Hard-pressed families are waiting for and worrying about the water bills that Fine Gael and the Labour Party are preparing for them. The Taoiseach will recall that he rammed through the water services legislation and used the guillotine to suppress debate. He even caused an unprecedented walk out of Opposition Deputies. Despite his stated commitment to political reform, he consistently failed to provide important information to the Dáil, governing instead by press release. He makes important announcements outside of this House. He does not govern by democratic debate in the Oireachtas. He created a fog of confusion. The briefings with conflicting figures causes additional anxiety for households. Last week he refused to answer straight questions and the Tánaiste, when questioned by Deputy McDonald, also refused to answer straight questions. Why do the Taoiseach and his Ministers persist in refusing to make themselves accountable to the Oireachtas when they are clearly able to leak information to the media?

Will he take this opportunity to clear up one matter? I presume he will not give us the details on his water tax proposals.

If, as the Taoiseach claims, the Government does not envisage the privatisation of water services, will he support the Thirty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution (No. 3) Bill 2014 put forward by Sinn Féin, which seeks to ensure the right of all persons to sufficient, safe and accessible water and that water services and infrastructure remain in public ownership? If that is his position, will he support our Bill?

No, I will not support the Sinn Féin Bill.

Deputy Adams is going to stage a sit-in now because he got an answer.

The Taoiseach, without interruption.

Last week the Tánaiste gave Deputy Mary Lou McDonald, who I do not see in the House today, a very direct answer to her question. Whatever planned diversionary tactics Deputy Adams and his colleagues came up with at their meeting last week were employed here. The Government will not support the Bill produced by Deputy Brian Stanley because the first part of the Bill would create a constitutional right to water without taking any account of costs or implications for private property rights and without any specific requirement for people to pay for that water. It is not properly considered and it is not thought through.

The second part of the Bill would create a constitutional requirement that water services and infrastructure remain in public ownership. Existing legislation already provides a statutory prohibition on the disposal of Irish Water and its water services infrastructure. In any case, it is not deemed appropriate to amend the Constitution to provide for a prohibition on the privatisation of a utility company.

Is that what we are calling it now, a "utility company"?

Furthermore, some uncertainty could arise for privately owned group water schemes, which receive considerable State funding, as to whether their status is changed or not.

The Water Services Act 2013 provides for the establishment of Irish Water as a subsidiary of Bord Gáis Éireann and specifies that it should conform to the conditions set out in the Act and be registered under the Companies Acts. Section 4 of the Act provides that Irish Water be registered as a private company limited by shares under the Companies Acts. Section 5 provides that one share of Irish Water shall be issued to Bord Gáis Éireann, which is now Ervia, with the remaining shares allocated equally between the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government and the Minister for Finance. As Ervia is a fully State-owned company, Irish Water is accordingly in full State ownership. Section 5(6) prohibits each of the three shareholders from disposing of its shareholding in Irish Water and thus places a statutory prohibition on the privatisation of Irish Water. It will never be privatised and no party in this House would ever put that down as part of its programme. These are the reasons that we will not support the Sinn Féin Bill.

Nobody knows more about diversionary tactics than do the Taoiseach and his Government, particularly on this issue. If we want an explanation for all their twists, turns and contradictory statements, it is that they have underestimated the determination of ordinary citizens - people who never were on a protest in their lives - to come out against the plan to charge them for water. The Taoiseach has been forced to back down. His Ministers have come into this House and criticised previous Ministers. After six years of pursuing austerity policies, the Government just did not envisage the level of resistance we have witnessed. Hundreds of thousands of people have taken to the streets. Others who cannot participate support the very basic position that they should not have to pay again for water. People are not asking for the Taoiseach just to reduce the charges, bring in sweeteners or give more of the types of briefings he has been giving to the media. They want him to scrap the water charges. That is it.

The Taoiseach says he will not support the Bill we are introducing, which embeds the right to water in the Constitution. Yet Labour Party Members in the Seanad supported this proposal. What will the Labour Party Deputies do when it comes to a vote in this House? Can the Taoiseach not review what he has said, support the people's right to water, scrap the water charges and embed this right in the Constitution?

Deputy Adams asked whether I will support the legislation put forward by his party. The answer is "No" and I have given the reasons. The Deputy commented on the situation in general. Only a few weeks ago, he was advocating the payment of water charges and saying he would advise supporters of his party to make their contribution to investment for the future. The Deputy changed his mind when he heard the sound of marching feet. Of course, Deputy Adams is very much a man who needs to see that his party keeps its word. Yesterday evening, members of the Garda Síochána spoke to public representatives of his party in Sligo and were given a specific assurance that public roadways would not be blocked and there would be a peaceful protest, which is perfectly legitimate. That was not what happened when the opportunity arose. If Deputy Adams gave his party members instructions, they did not carry out those instructions.

We are very conscious of the issues here because they have been raised by many people around the country. There are implications in respect of the proposition contained in the Bill. In order to strengthen what is already referred to in the Constitution and for the reasons I have outlined to the Deputy, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government will bring forward primary legislation to strengthen and bolster the position in so far as the Constitution is concerned, so that Irish Water will be retained in public ownership and will never be privatised.