Michael McCarthy (Labour)

I join previous speakers in welcoming the Minister and his officials. There are salient points in the Bill and some aspects of it are good. As a society, we probably have adopted the same attitude to our treatment of water as we have to the treatment of waste, namely, that it is not something that needs to be given priority. We have become careless about it. The majority of the regulations and laws governing the treatment of water derive from EU directives. We must wake up to reality and face the problems that exist, while being mindful of the protection of the health and welfare of people who consume what is, as Senator Dardis pointed out, one of our most valuable natural resources and being cognisant of the implications for the environment of our treatment of it.

I accept what the Minister says on metering. If what he says is the case, then it is probably no harm to have this phrased in terms of water being consumed or wasted, as the case may be. Keeping a tracking system is necessarily a good thing but it also gives credence to the belief that at some stage charges for water will be introduced on the basis of meters being installed. That should not be the case and the public should not be asked to bear the burden of costs due to another decision made by the Minister.

There have been difficulties recently obtaining money to pay huge benchmarking awards for those working in this sector and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government was not as lucky as other Ministers. The Minister for Finance picked up the tab for benchmarking in most other Departments but not for Deputy Cullen's Department, which puts a huge financial burden on local authorities. Those authorities are already strapped for cash and naturally enough they are looking for other ways of raising revenue, with the ordinary Joe Soap picking up the cost.

Funding has been pulled back from the local government fund, although there was a temporary respite before Christmas. I cannot think of the amount given, and I am not being flippant, but it was probably a politically strategic thing to do this side of the local and European elections. Generally, however, there is a shortfall of revenue, the Department of Finance has refused to fund benchmarking for this Department and local authorities are cash strapped. When one examines this area one could easily arrive at the opinion that charges for water will be reintroduced based on the installation of meters.

I have already mentioned the various charges associated with the Department, such as the recent rate of increase in development charges. Most local authorities have adopted those increases although many, like my local authority in Cork, rejected them initially and are now looking at alternative methods of accepting a compromise. Again, this leads to stealth taxes and while the amounts involved may be small, when people make up their budgets to build a house they find the planning application has become more expensive. That is another undue burden, particularly on young people who are trying to build houses. That group has already suffered the abolition of the first-time buyer's grant, which is another indication of how serious the fiscal situation is in Ireland and how the Minister is trying to raise funds for his Department, which he is entitled to do.

I oppose any charges for water but making these provisions in the Bill paves the way for their introduction in the future. I am cognisant, as is everyone else, that the local and European elections are being held in June and I would not expect the Minister to say anything other than charges will not be introduced this side of June. Who knows what will happen when those elections have taken place?

Other decisions by various Ministers indicate, as if we did not already know, that the elections are only four months away. The decision last year by Cork County Council to stop disabled person's grants and essential repairs grants was temporarily revoked recently because the council got an allocation at the start of the year from the Department. Anyone viewing that decision would conclude that it is a vote buying exercise like those in the period before the 2002 election, when money was being thrown around like confetti and people were lulled into a false sense of security. We all know what happened after those votes were counted. The votes will be counted quicker this June with electronic voting and the reality of the situation will also hit home sooner. A cynical political approach has been taken to announcements in recent weeks which is not consistent with the way in which decisions have been made in the last two years. That is particularly true for local authorities.

The Taoiseach was in Sligo recently for a meeting of his parliamentary party and at that meeting the issue of rural planning and once-off rural houses was raised. What is the Minister's view on this matter? Is there any tension on the Government's part or is it Government policy to open up the whole planning process? What are the implications for the sector we are dealing with today and the implications for rural sustainability and development generally? Is there a national policy in place on water services? What does the Minister see as the result of opening up this area of the planning process? I am interested in his views on these matters.

Many local authorities have privatised their waste collection systems, which has led to a shortfall in revenue. If one introduces private collectors the council coffers will invariably suffer as a result. If county managers are forced to introduce adjustments or cutbacks in budgets, whatever one wants to call them, what areas will they look at next? The most obvious area is rent from local authority houses and another is the charge on water usage, which is not good.

Section 36 deals with water services authorities making water service strategic plans for their areas. It provides that the making of such plans shall be an executive function. As Senator Dardis pointed out, we had very good debates on previous Bills introduced by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The Bill which ended the dual mandate was quite controversial, although one would think now that it had never passed into law, as was the Protection of the Environment Bill. In the latter the power to levy charges for refuse collections was taken from elected members of local government and passed to managers by virtue of the executive function. I am one of many who believe that managers and assistant managers have enough power as it is and that the role of members of local government is being further denigrated as a result of various Bills. If local government is to mean anything, then surely the role of the councillor should be enhanced. We seek clarity from the Minister on this section.

I look forward to the debate on later Stages of the Bill and I will take the Minister up on his comments about amendments to improve the text of the legislation. We hope to table amendments to improve the legislation.