Water - where do you stand?

ninty9er · 03-11-2014 10:25pm #1

There were many different reasons given on the airwaves last week for participation in weekend protests.

I myself don't have any great issue with water charges but have concerns over the management of the company tasked with provision.

Where do people stand?

Saipanne · 03-11-2014 10:26pm

Love the stuff. Can't live without it.

Silentcorner · 03-11-2014 10:44pm

ninty9er wrote: »

There were many different reasons given on the airwaves last week for participation in weekend protests.

I myself don't have any great issue with water charges but have concerns over the management of the company tasked with provision.

Where do people stand?

This is the big problem for the establishment, this has become something much bigger than just water charges. The establishment is currently trying to backtrack seemingly oblivious to the fact that it will do as much damage as ploughing on, the protests may well dissipate but this was not the sort of reform voters signed up to, this is not the "world class" public service Ministers have promised...they have just apologised to the nation but we know that words mean nothing, no one will face any consequences for any incompetence.

There is a strong wiff of incompetence, a potential wiff of corruption, wastage, premium wages, cronyism, undeserved bonus structures...this stinks of FF, who we collectively booted out of office unceremoniously in 2011...whose participation in the protests is pathetic.

This has been a serious boot into the establishment, and I include the traditional media who completely ignored these protests until it was no longer possible to do so.

I believe we should pay for water, I accept water charges, but I am really enjoying what is happening to the political establishment at the moment, and I would love if this was just the spark required to begin the process of real change.

Manach · 03-11-2014 11:03pm

While I'd hold water is already been paid for via income tax and should be continued to be paid for as such in that method, my understanding that only Jesus could make any stand on water?

hatrickpatrick · 03-11-2014 11:29pm

Why can't we see results?

For me it's a combination of the principle of metered charges causing people to cut back on hygeine, the fact that so much money has been taken out of the economy already, the fact that the government is increasing the financial burden on ordinary people without properly tackling waste and extravagance in bodies like the HSE, and finally the fact that Irish Water is so bloated, its senior staff are so overpaid, and all the cronyism shenanigans surrounding it.

BoJack Horseman · 03-11-2014 11:31pm

Every option in the poll is opposition?

samdavis · 03-11-2014 11:40pm

I lived in Italy for many years, you pay for water there......you pay approx. 10 euro per month (our bills were on average 27 euro every 3 months) We bought bottled water to drink and used tap water for showers, washing machine, dishwasher etc. This figure is acceptable (to me) Bin charges were 76 euro per year (bins were emptied every day from a communal bin at the end of the street) I understand the edict from the European Union saying we must pay for water, but it should be on a par with European charges. Adding up bin charges and water charges here is a joke. I am willing to pay for a service, but looking at rates for services in Ireland is a complete joke......

ninty9er · 03-11-2014 11:48pm

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Every option in the poll is opposition?

I've asked a mod to add "I'm happy to pay as it is" and "I already pay for my water supply" and reset the poll

Tesco TripleChicken · 03-11-2014 11:48pm

Im actually in favour of the water charges. Up until now Ireland has been one of the only countries to provide free water to the public, people need to stop feeling so entitled and remember that clean drinking water is a privilege not a given "right".
They do however need to fix old leaky pipes and remove all the crap (flouride etc.) from our water.
Edit: I also chose option 3 in the poll
And if you want free water then by all means take advantage of all the rain we get in Ireland, maybe then you won't always be complaining about it

curioser · 03-11-2014 11:52pm

Against water charges "ever", option 1.

Public policy since the foundation of the State was that citizens did not pay directly for water.

Until 1977 water was paid for through domestic rates which funded the local authorities.

Post 1977, the funding was replaced by a grant from the Exchequer i.e. from taxation.

The creation of Irish Water and charging the ciitizen directly for water has reversed over 90 years of public policy.

Senior Cabinet figures must have done a major face palm when they saw Brendan Ogle taking a front and centre role in the anti camp. The permanent Government must have thought they had neutralised him by giving him the handy job orchestrating the group of unions in the ESB. (Inside the tent p1ssing out rather than outside the tent p1ssing in.) Now he's outside the tent! BO resembled God on Saturday, appearing in several places at once. There's going to be fun, boys and girls!

alastair · 04-11-2014 12:02am

curioser wrote: »

Against water charges "ever", option 1.

Public policy since the foundation of the State was that citizens did not pay directly for water.

Are business owners not citizens?
Are domestic users on group schemes not citizens?

Because this supposed policy seems a bit leaky to me.

BoJack Horseman · 04-11-2014 12:03am

curioser wrote: »

The creation of Irish Water and charging the ciitizen directly for water has reversed over 90 years of public policy.

You can tax me for having a car, a dog, a TV, an ATM card, even an insurance policy..... I wont bat an eye.

Just never, ever ask me to pay for an expensive & vital utility!

twowheelsonly · 04-11-2014 12:15am

Not against the principle of it but most certainly against the way it's being implemented here.
We have to pay it to keep the Troika/our Overlords happy apparently.
I doubt that they insisted that we have one of the highest charges in Europe if not the world!!

IW is a joke in my opinion and yet another slap in the face from the Government who promised to end cronyism and promised transparency and accountability, none of which we seem to be getting.
One of my biggest gripes is when I do the sums...
The top 29 people in IW will earn over 100k. Taking a low guesstimate at 125k each, pre perks and bonuses, that means that approximately 14,000 houses paying a flat rate will be required just to pay their basic wages. Include cars, perks and bonuses and that figure will get scary - for 29 people!!

Macha · 04-11-2014 7:47am

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

You can tax me for having a car, a dog, a TV, an ATM card, even an insurance policy..... I wont bat an eye.

Just never, ever ask me to pay for an expensive & vital utility!

You mean like electricity or gas?

Phoebas · 04-11-2014 8:07am

twowheelsonly wrote: »

I doubt that they insisted that we have one of the highest charges in Europe if not the world!!

This is a fallacy.
Our m3 rate is amongst the most expensive, but when you factor in the free allowances and the tax credit etc, we drop right down the list.

_Brian · 04-11-2014 8:08am

Were already paying for our water by having our own well. And sewage through our own system.

Our taxes are going to subsidise water/sewage for others.

People need to get over themselves and pay for the services they receive.

The government should have tagged this charge into the same system as the LPT right from the beginning where people would have no option but pay or have the money stopped.

The fact still remains that were borrowing north if €6bn a year to run the state. More revenue is required, water charges or increased taxes.
My preference is for water charges as it both raises revenue and collects paent from people other than PAYE workers.

Ken Tucky · 04-11-2014 8:20am

_Brian wrote: »

Were already paying for our water by having our own well. And sewage through our own system.

Our taxes are going to subsidise water/sewage for others.

People need to get over themselves and pay for the services they receive.

The government should have tagged this charge into the same system as the LPT right from the beginning where people would have no option but pay or have the money stopped.

The fact still remains that were borrowing north if €6bn a year to run the state. More revenue is required, water charges or increased taxes.
My preference is for water charges as it both raises revenue and collects paent from people other than PAYE workers.

Where do you live that you have to have your own well? Was it your choice to live in such a home. Im just curious, not trying to get at you. Thanks

marketty · 04-11-2014 8:35am

I'm not against water charges in principle, and I WAS fully prepared to register and pay my fair share...however...it looks like refusal to pay the charges is growing and it seems like there may be very little consequences for those who don't pay. For this reason and the more I think about it, I'm sick of being one of the 'coping classes' who pays for everything in this country without question, if the people living either side of me can avoid paying and get away with it, why the hell should I stump up again?
If the government is going to back pedal and give more allowances, tax credits etc to ease the burden that's great, but will they have the balls to enforce compliance? I doubt it. So my water rates will probably go up every year to pay for my neighbours who get to enjoy it without paying for it.
The same thing happens in the housing market, no repossessions/consequences for those who won't pay, the cost of which is passed onto dopes like me who will.

Again I think paying for water according to usage is fair and absolutely encourages conservation etc. but if everyone has to pay then everyone has to pay, bar the very genuine cases

Riva10 · 04-11-2014 8:42am

Phoebas wrote: »

This is a fallacy.
Our m3 rate is amongst the most expensive, but when you factor in the free allowances and the tax credit etc, we drop right down the list.

Please explain your reasoning for the above statement and use figures from other countries

spuddy · 04-11-2014 8:52am

When this started, I asked myself two questions.

Do I think it's right to encourage water conservation?
Yes, and to do that there needs to be a mechanism to tell me how much water I'm using, therefore I'm in favour of metering.

Do I think the existing water system needs to be improved?
That's a harder one, water comes out of my tap when I turn it on, and I can't assess the status of the network which supplies it. However there are a couple of things weighing on my mind.

Reports of people with boil water notices, for extended periods of time isn't a sign of a well run system. Also if I stand back for a moment, I'd never consider splitting the electricity network up between 30-odd local authorities, so why split the water network? That inefficiency has a hidden cost which has to paid, plus interest, by the state, and then by me anyway.

So Yes, I think the system needs to be improved, and therefore, whatever the teething difficulties in establishing Irish water, it will tell us how much it actually costs to run the water system, and in the long term put pressure to make it more efficient, and therefore I'm in favour of it over maintaining the status quo.

I can't be the only one out there who thinks like this?

mikemac1 · 04-11-2014 8:56am

I don't understand all the outrage over water and none of this over USC

Most workers will pay vastly more in the next 12 months in USC then they'll ever pay in water charges.

Introduced in 2011 and supposed to be "temporary"

Sorry for going off topic OP, I just don't see why it's been forgotten and ignored by the public and by the people before profit and those politicians

Do water protesters not work and also don't pay USC?

I guess most of them work and are in the same situation as me

Phoebas · 04-11-2014 8:57am

Riva10 wrote: »

Please explain your reasoning for the above statement and use figures from other countries

Most other countries don't have a free water allowance or tax breaks.

There was an analysis of this done on primetime last night comparing a group of OECD countries. We were second from the top on m3 rates alone, but down in the bottom half of the list when allowances were taken into account. It should be up on the RTE player.

Kaizersoze81 · 04-11-2014 9:01am

Phoebas wrote: »

Most other countries don't have a free water allowance or tax breaks.

There was an analysis of this done on primetime last night comparing a group of OECD countries. We were second from the top on m3 rates alone, but down in the bottom half of the list when allowances were taken into account. It should be up on the RTE player.

Yeah and how long do you think it will be before this "free allowance" and tax credit are scrapped. Not very long is the answer. Then we're paying among the highest rare for water , and the highest rate for electricity in Europe. What a country

Phoebas · 04-11-2014 9:05am

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

Yeah and how long do you think it will be before this "free allowance" and tax credit are scrapped. Not very long is the answer. Then we're paying among the highest rare for water , and the highest rate for electricity in Europe. What a country

I can't see into the future the way you can, but, yeah, as it stands we don't have the highest charges, but if/when they increase them in the future we might have.

alastair · 04-11-2014 9:10am

Kaizersoze81 wrote: »

Yeah and how long do you think it will be before this "free allowance" and tax credit are scrapped. Not very long is the answer. Then we're paying among the highest rare for water , and the highest rate for electricity in Europe. What a country

We're not paying the highest price for electricity in Europe, and you've no evidence that the basic water allowance is ever going to change, let alone be removed. So dealing with the facts, the distributed list of water charges is incorrect. The London price for instance, is only the fresh water charge - it also needs to have the waste charge applied, plus a monthly standing charge, and they don't have any initial allowance as part of their set-up.

Gosub · 04-11-2014 9:46am

Phoebas wrote: »

Most other countries don't have a free water allowance or tax breaks.

There was an analysis of this done on primetime last night comparing a group of OECD countries. We were second from the top on m3 rates alone, but down in the bottom half of the list when allowances were taken into account. It should be up on the RTE player.

This is all grand. Allowances have been put in place to soften the blow of high usage rates. But what happens when these allowances and tax breaks are removed and we're left with the high rates?

I would much rather have no allowance and lower rates. Then it's a harder job for them to raise the rates.

Phoebas · 04-11-2014 9:53am

Gosub wrote: »

This is all grand. Allowances have been put in place to soften the blow of high usage rates. But what happens when these allowances and tax breaks are removed and we're left with the high rates?

I would much rather have no allowance and lower rates. Then it's a harder job for them to raise the rates.

Why is it harder to raise the rates than remove the allowances?

The rates can be changed by the regulator, who provides political cover to the government. Can you imagine how foolhardy a government would need to be to remove the allowances given the public backlash we've seen over the past month?

CarrickMcJoe · 04-11-2014 9:53am

Manach wrote: »

While I'd hold water is already been paid for via income tax and should be continued to be paid for as such in that method, my understanding that only Jesus could make any stand on water?

Don't forget BONO..

munchkin_utd · 04-11-2014 9:54am

Phoebas wrote: »

This is a fallacy.
Our m3 rate is amongst the most expensive, but when you factor in the free allowances and the tax credit etc, we drop right down the list.

also,
other countries have standing charges and meter rental, so the actual water portion of the bill is cheap.

it was said a few months back when folks were clambering to not have a standing charge, that the result would be higher charge per litre of water.

funny and ironic that the political solution now may be a flat charge for everyone!

alastair · 04-11-2014 9:55am

Gosub wrote: »

I would much rather have no allowance and lower rates. Then it's a harder job for them to raise the rates.

Why would the absence of an allowance make it any harder to raise the rates?

Gosub · 04-11-2014 10:01am

Phoebas wrote: »

Why is it harder to raise the rates than remove the allowances?

The rates can be changed by the regulator, who provides political cover to the government. Can you imagine how foolhardy a government would need to be to remove the allowances given the public backlash we've seen over the past month?

Your thinking seems to be very short term. The government thinks longer term with an eye to trying to look good today. Today they wouldn't do away with the allowances, but you can bet it's in their long-term plan. These people aren't politicians by accident. They know how to work the 'ordinary' people. The more we forgive them for this, the more we deserve to be treated like brainless turnips.

Regarding raising the rates. If your electricity provider decided to raise their rates by, say, 20% you might notice and kick up a stink. You might even look to move to another provider. Same with your broadband supplier. You won't have this option with your water supplier.

Water - where do you stand?

Water - where do you stand 277 votes

Comments