Feargal Quinn (Independent)

The Minister of State is most welcome, as are his words, particularly his stated objective to ensure that Irish water is best in class, a term I like a lot. I recorded an interview for RTE recently and was asked by Fingal authorities what I thought of its water quality. I said we always drank it and had never had any problem with it. I live in Howth. We had to stop because it turned out that sea water was what was intended. Sewage used to enter at a certain point but does not do so any longer. I discovered I had not been listening carefully enough to the question. In any event, the objective of having us as best in class is a worthy one.

I wish to ask the Minister about the recent PricewaterhouseCooper analysis, which was briefly mentioned in the report. It states that some non-domestic water users may have to pay more in coming years. Will the Minister of State elaborate on this as it may have a big effect on certain businesses and sectors of industry? For example, Matt Moran, the director of Pharma Chemical Ireland, represented by IBEC, stated: "Water is a major issue for the bio-tech sector in Ireland both in terms of the quality and affordability of supplies." It is important. Will the Minister of State elaborate on these future plans? We may dissuade certain industrial development from locating here if we put more red tape and costs on such firms. One of the criticisms of Ireland in the past was the amount of red tape involved. We are working very well on this in many areas.

We must also remember smaller businesses. Water has been part of the success stories of a number of businesses in Ireland. For example, I have seen the advertisements on television sponsored by AIB for Celtic Pure, a Monaghan company which started selling drums of water door to door. Last year, the company's workforce grew by about one third to 32, and it now wants to expand to mainland Europe. How can we ensure that both large and small businesses are being protected properly, particularly those that rely on water?

A related note, also in the report, pointed out that the collection rate of money due by non-domestic users is 52%. This was described as particularly low by international standards. From a business perspective, I struggle to understand why the collection rate is so low. Would the Minister of State be better served by making the collection of these amounts a priority, in whatever way he can manage to achieve that?

I am also concerned about the six weeks' consultation process. There is a risk that the legislation will be rushed through the Oireachtas. It has been highlighted on the blog, irisheconomy.ie, that there are gaps in the PWC report. For example, the report states:

For the Public Utility Model a high level assessment was undertaken in relation to what the financial position of the business might be and in particular the likely funding requirements, based on a number of assumptions made and sensitivities chosen. Given the commercially sensitive nature of aspects of this assessment, some of the specific assumptions and the detailed findings have been redacted from this section of the report.

I quote that because it is a concern.

I have a final comment on Senator Cullinane's point about the name "Uisce" being used, rather than "Irish Water". I was involved in An Bord Phoist many years ago when we had to come up with a new name for the new service. We decided on "An Post". The Minister at the time asked what it would be called in English. I told him there was no need for a translation because certain words are understood so easily. If "post" is understood in both languages there is no need for an English translation. "Uisce" is certainly understood by everybody in Ireland. Let us see if we can make this little gesture towards the Irish language by ensuring that rather than call the entity "Irish Water" we find a different term.