Today we are meeting with representatives from Uisce Éireann for engagement on the water supply project in the eastern and midlands region and its current status. I am pleased to welcome Mr. Gary Gibson, senior programme manager, Mr. Mike Healy, programme director, Ms Maria O'Dwyer, director of infrastructure delivery, and Ms Mairéad Conlon, asset strategy senior manager.

Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.

I remind members that they will be afforded a six-minute speaking slot for questions and answers, with a second chance to contribute if they so wish. I now invite Ms O'Dwyer to make her opening statement.

Good afternoon, Chair and members of the committee. The Chair has introduced my colleagues and me. First, I acknowledge the work done to date, by both this committee and the Government, through the accelerating infrastructure task force, in bringing infrastructure delivery to the fore of the national agenda. The focus on identifying barriers to delivery, planning and legal reform, and progressing major infrastructure projects without delay, is the strategic approach needed if we are to meet national targets and ambitions.

We welcome the invitation to attend today’s session to discuss the water supply project for the eastern and midlands region. This is a once-in-a-generation, critical infrastructure project for the country and it will support economic development for generations to come. It is central to ensuring water capacity can support housing delivery and population growth over the coming decades.

Uisce Éireann submitted a strategic infrastructure development planning application for the project to An Coimisiún Pleanála in December of last year. This was one of the largest planning applications submitted in the history of the State and was supported by a comprehensive environmental impact assessment, EIA, report. A decision on this application is expected in early 2027, following the statutory assessment process.

It is important to note that as this project is currently going through the statutory planning process, there are some areas where we must be careful not to pre-empt that decision. We are also in a live procurement process and we will need to ensure we do not leave ourselves open to a future challenge as a result of information we provide. However, we will be as open and helpful as we can in addressing questions from the members here today.

Ireland’s water supply, particularly across the greater Dublin area, GDA, which includes areas of Wicklow, Meath and Kildare and the wider eastern and midlands region, is coming under sustained and increasing pressure. Water demand in the GDA is on a knife edge, beyond what we can sustainably supply, driven by population and economic development and the impacts of climate change. In May of this year, we saw record water demand levels in the GDA, which reached 685 million litres in a single day. In practical terms, the system is operating beyond capacity and with limited resilience.

Today, a significant proportion of the region depends on a small number of water sources, particularly the River Liffey, which supplies the vast majority of water to over 1.86 million people.

This level of reliance on a single source is a real risk. A contamination event, drought or operational failure could lead to widespread restrictions or outages, with significant impacts for homes, businesses and essential services such as schools and hospitals. The water supply project will provide a new, secure and climate-resilient water source, capable of supporting up to 36 water zones, which effectively serve 50% of our population, and is essential to enable delivery of housing and growth for the State into the 2050s and beyond. It will immediately provide a secure supply to Dublin, Kildare, Meath and Wicklow, and will also enable supplies currently serving Dublin to be redirected back locally to Carlow, Wicklow, Meath and Louth. Crucially, it will also provide infrastructure with the capacity for future connections along the route in Tipperary, Offaly and Westmeath.

The project proposes to abstract a small proportion, a maximum of 2% of the long-term annual average flow of the River Shannon, from an existing reservoir that is used for energy generation by the ESB. The proposed abstraction of water is, in essence, from water normally used in the hydropower plant, using the same existing water level controls. It will then be treated at a new water treatment plant close to the Shannon, creating a treated water spine across the eastern and midlands region. This approach has been selected following the assessment of over 1,100 potential options and has been independently reviewed by the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, as the most appropriate solution in terms of scale, cost, resilience and environmental impact.

It is important to also emphasise that this project complements, rather than replaces, ongoing investment in leakage reduction. Leakage levels, both nationally and in the greater Dublin area, are the lowest they have ever been, but leakage is only part of the solution. Fixing leaks cannot on its own address the scale of demand or resilience challenges Ireland faces, nor can it provide the additional capacity required to meet future housing demand at scale. We recognise that for a project of this scale, effective consultation and collaboration with communities along the route are essential to its successful delivery. The submission of a planning application followed extensive public and stakeholder engagement on the project, including five rounds of non-statutory public consultation, the most recent of which was in 2025. The insights informed environmental assessments, updates to project design and construction planning.

We are also committed to continued engagement with communities along the route and we have appointed a dedicated community liaison officer who has hosted 20 community information clinics so far in 2026, including communities in Lough Derg.

We recognise that abstraction from the River Shannon is a key area of concern. As highlighted, the proposal involves abstraction of a maximum of 2% of the long-term annual average flow of the River Shannon at Parteen Basin. This compares with the current abstraction rate of 40% in the River Liffey. We have submitted a robust environmental impact assessment report as part of the planning application. Extensive modelling has been carried out, including under extreme drought and future climate scenarios, which shows that the effect on water quality will be negligible, with no visible day-to-day change for users of Lough Derg or the wider Shannon system. Water levels in Lough Derg and the Parteen Basin will continue to be managed within existing operating ranges by the ESB, and there will be no change to statutory flow requirements.

We also recognise the importance of engaging proactively with landowners. There are approximately 500 landowners along the route and we have consistently made it clear that our approach is to reach agreement with them on a voluntary basis wherever possible, supported by a structured wayleave package. We have seen a very positive response, with more than 80% of landowners formally signing up to this approach.

We welcome the Government's continued funding commitment for the project and we are committed to playing our part in the delivery of this vital infrastructure to support housing delivery. The project is achieving milestones at pace, with public consultation, planning submission and the launch of the procurement process completed in just over 12 months. We are taking all possible measures to accelerate delivery timelines as it navigates the statutory consenting processes.

In May of this year, the project received approval from the Department to proceed to the next phase under the Government's infrastructure guidelines. We are progressing the procurement of main works, in parallel with the planning process, to reduce delays, shorten delivery timelines and, subject to the relevant consents and approvals, ensure that this critical infrastructure project is ready to transition quickly from approval to construction.

The water supply in the eastern and midlands region is under increasing strain and cannot meet future needs without intervention, with increasing risks emerging for housing delivery and service reliability. The project represents a strong, long-term investment, with significant economic and social returns for the State. We remain committed to continuing clear engagement with all stakeholders and to progressing the project in a transparent and responsible way. We look forward to the challenge of overseeing this investment that will deliver lasting value for the region and for future generations. I thank the committee. We welcome any questions that members have.

I thank Ms O'Dwyer for her opening statement. I call Deputy Tóibín as the first speaker. He has six minutes, including for questions and answers.

Gabhaim buíochas leis na finnéithe. I will make a couple of points before getting into the substantive issues. I am sure that other TDs will have similar experiences. There are major difficulties in water in my constituency. Many of the estates in Ballivor recently had no water. The school had to close because of a lack of water. This is an ongoing issue. Water is being tankered to Ballivor on a daily basis because the storage facilities are not big enough. Kildalkey and Athboy in Meath will have a water outage tomorrow. I am talking to three separate builders in Meath at the moment whose constructions are being delayed because of the lack of water infrastructure being built. There are different timelines. One has been delayed by a year, which has completely trashed the builder's business model in terms of the cost of the credit that he has to pay while he is waiting for this. Water infrastructure is a massive challenge in County Meath. There is discolouration. Water services are not there, first and foremost. The witnesses might quickly address that issue.

I am obviously aware of the situation in Ballivor. I am sure that the Deputy is aware that works have started on the ground there with the upgrades to the reservoir and the pipeline, as he mentioned. Up and down the country, we have challenges. We have an ageing asset base. We have a significant investment programme under way. We recently got approval from the CRU for our revenue control period 4, RC4, investment plan. I can tell the Deputy that activity is up by 20% in the first five months of this year compared with last year. We are endeavouring to ramp up investment around the country.

On the issues the Deputy mentioned on particular sites, I am happy to take the details from him later and look into them. We work closely with the development community. We endeavour to be as responsive as we can to the need but it is a challenge.

Ms O'Dwyer mentioned the CRU. It fined Uisce Éireann €20 million recently. Is that right? It was in relation to the lack of fixing of leaks to the target that was set out.

There was a regulatory adjustment, and that is back to the leakage targets that were set for us in RC3. We did not achieve that level of leakage. The parameters we were operating with changed significantly in that there has been a considerable amount of growth in the network during that period of time. That feeds into those calculations. We are striving-----

There was a fine.

It is dealt with through the regulatory process by way of an adjustment. We do not operate on a private basis. If it were a private company, it would mean we had less money, if the Deputy knows what I mean, but we do not want to take investment from leakage in the country either, so-----

To clarify, was it a fine?

We can come back to the Deputy on that point. I did not come here to deal with that. I see it as an adjustment in how the regulatory process was dealt with. There were very ambitious targets there and we did not hit them but, as I said, that was because there were other challenges within the network. There is still a huge amount of leakage activity undertaken. Leakage is now at the lowest level it has ever been. We have probably taken leakage nationally from 49% down to 36%. In the greater Dublin area, we have taken it from 37% down to 29.5%.

The issue is relevant. The level of leaks in the Dublin area, for example, is one of the causes of the need for an extra source. However, I understand that the CRU gave Uisce Éireann a target of 176 million litres between 2020 and 2024, but only 90 million litres of leaks were reduced in that period.

In that period, there was also significant additional growth, and that is not reflected in those numbers. We had a huge amount of growth in water usage on the system during the period.

The last time Uisce Éireann was in here, I asked how long it would take to address the gaps in the water infrastructure that are currently blocking the building of homes. At that stage, Uisce Éireann said that it would take until 2050. Is that still the view?

Uisce Éireann was set up over ten years ago. We were set up at a time when there was wide recognition of the state of the water infrastructure, and it was widely accepted that it would take a number of decades to address the challenges that existed. We have made a huge amount of progress in the interim and we are continuing to make progress every day. This investment programme is going to see another step change, but by the time we address all the problems, a significant period will have elapsed.

The year 2050 is-----

We have not put a precise number on it because it could-----

Will the witnesses come back to the committee with a timeframe for the plan?

Yes. As part of our long-term planning, we considered all our supplies across the country, and we identified that there were significant deficits across the supply system. That is published in our national water resources plan. We were transparent and upfront about that. We have examined the solutions that need to be rolled out across the country to address the supply deficits. Delivery in this regard requires significant investment, not only monetary but also in terms of resources. I refer to the challenges we face in delivering on the projects.

We are identifying the high-priority projects now, getting them on the ground and getting them moving. In the interim, what we are trying to do is shore up our existing supplies and address issues on the network to prevent interruptions to customer supply.

Does Uisce Éireann need more investment to achieve those objectives?

We will need sustained investment over the coming years to achieve those objectives.

More than what is actually committed to Uisce Éireann?

For the minute, what we have in the next revenue control period reflects what we can deliver in line with the Government’s housing targets. Past that, we will need continued, sustained investment-----

I have a final question. It is stated that 80% of landowners have formally signed up to the approach. To a certain extent, I am always sceptical about big projects like this and the fact that they are taking resources from regional Ireland and moving them to the east coast. Our suggestion is that, as a country, we need to move population to the regions as well, because that is where the resources are. The figure of 80% means 20% have not signed up. For those 20%, is it likely that there will be a compulsory purchase order? How would it be achieved?

A little over 80% have signed up for the voluntary package. We were delighted to achieve this. That was on the basis of ongoing discussions with each of the landowners. Something that was very important to us, as Ms O’Dwyer pointed out in our opening statement, was that we would get access to the land by agreement. We did not want to go down the CPO route. We are at a little over 80% now. We acknowledge that there are people opposed to the project. There are issues such as people having difficulties in proving title to land, so it is not the case that the remaining 20% are fully opposed to it.

We are continuing to work with landowners and are open to discussion with them on these points. We hope some more will have signed up by the time we get to the point of having a planning decision on the project. There will be cases where we will use the CPO powers to acquire the land, but we remain open to discussion with all landowners and hope to achieve agreement. It is very important to us that we do this by agreement with landowners, both now and throughout the delivery of the project, subject to consent being given for it.

I thank our guests very much for coming in today. Like Deputy Tóibín, I want to raise some local issues because I believe they speak to the full story. It is one thing bringing water across the country from the Shannon, but at the same time it is about the water we do have and utilising it properly. I will give a couple of examples. In Leixlip, we have had a genuine issue for a number of years, even when I was a councillor. I have raised this in the Dáil, at committee meetings and elsewhere. There seems to be a burst every few weeks. What is the plan to resolve this issue?

At the moment, we are looking at the trunk mains in the greater Dublin area. The Deputy will be aware from our Water for Growth programme that we have an investment programme under which we are planning on investing in the resilience of the network primarily in the greater Dublin area. That is not about bringing new supplies; it is about reinforcing the existing network and the existing system. On a day-to-day basis, I appreciate that there are challenges. Our operational crews are working to respond to those as quickly as possible so we are able to restore supply. In the meantime, we are driving upgrades in the wider network. I appreciate the inconvenience that causes for customers.

On that example, Uisce Éireann does have operational crews. I am in regular contact with them, including Mr. O’Connell, who is in charge in my area. At the same time, where does it end? If there were crews out every two weeks fixing bursts and 15,000 residents at a time without water, it would not be tolerated in many places. If somewhere out the road from Leinster House or a leafy part of the inner city were out of water every two weeks, it would not be tolerated. Why should any area tolerate that?

It should not. Again, we can talk the Deputy through the detail of the investment programmes. We probably did not come here today prepared on the specific issues raised, but we can arrange a meeting and sit down and go through the plan with the Deputy.

I have asked for that many times, and the witnesses are here now, so-----

We will arrange it after this meeting today.

I have looked for that meeting many times and raised the issue many times, but so far we have not seen delivery. Are the witnesses aware of the specific issue in Leixlip? Also impacted are Maynooth and Celbridge. Every two weeks, 15,000 people are out of water for 12 hours at a time.

I am aware that we are having operational challenges there. Again, I suppose the Deputy will be aware that-----

It is not operational; it is capital. Operation would indicate an issue with crews, but this is about bursts. I refer to the capital programme. The same pipe bursts each time outside Intel, which has 5,000 employees. The town has about 15,000. We have coffee shops, businesses and breweries impacted by bursts. That is not an operational matter.

We are investing in our mains renewal and we do manage-----

So Uisce Éireann has no plan for Leixlip?

We do have plans. We are replacing networks, at a rate of about 120 km to 130 km of mains per year and we have plans in the area in question. On the Celbridge area, there are water supplies coming from two reservoirs, and the main from the Dowdenstown reservoir is being upsized at the minute.

That will not fix the bursts. The bursts happen in the same 500 yards of pipe. It just keeps popping.

We are doing works on the network in the area. There is an aged asset that we are dealing with and there is a significant network length. We have competing drivers to invest in, so we cannot just-----

So Uisce Éireann does not care about the ones affecting people?

We are prioritising our mains renewal programmes in the areas with the highest burst frequencies, and there are significant elements of work being done in the area in question. We appreciate that there has been a disturbance to customer supply and that it has been significant. We are examining the area to work on it. We came here today to talk about the water supply project, and that is what-----

There is low water pressure in the Allen reservoir. There is scheduled maintenance tomorrow, so the water will be off tomorrow, when it will be 31°C. Does that make sense?

We are carrying out works to try to resolve the issue with the Allen reservoir. The main that provides supply into the Allen reservoir is subject to some hydraulic constraints on the network. We have done some camera surveys on a stretch of it and we need to get to the remaining stretch. I am not aware of the exact nature of the works tomorrow but they may be to address the remaining issues. We need to find where the hydraulic constraint is to carry out the repairs. We cannot go ahead with the repairs unless we know what the actual issue is. That is what we are trying to find out. It is the customers downstream from the Allen reservoir who are being significantly impacted. We want to address the issue as quickly as possible. I am not 100% sure, but it is likely the works scheduled tomorrow are trying to address that issue.

My fear is that we could be bringing water over with large projects at the same time as local pipes are bursting. Uisce Éireann is looking at the leakage problem, which is one aspect of it, but if there are pipes bursting and if we are building new estates in the likes of north Kildare, which I know are getting funding, it is an issue. There is a pipe on the road into Celbridge put in for a new estate, but at the same time as we have the existing problem, new estates are going in, water mains are bursting and residents are affected. It is a case of competing priorities. That is the reason I ask why we are talking about a big project when we are missing some of the basics.

We have to balance our investment across our different portfolios. It is critical that we invest in this project because we will run into supply issues in the Kildare, Dublin and Meath areas if we do not bring on-----

The point is that we already-----

It comes back to that Water for Growth programme. That is where we were identifying €500 million with the intention of investing it into the core infrastructure in both network and existing assets. All of that has not been fully identified but it is about reinforcing the assets that are there.

I do not mean the witnesses here but at the same time, when someone tells me there are operational issues going on, this is not an operation; this is capital. It is a pipe.

Up and down the country, there are significant needs. We go through a process as part of the regulatory period whereby we endeavour to prioritise what we see as the most critical need at that point in time.

Do the witnesses regularly have experience of towns in which the water goes out for 12 hours every couple of weeks and-----

There can be challenges.

-----where there are 15,000 people impacted, with the same pipe and the same stretch? I could not conceive of that happening.

We can take that away and come back. We can get the committee outage statistics, because we provide them regularly to the CRU.

It is a matter of urgency in all these areas that they be dealt with, if that is the case.

That is the challenge we have. As Ms Conlon said, it is about prioritising that need and investment across this piece. It is very helpful when customers ring in because we use all that to assist in prioritisation.

At a macro level, it is looking at the big picture nationally. I appreciate that for any one customer or community, if you are the person at the end of that pipe and situation, it is a very difficult place to be in. We are trying to look at it as black and white to see how we prioritise things, based on the data and evidence coming from the system.

I have never heard anything like this before, and I am sure Deputy Cronin will probably bring it up also.

I thank the witnesses for coming in today. Unfortunately, they are in the firing line, so they will forgive us because we also have a job to do.

Talking about the pipeline, this is a very important piece of infrastructure for this country. It gets water from the west coast over to the east coast where we have a huge shortage. As the population grows, this will get bigger and with more businesses coming into the area, they will also need more water. I am delighted to hear that 80% of landowners have agreements already drawn up; that is fantastic. I believe the project is with An Coimisiún Pleanála, so hopefully everything is ready to go with that.

With everything going to plan, and without judicial reviews or anything like, when does Uisce Éireann see shovels being in the ground? I know the target end date is 2032. However, going back then, the first phase is to get the water from Parteen up to Peamount and then to feed that into Dublin and other areas around it. The second phase looks at getting the spurs into Tullamore and then into Mullingar and Nenagh.

I brought up on the floor of the Dáil today that instead of having a first and second phase, we should do everything together. We all know that in the past, in many cases with projects in this country, the first phase has been done and the second phase is then forgotten or it could be 30 or 40 years later before it is done. We cannot have that because we need the midlands to be a counterbalance to Dublin to be able to help with its growth, while also having balanced growth in the other regions as well.

I ask that the witnesses go back and ensure the second phase is part of the first phase. The Taoiseach agreed with me today on the floor of the Dáil that this should be happening. The midlands are a vital part of the growth of this country, being so close to Dublin. It is also an eastern midland project. Please do not pay me lip service and say "absolutely". We need the witnesses to go back to fight for that and make sure it happens as part of the first phase, not a second phase. We know what happens with second phases.

Second, unfortunately, I also have to go back to the local stuff. We have an awful lot of issues, and communication is a huge one with Irish Water. I have councillors, local people and TDs within my parliamentary party and others, who have issues with contact and communication with Irish Water. Only today in Tullamore, a water main was burst by an agricultural operation that went wrong. First thing this morning, my phone was pinging from people in the business community to find out what was happening because people needed water to be able to keep their business open and they had no information from Irish Water at that stage. They had tried to get through but nobody knew anything about it.

I tried to contact Irish Water and I got the same information they did, which was nothing. I contacted the local council and straight away it was able to talk to people on the ground and could tell me the work was being done and that they were already on top of it, which was great. The council said everything should be back up and running by 11 a.m., so I was able to contact those businesses and instead of them sending people home, they were able to hang on until 11 a.m. or go away for a couple of hours and come back to get their businesses going.

However, the information going out on the local radio was telling people that emergency works were going on and that it would be 6 p.m. before it cam back. The notice on the Irish Water website said there were works being carried out and that it would be 8 p.m. before it would be back. There was conflicting information right across the board, which is terrible. That is the communication. This is about the people on the ground, councillors, me as a TD, businesses and ordinary people getting up in the morning to have a shower before work or coming back in the evening to cook the dinner. Unfortunately, it also happens to be one of the warmest days of the year. The communication is terrible.

I have another story. We have works to be carried out and surveys are being done on the pipe work in Tullamore, which will entail 3.8 km of pipe work. Again, that is not happening until 2029. When I brought that up on the floor of the Dáil, I got a call from somebody in the communications department of Irish Water to ask where I had heard that, because that information is not out there. I said, "Hang on a second, let me bring up the email with the information and exact details of what was being done."

Is Irish Water fit for purpose? It came in here last year looking for money from us and we said we would do everything in our power to ensure we put pressure on our Minister, Deputy Chambers, to fund Irish Water, and he did so to the amount of money it required. However, does the organisation have the capability to be able to do the projects at the pace and speed we need for the country? I am looking at my local area, and it certainly is not.

I thank the Deputy for that. Mr. Healy might take the timing, and then Ms Conlon might take the midlands part.

We are going to get cut off here and I understand that, but somebody might give a quick answer to one of those questions.

I will try to be as quick as I can, and I thank the Deputy for the question.

We are moving at pace and the quickest we can to get shovels in the ground. Clearly, a lot is dependent on consenting. With every deadline we have had over the past 12 months - and we hope to get shovels in the ground in 2028 - we have done everything we can to shorten that period. We are working with our own Department and the accelerating infrastructure task force to start to look at reducing all the times before we get to construction on approvals, governance and all those elements, to work within the infrastructure guidelines. We have had some success with that and we will be looking to move this, but some of those durations are out of our control, that is, the consenting.

We have a commitment from An Coimisiún Pleanála to have a decision within 48 weeks after we submit. This would mean we would have a decision by the end of this year. We are running procurement in parallel, so that we can quicken every single stage. It is not sequential; it is parallel. We recognise the problem. Many of the issues talked about here will be eased once we have a treated water spine throughout the country.

I will quickly touch on the spurs issue. This is the biggest planning application in the history of the State, to look at the environmental impact of 172 km across the country. We have taken the decision that we need to work to get it into a robust and suitable form for us to get a decision from the commission. However, in parallel, we have been looking at the regional water resources plan, where we can take off off-takes. That process will be a lot shorter than the main process. We do not see it as a phase 1 and phase 2 because it is a different project, but those projects will then be released, once we have the main planning works done.

Ms Conlon might be able to speak on that further.

Effectively, we run the projects in parallel. The midlands will benefit. The majority of the supply into the midlands is coming into the Mullingar area. The current source for Mullingar is a high-risk source for us; we need a water conservation order there. It is a high risk on our books, and we really want to deal with that as soon as possible. It is a high priority project for us to get the Mullingar supply connected up to the water supply project.

I understand that but we also have to recognise that while everything is okay in Tullamore in Offaly at the moment and we do not have the problems that obtain at Loch Uail, there are other issues that are stunting our growth, population-wise, business-wise and everything. It is unfair. It is not an either-or as we need both happening at the same time. Speaking about 2032 before starting to look at this is crazy. We need to have this happening straightaway.

We are actively looking at these issues, which is why it is in the regional water resources plan. The plant has been sized to take up these elements of the works and the pipe is sized for it. The whole infrastructure will be there to make them happen. At the moment, there is a 25,000-page submission to the commission. We would have had to increase this, and probably environmentally survey most of the country if we had to look at all of the spurs that were planned. The decision was made to get the main spine agreed and then take each of the other projects in parallel at the same time. They have been considered all the way through. This is not a "nice to have" at the end. They will not be considered in 2032; they are being considered now.

What Mr. Healy is saying is that as soon as planning permission is received from An Coimisiún Pleanála, everything will go according to plan and work will begin on those spurs at that stage.

Effectively, they will be network projects once the pipeline is in place. This means we will be very well positioned.

This is the question I am asking. Will it start as soon as planning permission has been received?

As soon as we need it. If the growth is happening-----

It is a yes-no answer.

It comes back to the planning framework. If the planning framework-----

It should not-----

If the planning framework says to Uisce Éireann that growth is happening and it needs to provide for it, then we will be able to facilitate that. We will be plan led, and depending on the timeframe the growth is to happen in, we will respond to it.

Or politically led, whichever it is.

My read from this is that no decision has been made on the timing yet.

No, it is set to go. It will be ready to go. As the Deputy was saying, there is no issue there at present.

At the moment, Offaly is providing the biggest amount of land to be used. We are putting in the effort for the pipeline and the works to be carried out around it, the communities that are being affected by it and the landowners being affected.

It is our intention that we will meet the need.

Will the planning for the spurs have to go in after the main planning is granted? Will planning be started at that stage?

For clarity, depending on the project and the type of project, we might not need planning permission. There is a different consenting process for other elements of it. Going back to the Deputy's point on Offaly, it has had the highest return of landowners signing up. We know the longest length of pipeline is in Offaly. We have had very good discussions in working with Offaly. Offaly also sees the advantage of having a treated water spine through its county combined with-----

But only if we are able to get spurs off it.

Exactly.

It is our intention to make them-----

I find with Uisce Éireann that it is always about its intention. It keeps talking about communication, the challenges and investment, but at the end of the day, we want answers and that is what I am looking for here. I am not asking people to talk around the shop and give me no answers.

Ms Conlon is much more able to discuss this than me but the regional water resources plan gives all of those answers. It gives the strategy and the 25-year plan. This is not a "nice to have". It is our plan for the future of the State and for providing water infrastructure. All of these offtakes and spurs are in the plan. It depends on the demand and the plan being there. We cannot determine where the water is needed. We supply the water when we know the water is needed.

I apologise to my fellow committee members for taking up so much time.

I thank the witnesses for coming before the committee and for their presentation. I have attended the consultations that have happened in north Kildare. I also represent north Kildare, along with Teachta Neville. The disruptions in north Kildare are terrible. They are not just in Leixlip, but also in Celbridge, Naas, Maynooth, Prosperous and even Clane. Every week, I get calls from constituents. The unscheduled and scheduled water outrages are terrible. An outage was planned for these days when it is really hot. I wish Uisce Éireann would do something else such as preparation work on such days.

I have written to Uisce Éireann several times. We cannot use the parliamentary question route. If Uisce Éireann is having a meeting with Deputy Neville, I would like to attend. There is a particular issue in new estates where there are young families and children who need washing every day. I was against the water charges. As they would have affected women in particular when washing their children or preparing food for their kids, I knew that Uisce Éireann would never win. It would have affected women, their families and their kids.

With regard to the disruptions, what kind of disruptions will we see in north Kildare when the pipeline is coming through? Will we see anything like this?

The impact is more on individual landowners as we install the pipe through their fields. We need to take possession of their land, with their agreement, to install the pipe, reinstate the land and get it back into the condition it was before we started the works. In terms of impact on the public, there will be some movement of trucks delivering pipes and materials through the various roads around the county. The pipe will generally cross a road and will not run along it. The impact on roads will be relatively short term. We will go under some roads through trenches. We will be over smaller roads in a matter of a day or two. It will be a matter of excavating the road, putting the pipe in and backfilling. Most of the works will be on private lands in north Kildare in particular. There should not be an enormous impact on the public in Kildare as would be the case in other projects where works run along the roads.

When does Uisce Éireann think all of the outages in Kildare will come to an end? Is it a year or two years? When does Uisce Éireann think it will get on top of this?

It is difficult to put a timeline on it. I do not want to say something here because it will depend on the challenges. Being straight up with the committee, we are facing into a very difficult period. This is the key issue I was trying to call out in the opening statement. Even today, we are up significantly, at 670 ML a day, in terms of usage on the system. We are trying hard to drive a conservation message. Water is very scarce and we are trying to protect it. We are also trying to-----

It is hard to believe that.

I appreciate that.

After weeks of rain, suddenly with three days of good weather we are told to----

We do have an abundance of water in this country but we just do not always have it in the right place. We do not have the right infrastructure that is able to move the water to where we need it when we need it. We have a deficient system. We do very much appreciate the investment that is coming. This investment is making a huge difference. However, significant growth is also happening. We are trying to balance the needs of existing customers and, equally, cater and provide for housing. Our systems are getting better in terms of being able to identify and predict where potential challenges are coming, and we are able to get in ahead and address some of them. We are confident we can address this. We are fully committed to addressing this problem. We all live in various communities. When outages happen, our staff also experience them. We appreciate that it is not easy. Some houses do not have sufficient storage in them, so they can feel the impact of the outage more quickly.

Especially apartments.

We have rolled out an SMS system and it would be great to have Deputy Cronin's support in communicating it to the public.

I have signed up for it and I get the notifications.

When I have an outage at home, at least I am able to keep the kids away from certain activities and mind the water until the supply is restored.

In view of the issues raised about Kildare, Uisce Éireann might come back to the committee with a detailed report in writing.

It has agreed to a meeting and we will go with that.

A lot of it will tie into the water for growth programme and we are happy to share that. We are building on the projects we announced that day.

Teachta Tóibín asked about the 80% and 20%, and that is good. A community benefit scheme was also mentioned. Is this mainly around the Parteen Basin or is it along the route?

The community benefit scheme is part of a wider initiative we are looking at in the project with regard to the social value. We are investing billions of euro along the route and we want to make the most of it.

As a project we will leave a legacy. The legacy will be training and opportunities, not just for blue-collar staff but also for white-collar staff, and we are talking to the Laois and Offaly Education and Training Board. We are also talking to the schools along the way so we can increase the awareness of water. The community benefit scheme is specifically designed to compensate the local communities for the disruption during the construction process. We have been working with the local authorities affected along the route. We will have a fund for that, which will be split into four main categories. It will be moneys for education, employment, the environment and the community. We see that as a key element. It is not compensation for the works or for carrying the water through the area but for the disruption caused by the construction. Key to this is that we are currently writing the contracts for the main contractors and in these there will be a commitment for apprenticeships and training works they will do. With their investment there will also be meet-the-supplier sessions, so we can look at local suppliers. We are keen that the investment is for the benefit of the whole community and that we do leave a legacy. I will go into detail about what those conditions are, but as they are part of an live procurement process I cannot do so now. I am more than happy to come back and look at that.

Under the overall social value heading, there will be the community benefit scheme, which again is part of our planning application and I do not want to prejudice anything within that. Then we will go and look at the social inclusion clauses in all of our contracts and our contractors will be incentivised to employ, benefit and train more people within the region. It will be connected to the affected region. It will not be nationwide, unfortunately, but for the six counties affected, with the term "the six counties" having a different meaning along the route. Again, we need to look at that and look at how we make the most of that investment. I do not want that investment being contained within just the contractors. It has to help the community we are working in.

Ms O'Dwyer said that the approach was achieving milestones at pace, with the public consultations and planning submissions. I know Uisce Éireann has a really difficult job and you cannot make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. I wish it well but the disruption that my community is facing is really terrible. I would love if they would be considered for it.

We appreciate that and a large number of community clinics are still taking place along the pipeline. If anybody has any concerns, we urge them to come along and give us an opportunity to allay them.

That would be very helpful.

Another key element that we are finding as we are explaining the project, the impact of the project and where the haul roads and crossings will be is that we are also picking up a lot of local issues and local boil water notices and other things, which we take away in feedback. We find that very useful. What we need to do is build up trust with the local communities. Clearly that is something we need to do. It was very clear when we had our public consultations until the end of last year that we need to listen to people, understand their concerns and then work with them. It is not that we are going to come in and throw a pipe in and go away again. We need to leave a legacy and make that real. The legacy is not a scar across the land. We have committed to return the land to the condition we found it in, working with the landowners. We have a very detailed landowner handbook. We are restricting the times at which we can work and the seasons we can work. We are a long-term client, provider and utility. We are not just coming here and going away again as a project. Uisce Éireann will be here and we need to keep and build those relationships.

I thank the witnesses for their time today. This is a very significant project and I understand the demands that exist for it and why it is necessary. I want to focus on the impact the project could have on Lough Derg, especially in terms of the water levels and the broader activity on the lake. I represent east Galway. Many people in the town of Portumna and the wider region rely on that lake for an income from the likes of tourism and angling. They have concerns that this project will impact on those activities. I know engagement events have been held there, including very recently, and perhaps the witnesses could outline some of the concerns that are coming through with those events and how those concerns are being responded to. I mentioned the water levels. Uisce Éireann has outlined that the abstraction would be a maximum 2% of the long-term annual average flow. I want to dig into that a bit more. During certain times of the year such as the summer, the level of the river would be lower and the demand for water could be higher, so it could end up being much higher than the 2%. Maybe the witnesses could speak a little bit more about that.

As I mentioned in the opening statement, this planning application was probably the largest ever in the history of the State. As Mr. Healy touched on, this is probably because of the extent of the environmental impact assessments and the work undertaken to consider the environment and the impact this project would have. Mr. Gibson could go into the detail.

One benefit of this scheme is that it attracts the water from an existing reservoir, the Parteen Basin, as part of the Lough Derg Parteen system. As part of the planning application, we have prepared detailed hydraulic models of the water levels in the water body. As Deputy O'Hara has rightly pointed out, at peak we would abstract just 2% of the average long-term flow from the Shannon. The modelling we have undertaken demonstrates that even in a drought event, and even in the worst drought on record made worse by climate change, the ESB would have been able to maintain levels within the normal operating band while maintaining the minimum statutory compensation flow down the old River Shannon. As Ms O'Dwyer pointed out in her introduction, the look and feel of the water body will be the same for users both before and after because the levels will be within the levels in which the ESB always operates that water body. That is one of the main benefits of the project. We have modelled for that event and even in that scenario it shows that it can be maintained within those normal levels.

Going back to the community benefit, Mr. Healy mentioned that it would apply only to the communities that are directly affected by the project during construction. Can I take it that there will not be any community benefit funding for communities in County Galway who are impacted by this project?

Does the Deputy mean impacted by the project during the construction?

Not during the construction but communities that are alongside Lough Derg.

The premise is that there will be no change to the levels within Lough Derg or the Parteen Basin, so we do not deem there to be an impact and there will be no compensation as part of that condition. That is why the social value and social inclusion clauses, where we were looking at people for jobs, training and apprenticeships, will go to a wider area. We are not a commercial organisation like a wind farm that leaves permanent infrastructure up there for profit. The compensation is purely for the disruption during the construction. It will be disruptive. There will be road closures, haul roads and other elements. We recognise that and we wanted to give back something in that condition. We do not see a change for the leisure users on Parteen Basin or Lough Derg, or for the people who fish. We are having many meetings along the edges of Parteen to show that. I must admit there is pushback from that. People do not necessarily believe our statistics and other things, but we have published that information and that information has been commented on. We have commented on that and it is with the commission now to review that data and information. Having said that, all of that data was submitted to the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, before our preliminary business case was approved. That was independently expertly reviewed and those calculations were seen as accurate and valid and a fair reflection of what we are doing. The premise is that there is an operating band that the ESB currently uses to abstract water and we are working within that operating band, as Mr. Gibson has explained. There will not be direct compensation for people in Galway but there will be the social inclusion and the benefit from the projects, so we can leave a legacy.

Mr. Healy is saying that even in situations where there is a higher abstraction rate, there is not going to be any impact on the water level.

The model-----

Those are the concerns I am hearing and I am sure Uisce Éireann is hearing them as well.

We do hear those concerns. They were mentioned at the Portumna event that happened in recent weeks. We responded to that by saying that the modelling information we have is publicly available and that they demonstrate that the ESB can maintain within those levels, even in a drought event.

The worst drought on record for the study period was the 2018 drought. We have modelled it being made worse by climate change as well. Even within that situation, we see that the ESB could operate within those normal operating levels. We are trying to reassure people that that is the case. The matter is with An Coimisiún Pleanála for its decision and it is up to the commission to decide. However, we are confident that we can demonstrate that. We try to address people's concerns by pointing this out, showing them where the information is and saying that they are free to look at it, pull it apart and see if they agree with it.

We have been monitoring levels within Parteen Basin and Lough Derg for the past four or five years to see how those levels are. When we talk to the communities and go out there - it is getting trust in our figures and elements - we know what those levels are and the effects that they have been having on those communities. We can feed them back into the calculations.

We have been working with the University of Maynooth to see what the impacts of climate change are. Clearly, it is very difficult to predict into the future and other elements of that. We have taken quite large allowances for temperature gain and more evaporation. Ms Conlon is probably better fixed to look at the science behind all of this. We are confident that the impact will not affect tourism, leisure and all of the things that people are genuinely concerned about, and rightly so. We have shown that, and it is to be tested and have views expressed on it in our calculations and submissions.

I thank all the witnesses for joining us. Over the past number of weeks, I have attended a number of events with IBEC and EirGrid. Ms O'Dwyer was there. They were very optimistic about the future. It was encouraging to hear the feedback, particularly from a private sector perspective in terms of the direction of travel that we were moving.

My first question is in relation to the report that the witnesses sent and how 50% of the population of the State will be benefit from this project. Is that 50% of the pipeline from Shannon to Dublin or is it the entire project?

The pipeline is going to support the water supply capacity of 36 water supply zones. Those zones serve 50% of the population. This pipeline is going to boost the supplies in those 36 zones. What we are saying is that 50% of the population will benefit from this project.

We have considered the midlands region and the benefit that it is going to see from this phase of the project, but should we not be talking about the project in its entirety?

I am including those within it.

It does include the midlands region. I just wanted to be clear on that.

Regarding community liaison officers, mention was made of a number of events or clinics that Uisce Éireann had held. How many people on average are attending those events and how many overall?

We have the overall figure and can get it for the Deputy. It varies greatly. We go into local GAA clubs, community centres-----

Are there particular areas where there is greater attendance than others?

Around the Parteen Basin, there is significantly more. Recently, there was also more in Portumna. As we go further away from the basin through Kildare and Offaly, there is less attendance, but we can get the exact figures.

At the point where the water enters or meets the pipeline, are there any by-products or concerns that could potentially arise from that perspective?

No. We abstract the water from Parteen Basin at that point. There is no discharge back into the abstraction point.

There should be no cause for concern-----

-----about sludge or any other sort of by-product.

There is sludge generated, but that is generated on the water treatment plant that is located near the Birdhill abstraction point.

How will Uisce Éireann maintain that?

That is stored on site for a time and then transported off to a suitable facility in due course.

There have been no identified risks around that.

No.

Okay.

The witnesses did give us a total amount for the community benefit fund. The answers was a little bit evasive in terms of the different areas and maximising social value, at least by my definition compared with the witnesses'. Is it to fair to say that, with 170 km of the pipeline, or nearly 30%, going through Offaly, each county will proportionally get its percentage?

Each county will get a fair percentage. The percentage is based on the length of piping in the county and the number and scale of infrastructure sites. We have worked on that quite closely.

I was not trying to be vague. I have not given a value for the community benefit fund because that is subject to the planning application and the other elements of that.

What would Mr. Healy like to see it at roughly? Will he give us an estimate?

I cannot really do that because it influences the planning. These elements might be conditioned. It is a local fund based on the criteria we set. It is spread among the counties. The counties with the largest infrastructure and largest amount of pipe will get the largest share.

Is Uisce Éireann accounting for a rate demand with local authorities in relation to its infrastructure?

That is not within our gift. I know that Tipperary-----

Is Uisce Éireann accounting for it?

At the moment, we are not accounting for it. However, Tipperary County Council passed a motion on a development contribution.

There are development contributions, but is Uisce Éireann accounting for an ongoing annual rate demand as well?

That would be treated as operational expenditure, opex, in any case as opposed to part of the capital cost, which would just be the one-off cost of the project.

Is it something that Uisce Éireann is accounting for?

It would be treated like the rest of our pipelines. I am not saying which or whether, but we can double check-----

Surely with any capital project, Uisce Éireann would account for the initial investment and then the element of operating expenditure afterwards. It does not just build it and the sites-----

Absolutely. We can get an answer for the Deputy.

It also depends on how we calculate the ratable value of our infrastructure and works, which is a different model. Tipperary County Council is putting forward suggestions. Without speaking badly of other people, the council is saying that there should be a charge for the transport of the water through the county. That is not necessarily our decision to-----

I referred to infrastructure sites.

From the perspective of delivery and certainty, if we get the green light on this project - touch wood - and it starts in 2027, Uisce Éireann is estimating a five-year delivery until the tap is turned on, in simple English. How is Uisce Éireann going to work with developers to give them that element of certainty with two years to go, 18 months to go and 12 months to go so that we are not sitting around once the pipeline is delivered and waiting for developers to start connecting to it. How can we ensure that Uisce Éireann is not just working concurrently at different phases of the delivery project, but that it is working with developers as well so that, once we get this active, as much connection can be conducted or carried out as possible? What is that number of houses or projects that Uisce Éireann envisages?

What we have found with our other capital programmes is that, once we get on the ground, the projects move very well. In many cases, a lot of our large significant projects have been delivered ahead of time. Once we can get started, we will have no problem about bringing that certainty to bear. Ms Conlon might touch on-----

Given the scale of it from west to east, I could be on the east side and see progress, but this is a very long pipeline. How are we going to communicate that progress as it advances? What is the number-----

We can look at the reporting structure. That water will probably be available once we get the whole pipeline built.

The longest thing that is going to take to build is the water treatment works at Birdhill. That is a 54-month construction period. The laying of the pipe - the system - should be quicker and done in elements. Until the water treatment work is produced and the pipes are in place, we cannot commission. It will take a year or so to commission these works. There will not be a stage that we can go to Tipperary and take an offtake from that. It will be a system as a whole. It will be taking place-----

If it takes a year to commission it and two years to build a house, we are potentially going to have a 12-month wait where we cannot connect anyone because they have not been aware of Uisce Éireann's timelines.

We have that challenge with other projects around the country. We usually allow development to proceed ahead of that window. Once we know where we are, we are able to give a commitment. We also have other projects happening in the greater Dublin area. We have other interim projects. It is dependent on the timeline. We are not able to say exactly today what it is, but we believe that we will be able give that certainty and commitment to the development community.

Uisce Éireann will essentially start in the west and travel east.

Not necessarily. This comes back to the procurement and contract strategy. We are going to have a number of contracts and those contracts will work in a number of phases. Due to the scale of it and the way we are moving, we want to be in and out of farmers' lands as quickly as we can, depending on seasonable effects. We can only work in certain months of the year. It is reasonably intensive work, so we want to be in and out in a few years at a maximum.

There is a concern among landowners and farmers, in particular, that some of this work will cause a level of disruption on the ground that will impact on badger setts and there could be increases in TB, etc., in local communities. I ask Uisce Éireann to remain engaged and work with landowners. There are clinics now, which is fantastic and very welcome, but there is an unknown that could arise and I ask for that engagement to continue.

I thank the witnesses. I am sorry I had to run off earlier but I had to speak somewhere else.

I have a number of questions on the proposed pipeline in relation to the Critical Infrastructure Bill. What material difference will the passage of the Critical Infrastructure Bill make to the intended timeline and feasibility of delivering this project because we all saw what happened with the Dublin drainage project?

The Critical Infrastructure Bill sets out a process whereby we should be able to streamline and improve the existing consenting process. For many Uisce Éireann projects, there are very complex and challenging consenting processes that we must go through. Many of them have different timeframes. They are not necessarily streamlined. Our understanding of the Bill is that where a project is designated, as a critical infrastructure project, the consenting authorities involved in that project will come together to agree a pathway for those consents whereby they will work together so that effectively there will be a faster track through the consenting process.

On the water supply project, and Mr. Healy can come in again on it, we have a very ambitious timelines set out. That 2032 timeline has very limited float within that. We are asking all the consenting authorities to adhere to the timeframes that would be set out for them in terms of making decisions.

We know, and the Deputy mentioned the greater Dublin drainage project, decisions do not always get made in those timelines. Based on the critical need for these projects, we are asking all the different agents of the State to do whatever they can, on their side, to meet the timelines to keep this project on track.

As a TD from the mid-west, this project is somewhat controversial. In terms of this project, to what extent will the provisions of the Critical Infrastructure Bill allow Uisce Éireann to get through without ending up being tied up litigiously? By my estimation if the Bill was not enacted then Uisce Éireann would have a much more difficult job in getting this through planning without ending up in court.

Obviously we have a number of consents to achieve. We have got planning, a compulsory purchase order and abstractions. We have a number of others to come, so anything that can happen to smooth those over-----

As Ms O'Dwyer has said, the key consent is the planning application. The project is still subject to the laws of the land and needs to get planning consent. The Critical Infrastructure Bill is about making those things happen a little bit quicker and we can get through these processes as quickly as we can. Again, as Ms O'Dwyer has said, it is about making that consenting process a bit more streamlined but the project will always be subject to consents and members of the public are always entitled to have their views heard. That will not change, from our understanding, with the Critical Infrastructure Bill but it is about making that happen in a more streamlined fashion. That is to the project's benefit and where we would see it happening. Again, the project is still subject to the laws. It is subject to a decision being made by An Coimisiún Pleanála on the planning consent and then the EPA on the abstraction licence. That will not change.

My understanding, even from engaging with the Minister online and offline, is that the Critical Infrastructure Bill was almost designed with this project in mind. Is that fair to say?

In summary, the Bill will help us to safeguard the programme for the project. As we have said, it is very ambitious in terms of the timelines we have set out already. If we can remove uncertainty with the consenting process and the consenting authorities and ensure we can safeguard the milestones there-----

Is it fair to say the Bill will make it much easier for Uisce Éireann to deliver this project?

If it can remove the uncertainty in terms of those consenting processes and get alignment in terms of the different authorities with the work they have to do and the consultations they have to undertake as part of the decision-making, then it will help safeguard the work we have to do here to deliver the project.

The Committee of Public Accounts received a worst-case risk analysis that indicated that costs could go over €10 billion. I know Uisce Éireann's cost estimate is roughly half that amount. How will Uisce Éireann protect taxpayers from the cost of this potentially turning into a bottomless pit?

Mr. Healy might give an update on costs.

To go back to the Critical Infrastructure Bill, we have got some experience of the greater Dublin drainage scheme. Even without the Bill we got a very speedy judicial review date, a very quick passage through the courts and a settlement. We had planned for a much longer period. That was settled in three months and we had assumed it would take 12 months. There is a momentum in the State and things are happening.

On the greater Dublin drainage scheme, we looked at the schedule again and went to the Government and said that if it can reduce these governance periods and do these other elements, then we will do the same. We took a year out of the programme. We will apply the same logic and adopt the same approach to the water supply project to always reduce the timescale.

On the question about the costings and estimate that was supplied to the Committee of Public Accounts in our preliminary business case, that was a figure of €10.3 billion. The current estimate we have is between €4.6 billion and €5.9 billion. That has a significant amount of contingency already to look at delays and other elements. The figure of €10.3 billion has a contingency of around €7 billion, on top of that, which is massive. It is a model that is used for projects all around the world of a similar nature. If everything possible went wrong, that would be the outturn cost. They are very complex difficult projects that go through mountains and there are other elements. We are dealing with work that we do not on a day-to-day basis but it is just a bit longer and bigger. The treatment works is a bit smaller than the treatment works at Ballymore Eustace. We have 1,600 steel mains throughout the country. We do this kind of work. The element of risk is reasonably low in comparison to other projects and other complex inner city projects. We are confident that we will comfortably achieve the range of between €4.6 billion and €5.9 billion. Our initial estimate was done in 2023. We have reviewed that every year. Our preliminary business was re-enforced by a detailed business case with the same amount. We have looked at that and we are within 5% of that estimate. Even with what is happening around the world, with inflation, with Ukraine and all of those things, we are confident with that range.

The nature of the infrastructure guidelines and the way we have developed, if it all goes very badly wrong and there is, potentially, a multi-decade delay we would get to €10.3 billion but we have no intention of delivering that. We will deliver to the budget that we have set out in that range.

I have a few questions. In terms of the yearly capital investment programme over the next number of years, what percentage will this project take from the overall capital investment programme?

In the national development plan an amount of money was set aside for both the greater Dublin drainage project and the water supply project. Within our RC4 investment programme, there was just funding for that period out to 2029. There is a commitment from Government to fully fund it which takes the project into the regulatory control period 5. We have been given an assurance that the funding is there for this project. We are fully funded for the regulatory period RC4.

When will that expire?

In 2029 but obviously the project will continue.

Mr. Healy said that Uisce Éireann hopes to get shovels in the ground in 2028.

In 2028.

Uisce Éireann will only be very early in the construction process at that stage.

To reinforce what Ms O'Dwyer said, we will need the commitment for the full contract value before we sign. We will be signing contracts in 2028. So, again, we have, and we will be signing contracts for the GDD project, so we will have major commitment, and we will go through the infrastructure guidelines process. We will have a final business case and an approval gate 3, AG3, submission that will need approval from the Government for that element and then the funding will have to be available for that. Although the spend may be through 2029, 2030 and 2031, we have to give the commitment when we sign up to the contracts and that commitment has to be there and backed up by funding.

We have a decision on approval gate 2 from the Government now as well, so we cannot go for decision gate 3 until we have planning and have our contracts ready.

No matter how we look at it, once it gets into the construction phase, it will be well over €1 billion a year. The witnesses mentioned a figure of €5 billion as their best estimate as of now, and we will stick with that. We will not talk about inflation. What is the estimated construction period?

The figure of €5 billion includes inflation among other things.

That is good.

The construction period will be roughly over five years, and it will be-----

It will be approximately €1 billion a year.

-----a significant spend. The GDD project will hopefully be running in parallel, so there will be another few hundred million euro on top of that as well.

There is a bit hope there. The reason I ask this is under the national development plan that the Government published last July, it gave a figure for water services of about €1.571 billion per annum for 2028, 2029 and 2030. It appears that if that figure is right, and what the witnesses are saying is right, this one project will take two thirds of Uisce Éireann's capital investment as of the figures we have.

It is my understanding that in the national development plan these projects are seen as major projects and the funding of them is being held separately from the larger investment in water services.

Can Ms O'Dwyer say that again?

The funding for these projects has been ring-fenced separate to the rest of the investment in water services.

Is Ms O'Dwyer saying that the €1.57 billion per annum in the NDP is separate from the cost of these projects.

Yes.

Is the chart that I am looking at not the real chart at all?

We can get the detail of it so that I am not mixing but the funding for the water supply and greater Dublin drainage project was being ring-fenced specifically for these projects in the event that there is a delay. That money was being held for these projects to progress and, as Ms Conlon said earlier, we need a sustained and committed funding stream-----

Of course.

-----to upgrade the wider network, so we were looking at them as two separate categories.

Will Uisce Éireann come back and clarify whether that is included in the €1.57 billion per annum that the Government has in its Department ceilings? This is not an Uisce Éireann issue, but if I am looking at these ceilings for each of the next five or six-----

We will clarify it and come back with a clear table because-----

That is what I am asking for. Water quality has not been touched on at all yet. Is Uisce Éireann satisfied? Will it have any extra work to do on improving water quality?

Our colleagues attended a meeting of the Oireachtas joint committee on housing where that was a detailed session looking at water quality. Is the Cathaoirleach's question in respect of the project or just in general?

I am specifically talking about this project today, but it is a general question. Is the water in the River Shannon superb water or will it need a lot of treatment? I am from the midlands as well. We have a line in some parts of my county and no line in the other end. There is a phenomenal difference between households. Where are we on just simple issues like that?

The water body that we are taking from already provides source from some other areas and it will require treatment to bring it to the proper standards but the water treatment plant we are designing takes account of the raw water characteristics. We have a comprehensive suite of analysis of the raw water there and that will be taken into account for the design of the water treatment plant. It will require treatment and disinfection before it travels to Dublin but there are no particular concerns about the raw water quality.

Can I ask a simple question that sounds innocent? If there is a lot of lime, can that process take lime out of water or is Uisce Éireann neutral about whether there is lime in the water?

The water will be a little bit harder. It is hard water that we will take from the River Shannon, and we do not treat for that as such, but the treatment is designed to meet the stringent EU drinking water standards and that is what it will do.

The witnesses mentioned that An Coimisiún Pleanála has been good with the timelines. Given that it is the biggest application in the history of the State, it will be an almighty achievement if it is able to clear it at the first date and further information is not required. Is Uisce Éireann planning for it in its timeline or is it assuming that the biggest application in the State will meet its first timeline?

The commission already ran a public consultation and that ran to time. It then asked us to comment on a large number of responses that it received to that-----

Uisce Éireann has been through that process already.

-----and we received probably three and a half weeks to undertake a lot of those responses. The team worked incredibly hard along with others to get our responses into the commission because we were very clear that we could not ask for an extension as it really important to us that we send that right messages and we hope that the commission achieves its timelines as well.

We engaged extensively with An Coimisiún Pleanála before we sent in the planning application and briefed it on the project.

I get that.

It was well aware of what was coming down the tracks.

Uisce Éireann already provided further information as part of the process up to now. That was the question that I asked, and it has some of that done. I have another simple question. What is the pipeline's diameter?

The treated water pipeline will be a steel pipe with a diameter of 1.6 m.

Will it just a single pipe or will there be a reserve pipe?

It will be a single pipe.

There will be 170 km of single pipe and 2 km of twin pipe, which will take the raw water from the water raw extraction point and then pump it to treatment plant at Birdhill. Using raw water, we will have one that can be taken out of commission to clean it. Once the water is treated, it will be a single pipe. It will be clean, potable water, so hence it forms the spine through a 1.6 m diameter steel pipe.

Uisce Éireann has been dealing with the problem of the level of water being taken out of the River Liffey basin but will this not create a new dependency? What population is this pipeline designed to serve?

The pipeline will provide over 300 million litres of water and that will provide supply to up to 300,000 houses. When we were designing the scheme, we had to do a detailed supply-demand balance, which looks at the customers in the area and their future needs. That is informed by spatial planning. We have the national planning framework, which sets out the nation's population targets and the population targets for the cities, and the county development plans then feed that into the settlement areas. All of that information has been fed into it. We also looked at all the lands within the area that are zoned for employment zones, the potential industry types that might be in those areas and we allowed flexibility for the industry types that might be in that area. That is all allowed for in the design of the size of the pipeline, and it was independently reviewed by the Commission for Regulation of Utilities. It is important to look at that balance because we are designing out to 2050. While it is hard to have certainty on the design, it is important that we have allowed a buffer for uncertainty in it as well.

Ms Conlon said it will supply up to 300,000 houses, which is less than 1 million people. The Dublin population, not to mind the employment situation, will be way beyond that in the decades ahead. When it is up and running in ten years, will it be serving 50% or 90% or 25% of the supply to Dublin? What will the percentage be and where will the rest of it come from? The figure of 300,000 houses is not big in this day and age.

That is into that eastern and midlands region. As part of the national water resource plan, we looked at the national issue and the population growth targets as set out by the national planning framework in terms of the cities and the country.

What year was that document on population growth produced in?

We continuously review that in line with updates of it. The last update of the national planning framework was in 2025 but we allow for uncertainty in our initial estimation in our designs.

It is not possible to go back and change it now if it is in planning. In the last couple of weeks and months, every local authority in Ireland has rezoned additional land for housing. It can be assumed that a lot more houses are going to be built in the next ten to 20 years. We will just put it that way. That only happened long after the application went in. How is Uisce Éireann factoring in things like this?

Going back to the 300,000 houses, even as we stand, what population is Uisce Éireann serving in Dublin now? When this capacity comes, I presume it will be additional, but I see that some of what will be used for Dublin is to go to Carlow. What additionality will this project bring in terms of the population growth? We thought it was going to cover it all, but 300,000 houses is a fraction of the city.

Well, we would have-----

I am trying to get the big picture. I am surprised that this project is only serving 300,000 houses.

There is flexibility in the design in terms of where it happens. We allow for the uncertainty in it. We have built in enough for the housing growth in the area. We are led by the national planning framework and the local area plans. We are working on this. We have a forward planning section in our asset management team which works with the local authorities in terms of the section 28 update, which will see the county development plans reviewed now for population growth. We continuously work with the local authorities on this aspect.

It is a significant volume of supply that we are providing. It is not just about the infrastructure. We will also look at our leakage measures, which will reduce our existing customers' demand. That will allow us flexibility in what we can deliver.

We will get some reduction, but we will not get it down that low. There was mention of it being down at 27% earlier, or something like that.

We also-----

How many houses in the Dublin region is Uisce Éireann supplying with water now?

The current population in the greater Dublin area is 1.86 million people.

Ballpark, how many houses is that? Uisce Éireann must have an estimate, whether it goes by two per house or 2.5 per house.

The CSO statistic would be around 2.7 per property.

What population did Ms Conlon say Uisce Éireann was serving?

It is 1.86 million people in the Dublin area.

Somebody will do the sum for me. That is about 600,000 houses, ballpark. Does Ms Conlon know where I am coming from? Uisce Éireann is saying that this now-----

We can come back and set out a high-level summary of the supply-demand piece. As Ms Conlon was saying-----

What is surprising me is if the requirement in Dublin is for about 700,000 houses at the moment, and this project is only going to add another 300,000 houses, which sounds massive but is not as massive as one might have thought, I can see in decades, but still in our lifetime, hopefully, that more will have to be done.

When we are designing any infrastructure like this, it is important that we strike the right balance and we are allowing for growth, because nobody can really tell what is going to be happening in 2050. We are allowing for that growth. We use the international best practice in the methods by which we do that.

Having listened to our colleagues from Kildare at the beginning, some of what Uisce Éireann is going to have to do will have to make up for the problems there already. This is only adding capacity for 300,000 houses, and Dublin is expanding. I will just put it that way.

It is, but as we said in the opening statement, this project has to be seen in tandem with the very ambitious leakage reduction programme we have as well. With the two initiatives together, we would be endeavouring to significantly improve the supply-demand position in the greater Dublin area and the eastern and midlands region. It is a combination of both. Our national water resources plan has three pillars, and another key pillar there is to use less water. It is something that we really need to-----

Is there any sign of that happening? I am guessing that the usage per individual-----

I think we all-----

-----is a lot higher than it was 20 years ago.

Absolutely, and that is where I think we really need the committee’s support in terms of engaging the public in a conservation campaign. Again, water services are predominantly funded through taxpayer’s money, through the money we are all paying in-----

And from commercial revenue from businesses.

By asking everybody to value and appreciate water more, we would hope we can conserve it and get better value from the infrastructure that is there.

Ms O'Dwyer will have seen the general questions I am asking. I am sure she has lots of information, but can she give the committee some information on that point? With 300,000 houses-----

We will get a summary position back to the committee.

I think Ms O'Dwyer knows where I am coming from. I was surprised at the figure for 300,000 houses, when that will only be a fraction of the overall housing in Dublin. This is to supplement and not to-----

Exactly. I am just going to make the point. If we look at the average consumption in the GDA, we get confused with houses and occupation. It is not an exact science. The average usage in Dublin over the last few months has been between 620 million litres and 650 million litres.

Is that per annum?

It is per day.

The witnesses can understand that we are on different sides of the desk on this one.

The water supply project is for 300 million litres per day, so it is not a replacement.

When we get there, it will be one third of the total.

It will be half-----

It will be half now, but when we add the two together-----

Yes.

-----this project will meet about one third of the water supply that will be required for Dublin in due course.

Again, this is where it comes back to the detail. We are providing a new source, which is key. It is a resilient and sustainable source, but it is not a replacement for the current works and systems. It is in addition to and in support of those. It is not about turning a tap on when this project is complete and turning everything else in Dublin off. It is very much a system as a whole working together.

It is a supplement or an addition.

Supplies currently coming from the surrounds around Dublin, which feed into Dublin, can then feed their local areas. This is what we are looking to do.

I was shocked at the beginning when it was said that this project will take 2% or 3% from the water flow of the River Shannon, which, let us hope, should not make any significant difference. Was it said earlier, or perhaps it was in the document, that Uisce Éireann is currently taking 42% water out of the River Liffey?