1998 Fianna Fáil & Labour Party Dáil debate in lead up to the European Water Framework Directive

What has 1998 got to do with Ireland's present day 'Water Charges' crisis, you might ask?

If a river is polluted you would be advised to investigate the source of contamination.  In the case of Ireland's' Water Charges', the problems stem generally from European and international financial pressures to privatise water and charge households for it's supply.  This pressure has been put on Ireland ever since joining the European Union in 1973.

In the 1990's the European Union interference and the vacillation of political parties over water charges and privatisation of this resource resulted in widespread public resentment.   Public opposition was so great in 1996 that it caused the demise of the 24th Rainbow Government of Fine Gael, Labour Party and Democratic Left, with the result of a new Fianna Fáil/Progresssive Democrats coalition in 1997.  One of the new government's promises was to stand up to Brussels and not introduce water charges.   Sinn Fein voted for Bertie Ahern as Taoiseach of the new government.

Just before the departure of the Rainbow Government, in December 1996,  on the eve of the general election,  Brendan Howlin, Minister for Environment announced that they would replace their proposed water charges with a new system in which motor tax collected in each area would be the source for local council funding. 

In particular, Ireland's present day water policy is legally bound by the Water Framework Directive 2000-60-EC, (WFD), a European agreement which was agreed and signed in 2000.  It has to be said that this piece of environmental legislation is, in the main,  worthwhile, especially with regards to it's pollution, preservation and water policy generally.  However,  problems arose here in Ireland and in Brussels due to the interpretation of the Directive.   Depending on political ideology controversy arose mainly around fundingand ownership of water resources.  Ireland's objections after the 1997 elections,  eventually resulted in the inclusion of Article 9.4, (The Irish Exemption), in the WFD and the acceptance of the principle of 'Subsidiarity' established in the Treaty of Maastricht  in 1992.

The following debate Dáil Éireann in 1998 between Emmett Stagg, Labour Party, and Noel Dempsey, Fianna Fáil, and others, epitomises the controversy and shows how Noel Dempsey, the Environment Minister was Ireland's negotiator and signator of the Water Framework Directive.

 

 

Thursday, 5 March 1998 Dáil Éireann Debate Vol. 488 No. 3

Mr. Stagg    asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government  "inthe discussions, if any, he or his officials have had with the EU Commission or its representatives regarding charging for domestic water in Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter."

Mr. Dempsey:   "The draft EU Water Framework Directive presented by the European Commission in February 1997 provided for full cost recovery for water use, including sewerage services and environmental and resource costs, with some exceptions which would allow for a basic level of domestic water use at an affordable price.

Since the outset, the Commission has been advised of Ireland's opposition to the proposed charging provisions as they relate to domestic consumers. I and officials of my Department have continued to reiterate at every appropriate opportunity Ireland's objections in this regard. In July 1997 I wrote to the EU Environment Commissioner indicating this Government's position on the matter and I stated that we would not reconsider the issue of water charges for Irish consumers. I also made our position known to the UK Minister for the Environment in the course of our discussions on the UK's EU Presidency programme.

We have also maintained our opposition to charging domestic consumers in the course of consideration of the Commission's proposals at meetings at official level preparatory to consideration of the proposals by the Council of Environment Ministers. It is my intention to continue to oppose any provisions which seek to reintroduce charging for domestic uses of water in Ireland.

During discussions on 28 November 1997 in relation to EU Regional and Cohesion funding for infrastructural projects, the Commissioner for Regional Affairs referred to the Commission's decision to reduce the Cohesion aid rate for Irish environmental projects from 85 per cent to 80 per cent on account of the decision to abolish charges for public domestic water supplies and referred to the difficulties created vis-à-vis “the polluter pays” principle. In reply, I reaffirmed and explained the Government's policy on the matter.

At the launch of my Department's 1998 water and sewerage investment programme in Killaloe on 2 February 1998, I reaffirmed to the Commission official present in the clearest possible terms the Government's policy on non-charging for domestic water supplies.

Mr. Stagg:  " I welcome the new position adopted by the Minister's party on water charges. My party and I have been opposed to water charges for some time. The Minister will be aware that the previous Government abolished water charges. Can he assure us that, having regard to what is happening in Europe, the Government will not allow the reimposition of water charges?

Mr. Dempsey:   "The Deputy said he and his party have always been opposed to water charges. While the Deputy may have held this view for a number of years, it is not clear his party always held that view. It put local authorities in a position where they had to impose these charges.

The Government has not changed its position on water charges. We intend to maintain the position outlined in the programme for Government. Our arguments against water charges are soundly based on the principle of subsidiarity. We believe it is a matter for national Governments to decide whether to impose charges. We are making it clear to the EU that we regard the imposition of charges as in conflict with subsidiary principles."

Mr. Gilmore:   I have listened carefully to the Minister's reply to the supplementary from Deputy Stagg and the number of times he has told the Commissioner of the Government'sopposition to the reintroduction of charges. Will he state categorically that domestic householders will not be charged for the use of water and the provision of sewage treatment services because there seems to be some ambiguity between the Government and the Minister, particularly in his reply to Deputy Stagg, that there might be an imposition of charges by the EU?

Mr. Dempsey:  " I give an absolute, total, categorical assurance that this Government will continue its opposition to any proposals put forward by the EU Commission. If proposals are put forward and pursued we intend to fight them. Proposals were put forward during the time of the previous Government and, in keeping with its policy, I intend to oppose them."

Mr. Hayes: What is the nature of the discussions the Minister has embarked upon with the European Commission? It appears from his reply there have been three discussions since he took office. Is it the Minister's view that the European Commission sees this as the end of the matter? It has reduced from 85 per cent to 80 per cent the amount of grants made available to some programmes. Will there be further reductions in the various grants?

Mr. Dempsey:   As I do not have the gift of foresight, I cannot say whether this is the end of the matter. Since February 1997 the framework directive on water policy, which introduced the concept of charges for water, has been under discussion. The initial position of the Commission was that: “by 20.10 member states shall ensure full cost recovery for all costs for services provided for water uses overall and by economic sector, broken down at least into households, industry and agriculture”. That was its position as outlined on 25 February 1997. There are ongoing discussions on that EU Directive and I expect further discussion on it at the March council meeting.

In respect of the discussions I have had with the Commission, my first contact was in July 1997 when the Commissioner wrote to congratulate me on my appointment as Minister for the Environment and Local Government and requested that I revisit the decision of the previous Government on the position of water charges. I replied thanking the Commissioner for her good wishes and explained fully the Government decision. This was not a discussion but an exchange of letters. The other two occasions have been outlined in the question. When Mr. Verstringer was here and the matter was raised with him at a press conference he made the EU position clear. I availed of the opportunity to reiterate our position in relation to charges. It has been stated by the EU that we are the only member state that does not impose charges for domestic water. That is not the case. In Luxembourg there is opposition in [562] principle to imposing water charges. Its Government ruled out the imposition of water charges three years ago and in Greece there are no charges. We have been arguing on the principle of subsidiarity and from the point of view of social and public health considerations and that it is in conflict with our policy.

Mr. Gilmore:  . Will the Minister accept that the cost of providing water is already being met by taxpayers through the general taxation system? Is it not a matter for the Government to decide rather than the European Union seeking to intervene in the manner in which the State collects taxes and recovers charges?

Eamon Gilmor (left), Brendan Howlin (right), Labour Party, source: RTE News, 2016

Mr. Dempsey:  " That is our position. I agree with the Deputy that it is a matter for us to decide, in keeping with the principle of subsidiarity, how people should pay for water. The only sector not charged for water is the domestic sector. We have made this point strongly.

We are trying to ensure water charges are not imposed on the domestic sector. I am satisfied we are doing a good job."

Written Answers. - Water Charges.

Thursday, 19 November 1998 Dáil Éireann Debate Vol. 497 No. 1

Trevor Sargent, GP

 Mr. Sargent    asked the Minister for the Environment and Local Government    if he will report on his meeting with Mr. Verstrynge, Environment Deputy Director General of the EU; his views on whether the Government is under renewed pressure to reintroduce domestic water charges from the European Commission; if the new proposed water framework directive will require full application of the polluter pays approach; if the polluter pays principle was enshrined in the Amsterdam Treaty which Ireland ratified"

Mr Dempsey:   "At a recent conference on environmental benefits of Cohesion Fund investment in Ireland, I had an informal meeting with Mr. Verstrynge, Deputy Director General of DG XI of the European Commission, at which we discussed a range of matters, including the application of the polluter pays principle in Ireland. I outlined the Government's position in this regard and stated our continued opposition to the reintroduction of domestic water charges.

The current draft of the EU Water Framework Directive, on which common understanding was reached at the Environment Council in June, proposes that member states shall take account of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services in accordance with the polluter pays principle. It would allow member states to have regard, inter alia, to the social, environmental and economic effects of the recovery. The current draft of Article 12 of the directive takes account of the view that it should be a matter for member states to determine charging policy in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity. I stated my intention at the June Council to continue to exempt domestic water services from water charges.

The polluter pays principle is enshrined in Article 34 of the Amsterdam Treaty which amends the terms of Article 130r of the Maastricht Treaty."

Source: Dail Question-Water Charges March 1998
             Written Answers -Water Charges Nov 1998


Catherine Connolly - People are not Polluters - Water Services Amendment Bill 2016

Catherine Connolly, Independent TD for Galway West speaking in the Dáil on the Water Services (Amendment) Bill 2016 on June 28, 2016.   In this commendable and forthright speech, Ms Connolly gives what can only be described as a positive, rational, no holes barred, description of what many in the Anti Water Charges' campaign deeply feel.  

The speech includes what must be the first time that anyone has heard a person objecting to the term 'Polluter' referring to users  of water.  This is a very important, subtle term. It has now become fashionable and crops up in all official documentation and studies in relation to the environment, water and the public.  It is a loaded term that denotes 'wrong doing' which has to be punished, restricted and paid for.  It is a term used to turn people into consumers and water into a commodity.  

 Ms Connolly says" I take exception to the word that 'Polluter Pays' and I am tired of that terminology.  I am not a polluter, most people are not polluters, we are users of a basic service that we can't live without.  And to say that we have to be punished in order to save, well that's ridiculous in the extreme"

Catherine Connolly's full speech in Dáil June 28, 2016

Gabhaim buíochas as ucht an deis cainte ar an ábhar thar a bheith tábhachtach seo a bheith faighte agam. Tá gá práinneach ann réiteach a fháil sa chomhthéacs seo, ach ní hí seo an réiteach. Níl anseo ach cur i gcéill amach is amach. Tá sé suimiúil go bhfuil an Rialtas, cosúil leis an Rialtas a bhí againn an bhliain seo caite, an-tógtha le Lá na nAmadán. Sa bhliain 2015, sheol siad amach na billí ar an gcéad lá de mhí Aibreáin.

Is í an dáta céanna atá i gceist arís sa dhéachtreachtaíocht seo.

I am thankful for the opportunity to contribute on a subject that is most important. I come from Galway city and have a background of having served as a member of a local authority for 17 years and I am acutely aware of the importance of water services, a cryptosporidium crisis and a polluted lake. As I speak, approximately 4,000 to 5,000 people around Carraroe, in Connemara, cannot drink their water. I do not speak from a position of negativity or as part of the radical loony left but as a very pragmatic, practical, radical woman who believes that in any civilised society there are basic services that unite us in solidarity with each. Water is one of those services, as are waste collection services and health and education services.

It seems that this is a complete pretence and fudge of an issue, and there are more holes in this apparent solution as there are, unfortunately, in our water system that is leaking on a daily basis. The figures we had in Galway were that there is anything up to 40% leakage from the system. We have to deal with that but I am afraid that Fianna Fáil has failed and I do not expect Fine Gael to change that. However, I at least respect its position. It has repeatedly said that water charges are necessary. Fianna Fáil told the electorate that they were not and that it would vote to get rid of them. Rather than use our time and our new energy and the broad range of opinion in this Dáil to find a solution and to work together, we are using our energy on draft legislation that is going nowhere and which will give a watery birth in nine months time that will not be a solution to anything, with the possibility of further extensions if we need them, depending on the political situation. That is while the metering situation continues against people's wishes. We do not want it.

We want to conserve water. I take exception to the phrase, "the polluter pays". I am tired of that terminology. I am not a polluter and most people are not polluters; we are users of a basic service that we cannot live without. To say that we need to be punished in order to save is ridiculous in the extreme. It does not tie in with any research in psychology or with marketing. People must be brought on board in terms of this issue and most of us want to be brought on board. We have children and we want to hand down a better environment to them and the best way to do that is to bring us all on board.

In terms of education, that should happen with the Government and the European Union, which continue to look on citizens as polluters and users of services rather than as active citizens who want to share in making the world a better place. If Fianna Fáil was seriously interested in new politics it would stand with us and say, "Stop this charade and have a referendum to ensure that water remains in public ownership". That would give confidence to the people.

What really highlights the cynicism of the entire approach is the €100 grant that was brought in to help us to conserve water but now it has been scrapped, which shows that it was just a foolish bribe at the time. However, as can be seen, people are not easily bribed. Now that it is gone, Fianna Fáil does not care about whether we conserve water. There is not a word in the legislation about conservation. There is no reward for us as users, nor is there any positive mechanism to keep us on board. No money being made available to local authorities to help them.

I became a member of the local authority in 1999 and left it when I was elected to this House. During that time we begged the Government for funding. We knew exactly what was happening. We had very good staff on the ground whose number have since been reduced. We had good engineers and other staff but they were all removed. More than 20% of the local authority staff in Galway was reduced. How could they carry out any sort of job on water services? Even within that they gave us an excellent service. If a problem arose and we called them, they came out immediately. We now have a situation where we make a telephone call to a service in Cork, which results in us going around in circles.

I am not in the business of demonising Irish Water. I believe the demonisation of the chief executive officer of Irish Water, the former city manger of Galway, was and is unacceptable. I have had my rows with that man but it is unacceptable to demonise Irish Water and its staff when it was set up to provide a service. When what was happening was exposed, however, through very good journalism, there were heads on a platter rather than the Government taking stock and saying it should examine this because it is not working.

Without a doubt, Irish Water was set up with a view to privatising the service. That privatisation has been stopped in its tracks for the moment but I am not foolish enough to believe we have stopped the tide. We have done nothing of the sort. We have simply tried to hold the system to account on behalf of the people who put us in this House. We promised the people who elected us that we would strive and do our best to ensure people had a water service as a human right, which is what they, and we, deserve, and that it would be paid for out of taxes.

I have a difficulty with this issue. While I welcome the suspension of water charges I believe it is the wrong way to go in the sense that we should abolish them and work together to have a service, paid for from taxation, that brings us all on board. Many ways have been outlined for increasing the level of taxation but it is an insult to the people to say they do not want to pay for services. They do, but they want to pay for them out of their taxes and it is our role as a Dáil to increase and broaden the tax base to allow us provide basic services. Dividing one citizen from another, as we have done with health in terms of private and public health care, bin charges in terms of those who can afford to pay them and those who cannot, and repeating the process with water is shocking.

Those in Government have got caught up with an EU mantra that is foolish in the extreme where we at the lowest level have to comply with rules but those at the highest levels do not. They are also deliberately misinterpreting a water directive when it could be interpreted in a positive way to conserve water, and to examine how we can do that and how we can bring people on board. Those in Government and, particularly Fianna Fáil, have wasted a golden opportunity and it shows up the cynicism of the new politics that its members have come in here day after day since February to talk about.

Original article:oireachtás.ie, June 28, 2016


The government has defeated Sinn Féin's plans to get rid of Irish Water

The motion called for the immediate scrapping of Irish Water as well as an end to water charges.

TDs voting in the Dail this evening

A SINN FÉIN motion calling for the the abolition of Irish Water was amended by the government tonight before being carried in the Dáil – marking the defeat of the original motion.
The original motion, put forward by Sinn Féin and supported by a large number of Independent TDs, called for the immediate scrapping of Irish Water as well as an end to water charges.

 

The motion also called for a date to be set “for a referendum to enshrine the public ownership of water services in the Constitution of Ireland.”

Opposing the motion, the Fine Gael and Independent minority government put forward its own amendment which allowed for water charges to be suspended while a commission was set up the examine whether they should remain.

The amendment carried by 60 votes for to 39 against – which meant that Sinn Féin’s original motion was altered with government’s amendment.

When the time came to vote on the motion as amended – it passed by 59 votes to 38.

Not wanting to vote with the government, Fianna Fáil abstained – but argued along the same lines, calling for the commission to be set up to investigate the future of water charges before any decisions are made.

Original Article: http://www.thejournal.ie/water-charges-vote-2789041-May2016/


Paul Murphy TD speaking on the Domestic Water Charge Motion May 24, 2016

Paul Murphy TD's speech on May 24 2016, Domestic Water Charges motion