Alan Kelly (Tipperary North, Labour) | Oireachtas source

No, check the record. I have said it a number of times. Senator Cullinane just chose not to listen as usual. I am not going to repeat the whole thing. I outlined earlier regarding the Constitution and how we have to be very careful about putting amendments into the Constitution, about the consequences of that and the fact that Article 10 already says what it does on water. We have to be very careful about any potential changes of our Constitution. It is essential that anybody who makes or considers to make any changes to it bears in mind every single potential consequence. It was brought up by some people as regards the potential to license services. Irish Water has a statutory function to deliver water services and cannot really get involved in asset transfers as stated under the previous Act. They cannot contract out their statutory responsibilities. I would like to give that assurance to the House.

Regarding the European Commission, which was referenced on a number of occasions, in 2014 the Commission issued a communication in response to the European citizens' initiative on the right to water. I referenced it yesterday and spoke about it again this morning. In the communication the Commission stated that it would continue to ensure full respect of treaty rules regarding the EU remaining neutral in respect of national decisions governing the ownership regime for water undertakings. The Commission also stated it would remain attentive to public concerns about the specificity of water services. It is clear there is no agenda of privatisation. Ownership of water services is always a matter for the Government or for the country on its own terms.

Some Senator, I am not sure which, brought up a reference to a company of a similar name in Britain. I understand it has nothing to do with Irish Water here. That is the information I have been given.

I believe what we have proposed here is as far as we can go. I say that hand on heart and given the genuine proposals put forward by Senators. I say it on the basis of the spirit of each amendment and the spirit in which it has been proposed by all the Senators. I would like to point out that I have faith in the Irish people, as there are two resolutions to be passed by each House, to elect people who will represent the fact that they never want to see this privatised.

I believe in the people. Whatever decisions they make, I believe they will elect people to reflect the fact that they have no wish to see this company ever privatised in any way, shape or form, and it is important that we acknowledge that. I cannot see how any government would not only behave in that manner but, through this threshold, take away the right of the people to make the decision in that instance, which, in any event, I do not believe would actually arise.

I wish to affirm and restate the serious issues in respect of what we are discussing and the need to define what we are discussing. Even defining what we are discussing is difficult. Can Senators imagine the unintended consequences if we went down that road? Can anyone in this House absolutely guarantee that any wording put to the people would not have unintended consequences? I cannot. Can anyone guarantee-----