Fergal Browne (Fine Gael)

I am sure other Members, including Senator Brennan who has strong views on this matter, agree with me.

The Water Services Bill updates old and inadequate legislation and must be welcomed. I have grave concerns about the Minister's ideas on one-off housing in rural areas. This will have severe implications for water supplies. County Carlow has a good planning policy that it is fair and consistent. Introducing a standardised policy countrywide could make it more difficult to obtain planning permission in counties such as Carlow. I holiday in County Kerry and I am not impressed with the local authority members there who seem to sign section 4 motions at every opportunity to sanction one-off housing. Another Senator said that most people would be quite happy to live in hamlets in rural areas. I agree and feel that the onus should be on local authorities to provide services to such hamlets. If it is not planned properly, the notion that one-off houses can be built everywhere is a recipe for disaster.

Schedule 2 of the Bill deals with pre-treatment objectives. Will the Minister of State clarify the Government's plans regarding the fluoridation of water? This was raised at a recent committee meeting and the jury is undecided on whether fluoridation of water is good or bad. It is felt in some quarters that it is a form of mass medication. Different systems are in place in other countries. For example, some countries add fluoride to salt; the beauty of this is that one can control the consumption of fluoride. The disadvantage of having fluoride in water is that one cannot control how much fluoride one consumes.

Section 32 refers to detailed performance standards to be prescribed in due course by local authorities. While this is admirable, how is it to be quantified? We all know that the public is hard to please. How can an adequate performance standard be quantified? There is a variance between water pressures in different parts of the country and this is an issue in rural areas. How can local authorities guarantee a minimum standard of water pressure? Setting such a standard could be costly for local authorities to meet. How will dealing with customer complaints be quantified?

Section 32 (3)(r) refers to the "provision of water supplies for fire-fighting or other public health and safety purposes including the provision of notices to assist in the location of fire hydrants". While this is fair in an urban area, I wonder how it can be applied in a rural setting. I have been told that this will not be possible in a rural area.

Section 36 smacks of the premise behind the waste management strategy and we see again the horrible phrase "executive function". Local elections will be held in June and one wonders why we are bothering to hold them as there is increasingly less work for councillors to do and fewer decisions to make. The county manager can take the decision on waste management and under this Bill water services will remain an executive function. What is the role for councillors, or the acclaimed SPCs, in this area?

Section 38 refers to public consultation. However, it appears to only apply after a decision is made. I stand corrected if I am reading this incorrectly. My understanding is that the management of a local authority will make a decision, inform the councillors and SPCs and it will then be put to public consultation in a token manner. This is inherently wrong. This is a backward step if we are serious about trying to make people more involved in local authority affairs.

Section 44 enables a water services authority, on request, to repair privately owned service connections that pass under private land not belonging to the owner of the premises being serviced by the connection. Members of my local authority who are familiar with this area feel the authority should have an automatic right to access land where they know there is a water leakage or other difficulty. Seeking legal permission to access land can be time consuming for the authority and during this time thousands of gallons of water may be wasted. The Bill should make provision to allow local authorities to access in land in certain cases. While I recognise there may be a difficulty in this, the local authority should be given extreme powers to access land in emergencies.

Section 50 enables a water services authority to enter into an agreement with any person to provide water services infrastructure, with a view to that person subsequently transferring ownership of it to the water services authority. Where do development levies fit in with this section? If a person receives planning permission and development levies are applied for water, can this charge be offset when the local authority takes the services under its control? While I welcome this good Bill, the points I raised need to be clarified.