Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State is welcome. A common theme throughout the Committee Stage debate on this section and the amendments and throughout the entire debate is trust. As Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú has referred to this issue in some detail, I will not go over old ground. However, the overwhelming majority of the more than 4,000 e-mails I have received in recent days about this issue were certainly about whether the Government could be trusted not to privatise Irish Water. Essentially, I suggest this is at the core of all of the arguments being made in respect of the holding of a constitutional referendum. While listening to Senator Gerard P. Craughwell and after talking to Senator Thomas Byrne, I could not help but reflect on the various State utilities that had been created since the foundation of the State. Since Ireland joined the European Union, nearly all of them have been deregulated. The European Union, effectively, has forced Ireland to deregulate in the telecommunications sector and I was in the House for the debate on the legislation which was passed to deregulate it. Similarly, the electricity sector has been deregulated to a large degree. What is there to say about Irish Water in the future? It, unquestionably, will be successful or else it will disappear and go into bankruptcy and neither the Government nor a Government of similar ideology would allow this to happen. What would be the scenario were the European Union to state Irish Water was anti-competitive or not compliant with anti-trust regulations and that, therefore, the Government must deregulate it and sell off some of its services? I note that the Government decided to sell off elements of Bord Gáis Energy to generate money.

Are Members on the Government side surprised that there should be such massive distrust and a disconnection between swathes of the people and the Government on this issue? That is the message I am getting and it is sad because, in a way, it is a matter of some concern for Members as democrats on all sides of the House. To put it in another way, a Government governs with the consent of the people and if it does not have that consent, democracy is in danger. That is at the core of this issue and while it may sound somewhat melodramatic, the trends that have been developing in Irish society in the past year or two are a source of great concern. Now that it is being reflected in a mass movement across the country - despite suggestions on the Government side of the House that it is being orchestrated by one particular grouping or ideology - it is a fact of life that the ordinary, common people of Ireland have come together and are united on this one issue.

They do not believe the Government when it says it will not privatise Irish Water. They might be prepared to give some concession to the current Government's promise not to privatise it but what about the future? The same question arises in respect of charges. They are being frozen until a certain date but what will happen after that? This is all bound up with the banking debt which continues to hang over our heads. The distrust began to emerge when people asked themselves how they ended up in a situation whereby their children will be responsible for paying off this money. These issues have all come together under the heading of Irish Water but the distrust of the Government and even the democratic process grows from a wider base. For this and other reasons, the Government should be alert to the dangers of going down the road of a plebiscite. It seems to me the worst of all possible worlds. As Senator Byrne and others have observed, it is meaningless because it will not address the concerns about privatisation. I acknowledge that the Minister has come a long way in listening to the people but we are dealing with a huge movement on this issue. In my entire career in public life, I have never before received so many communications on an issue as I have on this one. Even the pro-life issue did not give rise to as many communications. I have replied to people in my own constituency but it would be impossible to reply to everybody. It is the same answer in many cases because I understand a certain website allowed people to use templates. I also received replies to my own responses. If it was a party motivated movement, it would be most unlikely that people would bother replying to me.

As has been pointed out time and again, the plebiscite is not going to resolve this distrust. A disconnect between the people and their government is an extremely serious issue in any democracy. I wish it were otherwise because I do not think it will reflect well on any of us as we head in to an election over the next 15 months. We are already seeing the rise of Independents and independent issues. There is nothing wrong with those who were elected to these House. The people are sovereign. They decide who will be elected. However, people are elected not just because the single issues for which they stand but also due to a continuing disconnect with the mainstream parties. I do not want to labour the argument but I am trying to give another view on the arguments against section 2 and the holding of a plebiscite. The Government should pause and reflect on the outcome of this provision.

Senator Byrne gave the best example of what might happen when he cited to the triple lock introduced after the Nice referendum. The Nice treaty had nothing whatsoever to do with militarism. It was nothing more than a housekeeping exercise at European level. I will argue that against all comers because I was actively involved in the campaign. Somehow, a significant number of voters got it into their heads that there was a military dimension to the treaty and that their sons and daughters would be joining a European army. Twelve years on, I have heard nothing about a European army. At the time, however, I met mothers in my own town who genuinely believed their sons and daughters would be conscripted into a European army. They voted against the treaty on that basis. The Government was forced to reassure the people by vesting authority in the United Nations and the Houses of the Oireachtas. That was the most controversial issue and, once it was addressed, the people accepted the treaty. That is what I believe is going to happen with this plebiscite, and I urge the Government to withdraw this section and return to the drawing board.