David Norris (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State, who is an old colleague and friend, to the House. I also welcome the legislation. It is quite appropriate that we should pay for what we use. I am less impressed by the fact that this appears to have been done at the diktat of the troika. I do not care for introducing this kind of force majeure into it. I have a few comments about the legislation. In general, it is perfectly appropriate that we pay for what we use. I hope that payment will be ring fenced and will go back into upgrading the provision of water services. The management of water resources over many decades by a series of Governments has been completely inadequate. As a resource, water is certainly one material of which we have an abundance. One only has to look outside the window of this House almost any day of the week to see that we do not suffer from a lack of rainfall so there is plenty of water. It just has not been managed appropriately.

There are two kinds of leaks. There are leaks on domestic property, which have been emphasised by the Minister of State and other speakers, but there is also the question of leaks on the property of the local authorities, particularly in Dublin. The mains water supplies in Dublin run under the streets and in some areas, particularly the north inner city, many of these have been left for a considerable number of years without any upgrading. I remember when they dug up wooden pipes from the 18th century, which is laughable in a capital city. We need an integrated approach and to look at the problem. We need to look not just at people in private property but at the responsibilities of the local authorities and whatever water management agency is involved.

I have considerable concerns about the fact that there was no proper tendering for this. This is bad governance. There is no other word for it because one must leave things over to tender. It has been boldly stated that Bord Gáis is the best and most expert group but I wonder. Coincidentally, I received my gas bill today and I have hardly turned the gas on at all. I got an estimated bill of ¤987 or thereabouts. I do not think I used that amount of gas and would be very surprised if I did. Grilling a few rashers does not usually come to that amount. Bord Gáis has difficulty accessing the meter. It installed it so that is a wonderful and classic example of expertise. I wonder at its expertise in this area.

Bord Gáis will franchise out the installation of the meters. This is fair enough but I hope there will be a bit of quality control because it is very important that the contractors involved in this process have the correct skills. I am speaking from a slightly parochial point of view but this is particularly important in areas of classical Georgian Dublin. For example, it is very important that the 18th century hand-turned granite pavings sets should be maintained. This has almost never happened. In particular, when it is franchised out, everybody denies any responsibility for it. When one has entire streets listed in the public interest, very particular care should be taken to ensure that this part of our heritage is not destroyed. It is not something that immediately strikes the average person as being an important part of our heritage. It is not like a painting in the National Gallery but it is significant and part of the integrity of what remains of the 18th-century city.

In respect of Bord Gáis, metering and pavements, Bord Gáis was appointed without tender because of its alleged expertise, of which I have yet to be convinced. If it is going to do it, why in the name of God does it not take the opportunity to install proper gas meters at the same time? Will there ever be joined-up metering? It is in the same area as the ESB. One of the things I like about these water meters is the fact that we are told they can be read electronically. This is brilliant and superb as the owner does not have to be disturbed and one does not have to be in or get these idiotic notices where the date is never filled in and which have a box that does not tally with the number on one's box. I am all in favour of that. Instead of digging up the streets three times, why does it not dig them up once so there can be some kind of universal metering and the same machine can read electricity, gas and water meters? I know this might be a slightly adventurous step but in the long run, it saves money, helps create jobs and shows an intelligent approach. If we are moving in this direction and this is the future, why limp along one step at a time and do water today, gas tomorrow and electricity the day after and dig up the streets all over again half a dozen times? I suggest that we look and see if it is not possible to do this.

I gather the installation of the meters is going to tender so at least one element is being tendered for appropriately. Again, I hope we have some expertise in this area because I hate to think that some continental engineering company would unload a collection of dross on us and we would have a system like that which pertained to the e-voting machines and have to pay for the warehousing of a few million water meters. I agree with the previous speaker who instanced situations where there were different kinds of charges all over the country for various kinds of meters. If we are buying in bulk from a supplier, and I presume we will buy the same machines from one single supplier which may or may not subcontract, I hope that we use every ounce of our muscle to get a bargain price for those meters because it will be a significant contract for whatever company or group gets it. We should ensure we use this lever of bulk buying to say we want meters of real quality at a good price.

What happens if the meters fail due to weather conditions, be they flooding which would be ironic but possible, or frost? Who is responsible? Are we going to hit the householder again? I daresay I will be able to pay for it and am very happy to do so in the same way I would be happy to pay bin charges if we had any decent bin companies. I greatly regret that some local authorities were permitted to privatise these services because it has been a 100% disaster. I hope we can get some clarity with regard to who must pay for any repairs. The point I was getting to was slightly different. In the current economic situation, there may be people who are being hit repeatedly, including by the property tax and the second home tax, which will not affect the poorest people or me. I wonder how on earth people in mortgage arrears who are hit by more and more bills are going to keep paying. Every week, we come into this House and there is another ¤200 or ¤100 being put onto household bills. We may be lucky because we have reasonable incomes although I am sure some Members are under pressure because they have made commitments before. We should not exempt ourselves and say that we do not suffer anything. There are Members in both Houses who are put to the pin of their collar because they gave commitments during the good days but what about the people out there?

Can they afford it and what will happen if they cannot? For example, will there be a proposal to cut them off? The Minister of State is shaking his head, which I hope can be translated into a "No".