Alan Kelly (Tipperary North, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I must work, as part of the Executive, within the advice I get and with the terms of that advice as well, and everyone here appreciates that. I come from the Labour Party. We all are politicians at the end of the day. I am a Member of a Government involving Labour and Fine Gael. From my ideology, the idea that we would privatise Irish Water is against everything I stand for. Let me be clear about that.

A couple of colleagues referenced - I do not know whether they quoted them fairly - that there might have been two Senators who stated yesterday that they would privatise Irish Water. That is not what I heard. One of them said maybe in the future but not now and the other wanted a discussion on it. Be that as it may, I have not heard of anyone in these Houses, particularly in the other House, or any of the local authorities - I have been around a lot of those because I am responsible for them - who wants to do this. The Bill provides that this cannot happen and now we are providing that it would need a resolution of this House and the other House, and then it would have to go to a plebiscite of the Irish people. We are stating clearly that this can never happen.

In response to many who have asked, including a number of Senators here, all legislation in the State can be changed. I am a straight talker. All legislation can be changed. However, what future government, no matter who its members are, would change this? I would respectfully say that Senators should have a little more confidence in the fact that the people know whom they vote for. People know whom they vote for and they know what they stand for. If every party in the State states it would not do this, what future government would potentially take away the right of the people to decide on the ownership of water if, which I can never see happening, they were so minded to do it in the first place? What government in its right mind would even consider that? I do not know what public would elect a government to make that decision in the first place. Even if one parks the privatisation of Irish Water, what people would decide to elect a government to take away the right of the people to decide to do something that they never wanted in the first place? It is illogical.

One can trace the line of saying that legislation can be changed. I say it out straight. Of course, legislation can be changed. Senators need not even respond. I am acknowledging that. I am straight up about it. Of course, it can be changed. However, what Government will do that based on this?

The threshold is up at ceiling level.

I also want to repeat, and I did it deliberately. I have been in this House previously and I am not saying this in jest but I have always believed that the best debates, in many ways, come from this House. I deliberately in my response on Second Stage went over this item because I knew it was the item that most people had a lot of interest in and we discussed it before in this House. I have referenced the fact that we went to the Attorney General, we went across Government, took advice and took legal advice and remember the Attorney General, like all the rest of us, is the guardian of this sacred document in this country. Therefore, we have to look at the law of unintended consequences. We should learn lessons, in this space, from other referenda that we had in the past in another area.

If we were going to have a referendum, what would it be on? How would we define it? Would we have to go back at it again and again? Would we be having a referendum on Irish Water? Would we be having a referendum on Irish Water as an organisation? Would we be having a referendum on water services? Would we be having a referendum on water? Would we be having a referendum on water plus something else or what? Those are real questions and I do not say them in jest but honestly.

If we were to have a referendum, what would be the inventory of what we are protecting? Would it include boreholes, private wells, pumps, land which pipes go through, aquifers, group water schemes, infrastructure co-owned by many different people and by different companies, companies' infrastructure, infrastructure owned by commercial organisations that are working and using large quantities of water, that are even producing water and selling it?