Seanad debates

Wednesday, 16 June 2004

Water Services Bill 2003: Committee Stage.

 

1:00 pm

Photo of Pat GallagherPat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)

I understand the intent behind the three amendments under consideration and readily agree that in a modern society every person should have access to a safe water supply. However, I am concerned that the approach suggested could lead to an impossible burden being placed on water services authorities regarding the performance of their function under the Water Services Act. If accepted, these amendments could be interpreted in due course by the courts as requiring each water services authority to provide a water supply and sewage collection and disposal service in the remotest and most inaccessible areas regardless of other considerations such as cost or the sustainability of such an approach. Obligatory intervention by a water services authority into the provision of both water supplies and waste water collection and treatment in remote rural areas could also interfere with the ongoing development of the independent group water services scheme sector. That sector is the mainstay of water services provision in many rural areas and one of the primary objectives of this Bill, particularly under Part 6, is to put in place a suite of provisions to support and encourage its ongoing development. We know the important role that group water schemes and the providers of water in most rural areas have played. We want to ensure and support its ongoing development.

The general thrust of amendment No. 54 is implicit in the existing wording of section 31(2) without imposing an explicit obligation with the dangers this involves. Public policy in regard to proper planing and sustainable development and protection of human health and the environment presupposes the availability of adequate water services. However, it is not appropriate to express this in terms which could impose an unacceptably heavy burden of duty on a water services authority without regard to particular local circumstances.

With regard to amendments Nos. 55 and 56, the purpose of section 31(19) is to remove any possibility of a conflict between the provisions of section 7 of the Housing and Working Classes Act 1885, which obliges every local authority to secure the proper sanitary condition of all premises within its functional area. Depending on its interpretation, it could be used to force a local authority to provide water services even in the most unreasonable circumstances, for example, in an isolated inaccessible rural area where the cost or technical difficulty of providing a water supply or waste water collection and treatment might be prohibitive. Such indiscriminate application of a duty to provide services could undermine the ability of a water services authority to provide water services generally. It could also lead to abuses being perpetrated against the interests of water services authorities by the placing of unreasonable demands on them for service.

The alternative wording to subsection (19), proposed by Senator Bannon under amendment No. 56, is in the form of a new section 32. It does not have any material effect on the existing provision under subsection (19) and I am inclined to retain the existing wording. However, I am willing to reconsider the amendment and to consult further with the Attorney General. I suggest we could return to this on Report Stage and I would appreciate time to consult with the Attorney General.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.