Sean Barrett (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister. While I have been absent from the House of late, down at the banking inquiry in the basement, I have looked up at the monitor. From that purgatory I have seen the heaven of the Seanad Chamber and I have wished I was here at the debate. Perhaps, when the Lord wants to punish one, he grants one's wishes. Therefore, I have come here for this great debate. I am pleased that the amendment has provoked approximately five hours' worth of debate. It is important to assess the matter. The Minister may have suggested that people are in favour of the plebiscite. Not many people have been, but there is a reference to a plebiscite in the amendment as well. This is one of the problems we encounter. Let us consider the text of the Bill. Section 2(8) states: "In this section “Plebiscite” means the Plebiscite to which subsection (1)(b) refers." However, section 2(1)(b) refers to a plebiscite as: "a proposal to provide or allow for such alienation is submitted by Plebiscite for the decision of the People". That is not a definition. By contrast, the definition of a plebiscite in section 2(1)(b) of the proposed amendment states: "if such Resolutions are passed, the proposal of the dissolution of Irish Water may, if the Government decides to proceed with the proposal, be submitted by Plebiscite to the decision of the People, and if, consequent upon the proposal having been submitted to the People by Plebiscite, a majority of the votes cast in the Plebiscite shall have been cast in favour of the proposal, legislation may (if the Government so decides) be initiated by or on behalf of a Minister of the Government in either House of the Oireachtas in respect of the proposal." I humbly submit that this is a far better definition of a plebiscite than the definition in the Bill. For this reason alone, between now and Report Stage, the people in the Custom House might actually acknowledge that sometimes there are good people in Seanad Éireann coming forward with ideas. The last time we proposed amendments, the Custom House, that beautiful Gandon building, was turned into a bunker. They would not accept anything we said. I appreciate that this Minister has brought in changes and I welcome it.

The first debate I had with the Minister was on taxis. We both changed the Bill substantially and we remained good friends afterwards, but it was a better Bill and there was no personal animus in it. We are always prepared to do that.

The Minister said in his reply that there is no such thing as shares in Irish Water. The first line of section 2 refers to: "A Bill providing or allowing for the alienation of any share or shares in Irish Water". I would need to examine the record to see why the Minister believes there is no such thing as shares in Irish Water, because it is in the first line.