for money - all of those elements that are really important for what we have been discussing.

We are of the view that it is the correct thing to do. The Water Advisory Body also noted that it has tended to have a technical focus as opposed to An Fóram Uisce, which is much broader in terms of water issues. We all agree it needs to have a more customer centred focus. This can be offered through the direct accountability to the Committee of Public Accounts. We are satisfied its dissolution is the right thing to do and not to have duplication in terms of accountability. Direct accountability to us as Members of the Oireachtas is something we have all been seeking for quite a while in respect of Irish Water.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The argument here is not that the Committee of Public Accounts should not have the role prescribed in the legislation. I think we all support that. It is a very good thing. For all the criticisms many of us have of Irish Water, it has also made itself available to our committee regularly and in very detailed form. That is not the question I am asking. The makeup of the Water Advisory Body is very different. It includes a range of people. If the Minister of State has decided on this course of action, how does he propose that those people, organisations and interests that will no longer be part of any of the accountability architecture alongside Uisce Éireann now engage with this process? This is not an either-or - one or the other. I am nervous we are losing something valuable. Has there been any discussion about whether they have some other mechanism to participate in an ongoing structured consultation as opposed to individual consultations?

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Water Advisory Body has advised that it is important that Uisce Éireann is held to account on the quality of its customer service and experience. Given the oversight not just of the Committee of Public Accounts but also the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage, there is an opportunity to bring a body to that forum for wider discussion on the efficacy, function and programme of works of Uisce Éireann. We are confident this is the correct thing to do. Consultation has taken place and we are satisfied this is the best way forward in terms of accountability to the public, value for money, public expenditure and the myriad of issues raised by Deputies around the water policy debate.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 2 to 4, inclusive, 10, and 13 to 15, inclusive, are related may be discussed together. Amendment No. 13 is consequential on amendment No. 14.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 5, between lines 27 and 28, to insert the following: " "Act of 2017” means the Water Services Act 2017;".

These seven amendments are technical amendments to facilitate the dissolution of the Water Advisory Body and remove any consequential matters such as the provision of grants to the Water Advisory Body. A typographical error is also corrected. Amendment No. 2 provides that reference to the Act of 2017 means the Water Services Act 2017. Amendment No. 3 provides that "dissolution day" means the day appointed under section 27. Amendment No. 4 inserts a definition of the Water Advisory Body. Amendment No. 10 corrects a typographical error. Amendments Nos. 13 and 14 provide for the fourth paragraph (d) to be added to the list of amendments made to the Water Services Act 2007 by section 27 of the Bill. The new amendment deletes paragraph (d) of section 16 of the 2007 Act. This is the provision under which the grant may be paid to the Water Advisory Body by the Minister. As the Water Advisory Body is being dissolved, it will have no requirement for such a grant. Amendment No. 15 deletes section 29 of the Bill. This section had sought to amend section 44 of the Water Services Act 2017, which concerns the functions of the Water Advisory Body. Due to the dissolution of the Water Advisory Body, section 44 of the 2017 Act is being repealed by amendment No. 5 and so the amending provisions of section 29 of this Bill are no longer necessary.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 5, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following: “ “dissolution day” means the day appointed by order under section 27;”.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 4:

In page 6, line 3, to delete “2013.” and substitute the following: “2013;

“Water Advisory Body” means the body established by section 43(1) of the Act of 2017.”.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 6, between lines 12 and 13, to insert the following: “(4) The following provisions of the Act of 2017 are repealed:

(a) sections 44(1) and 53;

(b) sections 42, 43, 44 (in so far as it is not repealed by paragraph (a)), 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 52.”.

The Water Advisory Body was established by the Water Services Act 2017 with advisory and reporting functions. This amendment removes those functions by repealing the specific provisions of the 2017 Act. Section 44(1) of the 2017 Act is about the Water Advisory Body advising "the Minister on the measures needed to improve the transparency and accountability of Irish Water for the purpose of increasing the confidence of members of the public in Irish Water". This section is also about the Water Advisory Body providing quarterly reports to the Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage on the performance by Irish Water in the implementation of its business plan. Amendment No. 5 repeals this section of the Water Services Act 2017. Section 53 of 2017 Act is about the Water Advisory Body's annual report and its laying before the Houses of the Oireachtas. There are no annual accounts of the Water Advisory Body. It is funded through the Vote of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, and this Department is accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts for the Water Advisory Body's expenditure.

The purpose of subhead B9 of this Vote is to fund the Water Advisory Body's secretariat, overhead and administration costs, members' fees and expenses, as well as any consultancies undertaken by the body. Amendment No. 5 repeals this section of the Water Services Act 2017. The other section of this Act relating to the establishment and functions of the Water Advisory Body are also being repealed by this amendment. These are sections 42 and 43, which contain provisions relating to the establishment of the body; section 44, which details arrangements for the work of the body; sections 45 to 49, inclusive, which outline the membership of the body, including the chairperson and the terms of membership and office; sections 50 and 51, which are about the body's meetings and procedures and matters relating to such meetings; and section 52, which is about the provision of grants to the body, as well as administrative arrangements.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 6 in the name of the Minister arises out of committee proceedings. Amendments Nos. 6 and 12 are related and will be taken together.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 6:

In page 6, between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following: “(5) Notwithstanding the repeal of sections 44(1)(b) and 53 of the Act of 2017 by subsection (4)(a), the Water Advisory Body shall prepare a report under section 44(1)(b) and an annual report under section 53, as modified bysection 28, for the period ending on 31 December 2022.”.

These amendments are linked to the repealed sections 44(1) and 53 concerning the Water Advisory Body's reporting functions. The body will cease to have advisory and reporting functions on 1 January 2023, when Uisce Éireann becomes accountable to the Committee of Public Accounts on that date. It is appropriate, however, from a governance and transparency perspective, that the Water Advisory Body complete its work regarding 2022 while it is statutorily in existence. It is necessary to give the body time to complete its outstanding reports, so these administrative tasks will be facilitated prior to the formal dissolution of the body.

This amendment provides that the Water Advisory Body will complete its final 2022 quarterly report on the performance of Irish Water in the implementation of its business plan and submit this to the Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage, as provided for in section 44(1) of the Water Services Act 2017. The amendment also provides that the body will complete the final 2022 annual report and submit this to the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, as provided for in section 53(1) of the Water Services Act 2017. The Water Advisory Body will be given until dissolution day, that is, 28 February 2023, to complete its reports for 2022. The body will then be dissolved.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 7 arises out of committee proceedings. Amendments Nos. 7 and 9 are related and will be taken together.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 7:

In page 6, between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following: “Referendum on the right to water

5.The Minister shall, not later than 2 months after the passing of this Act, lay a report before the Oireachtas Committee that—

(a)proposes the wording for a referendum on the public ownership of water infrastructure,

(b)sets out a timeline for the referendum, and

(c)sets out in detail all other key considerations.”.

These amendments are virtually identical other than for the space of one month. As the Minister of State knows, we have been making a strong case for the Government to provide more information on its intention regarding holding a referendum to enshrine public ownership of the water system in the Constitution. The Minister of State outlined his position a few hours ago and will do so again now to say that he is dependent on the outcome of the report of the Commission on Housing and whether it recommends enshrining the right to housing in the Constitution, and then on whether the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, brings forward a proposal to Cabinet to hold two referendums next year, namely, one on water and one on housing. The Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, is on record as saying he wants to do this and we take him at his word. Our problem is that we know that Fine Gael currently does not support such a proposition. We know this from our discussions at the Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage concerning these referendums and other public comments.

The logic of these amendments therefore is to ensure that the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage is not able to disappear into the wilderness on foot of the Commission on Housing's report in November and avoid responding. It is reasonable, therefore, whether in the context of the one month Deputy Cian O'Callaghan has suggested or the two months contained in my amendment, that there is a requirement in this legislation that the Minister lays before the House a report on precisely this issue. I suspect the Minister of State is not going to support this amendment, but we are going to press it.

The trade unions that represent water services' workers, Unite, Fórsa, SIPTU and others, recently launched what I thought was a good initiative. Historically, we have had many divisions and battles over water in the political process and the trade union movement, but now all the unions have united and made a simple call for the Government to name the date for the referendum. Having a requirement in this legislation for such a report within the restricted time limit we have outlined will help to build this momentum and make it a little bit more difficult for some of the participants in the Government who are less willing to proceed with something I think is hugely important.

Why is this important? It is important because one of the biggest public movements in recent history in this State was the Right2Water campaign. Its central premise was that people should have access to water based on need and not on ability to pay. This is one of the primary reasons that we are one of the only EU member states with zero water poverty. There is always the concern, though, that a Government, whether this one or one in the future, would jeopardise this record and seek to privatise water services. Having public ownership of water services enshrined in the Constitution is the strongest and best way to prevent this from happening. This is, therefore, an important amendment and I look forward to the response from the Minister of State.

Cian O'Callaghan (Dublin Bay North, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I support this amendment. Turning to my amendment No. 9, fundamentally there is nothing to stop the Government from setting a date for a referendum on this issue now. It could be done and should be done. This has been talked about for years. We need the Government to finally get off the fence on this issue and to name and set a date. If the Government were to do this, then we could then start to move forward on this topic.

Deputy Ó Broin said this or a future Government could end up trying to privatise our water services if this right is not enshrined in the Constitution. As I said before, there is always the risk that if things go bad economically we could end up in some sort of Troika situation again where bodies external to Ireland could, as a condition of providing loans, finance or anything else, stipulate that one requirement was the privatisation of water services. If the right to water is enshrined in the Constitution, then this possibility would be off the table. It could not happen and could not be done. It would not be possible to argue with the Constitution and what is in it. This is, therefore, the best possible way of safeguarding our water resources. I refer to drinking water and wastewater servicers, which are so key to everything in our lives. I urge the Government to name a date in this regard as quickly as possible so we can get on with this process.

Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I strongly support the call for a referendum to be held on keeping water services public. There are 3,000 water workers in this State. The feeling runs strong among them that a date must be set for a referendum. I welcome that the four trade unions with membership among the water workers are now campaigning for a date for the referendum to be named in respect of keeping water services public.

I also make the point that it would be important that a date for a referendum be set before the end of this year, because 1 January 2023 is the date for the transfer of water assets from the local authorities to Irish Water-Uisce Éireann and for local authority water workers to transfer over to that organisation as well. A large body of rank-and-file water workers are of the opinion that there is not going to be a successful transfer on 1 January 2023 unless a referendum date has been named by then.

Pressure and sentiment are building on that issue.

Reports were published in the press some weeks ago saying that the Minister intends to bring a proposal to Cabinet early in the new year in this regard. The Tánaiste has been directly quoted as saying that he is not convinced of the need for such a referendum. I have heard bits and pieces from Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Deputies on this issue. I have heard less from Green Party Deputies. I would be interested to know what is the position of the Green Party and its Deputies on this issue, if the Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, would care to tell the House and to inform the public. Either way, pressure will only grow on this issue.

It is important that a date be named before the year's end.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I, too, support Deputy Ó Broin's amendment. Not that I have fundamental hang-ups about referendums. I have a strong conviction that the men and women and local authority officials who have looked after water so well in all weathers and in the face of all challenges over the decades need to be respected and treated well. I do not know if naming a date for the referendum will do anything to help their cause of not transferring by consent by 1 January 2023. That is going apace and there is much unease and unhappiness.

It is scandalous, as far as I am concerned, that people joined the local authority in good faith, many of them joined other sections as general operatives or whatever, and transferred into water services, they gained valuable experience as caretakers, plumbers, electricians and chemists and in many other aspects of it and now, all of a sudden, they are being bullied into a job that they did not apply for and did not work for. Would the Minister of State blame them for being afraid to transfer, even if the conditions were right, into Irish Water when the model is so unsound looking? In previous amendments, one had the Minister of State setting up advisory councils and everything else. It is more jobs for the boys and not being responsible to the Committee of Public Accounts until such time as they have everything réidh. They are long enough there now to have their house in order.

I want to maintain our water in public ownership. I also want, if the Ceann Comhairle would allow me, to mention the people - the Ceann Comhairle himself will know many of them - who set up and formed group schemes. They are still operating those group schemes, with the cost of the electricity, chlorination plants etc. now on them. They are getting very few supports. What rights do they have? What of people who have their own pumps and wells, and the people who are only getting it from a stream who have no water supply and no hope of getting a supply? We are forgetting about them and we can have referendums.

Much of the other legislation that we have here is grand, but it is irrelevant to many people. There are tens of thousands of people who have their own wells. They have their own septic tanks for wastewater and there are only approximately 20 inspections in each county annually. One cannot get the so-called "great" grant to upgrade them unless one is inspected. It is another trick of the loop. Then we have the public sewerage schemes in many villages and towns in my county belching into the river causing pollutants and the EPA turned a blind eye on the authorities. I am all for clean water and all for fair play. Fair play is fine play with me. We must respect those workers in the service and the service their former colleagues have given as well and that must be written in.

As we are on amendments on a referendum, is there any possibility of a plebiscite for Tipperary to ask the people are they happy to allow their water to be pumped all the way from Tipperary right up through the country?

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is wandering a little there.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am. I am nearly finished. They are entitled to be consulted too-----

Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is staying close to home. He is not wandering at all.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

----to pump it into leaky pipes in Dublin. I have nothing against the people in Dublin, in case someone would think I have, but there is 50% of the water leaking in Dublin. When it leaks out, when there are outages and everything else, obviously, other commodities leak back in. Some of them are very unsavoury. I have a bit of experience in this work and I know what I am talking about. It is not very nice. I am shocked at the Green Party having put this project to bed because of the runaway costs there will be and because of the damage it will do to the environment to bring that massive construction right through the length of the country. It will be of no benefit to any of the areas that it is passing through that have water shortages and outages. There are plenty of sources around Dublin. There are wells, supplies, under supplies and everything, for instance, Poulaphouca, if they are looked after properly. Ghana was able to repair the leaks in its capital city and we cannot do so. We had an ideal opportunity during lockdown when there was no one on the streets but there is no effort to do it. We must be fair to all the people.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for his latitude.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thought when Deputy Mattie McGrath talked about Tipperary and a referendum that he might suggest it would secede from the State or something.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No.

Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy would have to get permission from the people of Fermanagh because the water starts there.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am reassured that it is only the Shannon water Deputy Mattie McGrath is worried about.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are happy.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call the Minister.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I was there at the start of it.

Malcolm Noonan (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will respond to amendments Nos. 7 and 9 together as they concern the referendum on the public ownership of water infrastructure. Before I do, I will address some of the points raised by the Deputies in terms of the referendum.

I share the concerns of Deputy Mattie McGrath in terms of the Shannon project but that is not being addressed here today. From an ecological perspective, I would have concerns about it. In terms of Government support for the referendum, it is absolute. My own party's support for a water referendum is absolute as well.

Concerns have been raised around local authority staff and other issues. I pay tribute, as I did earlier, to the federation of group water schemes. I thank Deputies Ó Broin, Gould and Cian O'Callaghan for their proposed amendments which require that the Minister report on the proposed wording for a referendum on the public ownership of water infrastructure, the timeline for the referendum and other key considerations.

Amendment No. 7 proposes that the Minister lays a report before the Oireachtas committee within two months of the passing of the Act. Amendment No. 9 gives the Minister one month to lay the report.

On Committee Stage, Deputy Cian O'Callaghan proposed a similar amendment which gave the Minister six months after the passing of the Act to provide the report on the wording and the timeline of such a referendum. This amendment was rejected by the Select Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage.

Unfortunately, I cannot accept these two amendments as they do not come within the scope of this Bill. As the Deputies will be aware, this is a technical Bill to separate Uisce Éireann from its parent company, Ervia. I can, however, advise Deputies that the Minister, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, expects to be a position to bring forward definitive proposals on a referendum on water ownership for consideration by Government in the near future.

The Government's vision for a world-class public water system in Ireland based on the full integration of water services in a national water services authority is set out in the policy paper on water sector transformation published in February 2021. Public ownership is central to the vision and is already legally guaranteed. No change to State ownership of Irish Water is currently possible without majority support in a plebiscite of the people in line with the Water Services Act 2014.

In the context of engagement at the Workplace Relations Commission on a framework for the future delivery of water services, the Department hosted parallel engagement with unions on policy matters of relevance to workers, including a referendum on water ownership. A paper, entitled Irish Water Transformation: The Wider Policy Context, was shared with unions on 18 July 2022. This paper reflects the engagement outcomes and is available to Members in the Oireachtas Library. This paper sets out the planned approach to bring forward a referendum proposal on water ownership for consideration by Government in conjunction with the anticipated recommendation of a proposed referendum on housing from the housing commission.

We cannot be clearer that the commitment is there. It is there in writing in the Irish Water Transformation policy document. It is there from Government. We are giving that commitment that a referendum will take place on water and housing.

On the concerns raised by Deputy Cian O'Callaghan around what happened in other countries on structural adjustment programmes, that is not the case here. Even as it is, there is no possibility of changing the State ownership of Irish Water without a plebiscite.

I give those assurances to Members.

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The time permitted for the debate having expired, I am required to put the following question in accordance with an Order of the Dáil of 8 November: "That the amendments set down by the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage and not disposed of are hereby made to the Bill; Fourth Stage is hereby completed; and the Bill is hereby passed."

Catherine Connolly (Galway West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Bill will now be sent to the Seanad.