Fidelma Healy Eames (Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister to the House. I appreciate that he is bringing a level of realism to the debate that was not here this time last year. One year ago I did not vote for water charges for one reason - namely, that I had got no answers to the questions I asked. We are back here a year later for that very reason. The other side of the House assumed at the time that it had all the wisdom and that there was none on this side, but we can see how flawed that was.

The furore over water since 1 October has brought a level of realism and a requirement to re-examine the legislation. The Government side has begun to listen a bit more, but we are still doing the wrong thing, just a little bit righter. The concept of Irish Water has been poorly constructed.

As Senator Barrett said, we have some 4,000 people doing the work of 2,300 people. According to Professor John Fitzgerald of the ESRI, it is the work of 1,700 people. This is the burden and culture being propagated by Irish Water. Everybody wants water, but everybody does not want Irish Water, including the corporate image and the culture of bonuses. While the Minister has taken some of that off the table, including the PPS numbers, we have to get things completely right.

I see merit in examining the possibility of local authorities taking on the job and fixing the leaks. Deals were offered to the Government. Siemens offered to install meters at a cost of €810 million, none of which was to be paid up front, and recoup the cost over time, but that was taken off the table by, I presume, the former Minister, Phil Hogan. The deal was given to Denis O'Brien's Siteserv at a cost of, I understand, €539 million for obsolete meters that will need to be read by a person travelling around in a van. If we had decided on smart metering, people would have been able to monitor their usage from inside their homes. That would have been a step in the right direction towards water conservation.

In his speech the Minister said that, according to the OECD, "metering is the key to fairness." Some 533,000 meters have been installed in 16 months. Given that there are 1.6 million homes in the country, we are one-third of the way there. Water has a price. We need it, and producing it carries a cost. Charges should not commence until all homes have meters installed. After that, there should be at least two terms during which readings are given to every household in the country to show them their usage. The first reading would show households whether they are above the average usage for family size and if they have leaks. The second should be able to show whether that has been corrected. After that, it would be fair to begin a process of charging for water.

The Minister is offering a grant of €100, but it is not a water conservation grant. It is an inducement to sign up and nothing else. It is a sop to the Irish people at a fairly considerable cost, namely, €130 million from the Exchequer. The accident and emergency department in University College Hospital Galway could use that money right now, such is the overcrowding of people over 80 years of age on trolleys.

If the €100 water conservation grant is genuine, where are the metrics the Minister will use to verify that people are conserving water and are therefore entitled to the grant? There are none that I have heard of. Giving people €100 and calling it a water conservation grant when it cannot be proved that they are conserving water is the type of hypocrisy that really annoys people. Water is a precious resource and is fundamental to life. It must never be subject to manipulation.

If water services ever go into the hands of a private company or into private ownership, they would be subject to manipulation. Every day I hear that nobody in the House wants water to be privatised, but it is our job to put legislation on the books that will stand into the future for all Governments. Irish Water must, therefore, be kept in public ownership. The plebiscite in section 2 of the Bill to which the Minister referred will not ensure that water is kept in public ownership, because it is dependent on a resolution of the Houses. Does the term "resolution" mean a majority of both Houses? That is not secure; just look at how the other House voted yesterday. A resolution of both Houses does not mean that we will keep water in public ownership. There is only one way to do that, namely, to enshrine it in the Constitution in perpetuity. I was moved by the case made by Senator Marie-Louise O'Donnell a few weeks ago in the House.

I would see the €160 net charge as reasonable if I thought the Government could ensure that figure was sustainable after 2019. I have not yet decided how I will vote, but if the Minister can tell me the figures to show that the charge will be sustainable for Irish families after 2019 and we can invest in water infrastructure at the same time, he will have my vote.