Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I am not happy. I thank the Minister of State, as always. A number of enterprises are charging prices way above the European average, particularly in the area of energy. I do not know why we chose to associate water with energy given people's bad experience with electricity and gas, but that was a choice that was made. We have the international record, including that of Nobel Prize winners, suggesting there is no great surprise associated with the fact that producers get to dominate the regulatory agencies. One could make a submission and Members of the Oireachtas could submit their views, but we cannot obtain the price of the water or the free allowance. That is why I tabled one of my amendments. It was ruled out of order.

The Oireachtas is not being taken into the Department's confidence in this matter. I would not give much for our rights with the Commission for Energy Regulation given that it has not been able or willing to address the cost structures, particularly that of the ESB. I disagree utterly with the practice that the head of the ESB should be paid multiples of the salary of the Taoiseach. I regard the Taoiseach as a far more important person than whoever runs the electricity monopoly. However, those concerned have gotten away with this and the regulator has been pretty powerless at representing the consumer. He is not the only one. Where airports, health insurance and the National Transport Authority are concerned, we have the same experience. We must learn that unless the consumer is represented in the decision-making process, the producers will dominate. There is a cosy relationship. I remember when Aer Lingus treated the Department responsible for transport as its downtown office. On the first day on which competition was opened up, fares fell by 54%. The regulators were, therefore, charging double the market price.

We must stimulate competition. I refer to Senator Keane's point and the purpose of competition. If this were a competitive industry, how much with the senior executives be earning? That should be taken off. If people are to be earning monopoly salaries and supported in that by an alleged regulatory body that does not act on behalf of the consumer, it does not serve us well in respect of the very vital commodity of water. To link water with energy when we have had such an unsatisfactory experience in regard to the latter is wrong.

On Report Stage, I ask the Minister of State to think about where he and the Minister, Deputy Rabbitte, consult on matters. Are the other views of the Cabinet not taken into account? The Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Bruton, and those Ministers representing consumers might want to express a view. It seems very strange that two members of the Cabinet came to the Oireachtas looking for power to consult each other to make decisions. The complaint heretofore was that four members of the Cabinet make all the decisions. It has reduced to two in this instance, and my amendment seeks to change this.

The consumer is not heard. I have the same figures as the Minister of State. Some 145 litres of water are used per person each day. My breakdown of this is that 32% is used for showers and baths, 28% for toilets and 22% for washing machines. This is 82% of the total. Is anybody making that point or are the Department's engineers just convinced that everyone is wasting water and that they should be charged up to €740 per year because it is their fault? The standing charge, if it is not related to use, will have no impact. It is just a tax. If somebody takes the Minister of State's advice and cuts down on consumption, he will still have to pay the standing charge. The economics of this concern me, as does the lack of consumer and competitiveness representation. I will be pressing the amendments. The governance of the sector is vital and we really need to amend the legislation on Report Stage.