Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Yes, I reported progress. Bhí daoine eile ag iarraidh caint ar seo freisin. There may have been other contributors. We were waiting for the Minister to respond to amendment No. 37 which relates to the water charging policy because we are not sure what the water charge will be and, therefore, we want built into the legislation an ability to pay clause. In other words, where people struggle to pay, their ability to pay will be taken into account.

The point I was making during the course of the debate on Tuesday was that the ability of individuals, based on their income, has to be taken into consideration. For example, a different percentage of the household income would be taken into account for a person on a high income of more than €100,000 compared to a person on a low social welfare income of, say, €15,000, that is, a father, mother and children. It would cost more as a percentage of their income to flush their toilet or to fill the kettle. It goes back to the amendment tabled by Senator Barrett in respect of a water allowance where I think he proposed 100 litres per person per day. Obviously a distinction has to be made between those who can pay and will not do so, and those who simply cannot afford to pay.

I suggested on Tuesday that the Department allow for an appeals process whereby an individual who cannot afford to pay would write to the water section of the county council, building in a process where local councillors could represent individuals to demonstrate a case where they simply cannot afford to pay and that the county council would make the case to Irish Water on the person's behalf. Often when an ordinary citizen is dealing with a semi-State organisation, a bank or the ESB, it can be very difficult for that citizen and before one knows it the ESB or the semi-State organisation has employed the service of solicitors.

That should be cut out and the county council should represent the case for the individual, the individual having demonstrated, through a prescribed form or otherwise, that he or she cannot afford to pay.

There are two elements to the amendment and I hope the Minister of State will accept it for the sake of society. If the amendment is not accepted, the consequences will be that we will have a semi-State organisation that is out of the hands of public representatives and away from the scrutiny of the Oireachtas. While it may be answerable to the Minister, it will not be answerable to the Houses nor any local authority in regard to determining who will be entitled to a write-off because this is not built into the legislation. Therefore, the body will have exclusive power not only to charge and set charges, but to go after those charges. Presumably, this will involve the services of debt collectors and solicitors, just as it does in the case of the ESB or Airtricity.

This organisation is being established using the same template as those companies. We all know that where an individual has a dispute with a utility supplier, even if it only involves a couple of hundred euro or less, a debt collection agency or the services of a legal firm tend to be employed and before we know it, the individual consumer has very few rights. I would hate to see that kind of situation emerge in this case. It would be bad for society, because water is so important for life. It would also be very bad for the institutions of democratic politics if this was allowed to happen.

I hope the Minister of State has reflected on this and that he is willing to accept the amendment or an alternative form of it. If the provision I seek is not built into the legislation, I have no option but to press the amendment, because I believe that those who genuinely cannot pay will be forced into a corner and their situation will become even darker once debt collectors or legal practitioners are called in to try to obtain the moneys for the massive organisation of Irish Water or Uisce Éireann.