Brian Ó Domhnaill (Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I wish to pick up on what Senator Byrne said, because it was a valid point. An element of confusion was brought into the debate by the Minister in regard to property rights and the law of unintended consequences. Senator O'Donovan pointed out that there is no such law, because it does not exist legally. It is merely a knock-on effect, an externality, or an inefficiency of a property right. Therefore, the property rights issue is a separate element entirely. It is not linked to this issue. The only property rights in question here were those outlined by Senator Byrne - that is, the rights associated with the infrastructure, land and networks that have been transferred to Irish Water. For example, in my county, assets worth €155 million were transferred from public ownership to Irish Water overnight on 1 January this year. Those are the property rights about which we should be concerned - the vast array of the public drinking water network, together with all the treatment facilities and all the sewerage infrastructure, which have been transferred to Irish Water. If Irish Water had not been established we would not even be having this debate on the section. It would be irrelevant, because the water system would be held within the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government or the local authorities and it would be within the control of public representatives. A public monopoly is being established with rights over the control of our water supply, and decision-making is being centralised away from the local authorities, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Houses of the Oireachtas and into an agency, which is being provided with all the infrastructure to supply the network of water to every premises in the country. That is what is in question here.

What is being provided for in the legislation is extremely weak. A plebiscite is not worth the paper it is written on. It is only one of the options available under the proposed legislation. The other option is a simple resolution of Dáil and Seanad Éireann, and the equity stake in the company that is Irish Water could be transferred to any private stakeholder or stakeholders who wish to invest. We know that, inevitably, that is what will emerge down the road.

We can dream that the realm of politics does not work that way but I do not believe that. If an outside investor with serious bang for his buck is willing to provide billions of euro I do not believe that a future Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government will resist, particularly if an election is coming and the Government is struggling. It might be different if the money was used for something beneficial to the country. This applies irrespective of party allegiance and that future Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government could represent my party. We all know what would happen if this outside investor approached, given the party system; the Whip would be enforced, backbenchers would be silenced and the Minister would get his way. In these circumstances private sector rent-seeking behaviour would take control and we saw what happened with the bank guarantee.

I agree with what my Sinn Féin colleague said on the bank guarantee because it was disgraceful but I think it will happen due to this legislation too. At the time of the bank guarantee outsiders had more information than the regulators, the Minister for Finance and the Department of Finance officials so those outsiders called the shots and got their way. The same will happen with this legislation. I will not name the outsiders in this matter, though I suspect their names are on every Senator's lips, because those outsiders will come at this issue with the best legal financial, economic and financial brains in their corner and run rings around the system. Politics, Government and decision making would be captured by these outsiders. I am not blaming any political party in Government or in Opposition but I have set out the future if this legislation proceeds. We should not put our water network infrastructure in a position from which it might be captured in the manner I have outlined. At the end of the day, money talks and finance walks - that is what is at stake.

I could go on and on but the Minister, Deputy Kelly, and the Department give me the feeling they are unwilling to examine this. The referendum has been ruled out but why not disband Irish Water before it gets going? Establishing a public monopoly that is not fit for purpose, like Irish Water, is a bad decision and I base this observation on the fact that it has squandered so much money to date. Some €200 million of taxpayers' money has been spent on consultants and legal experts to replicate a structure that exists in other jurisdictions. The referendum would at least enshrine in the Constitution the human right to water, as defined by the UN. We must see that the right to water is enshrined in the Constitution so it cannot be sold for private gain and if we do not do so I believe Irish Water will be sold at some point in the future. It could be sold partially or wholly but, ultimately, elements of it will be sold because private equity investment will be required to fund infrastructure. It seems the Government is hell-bent on not providing funding for infrastructure, as evidenced in the recent announcement.