Your City Needs You

merlante

Did anyone get the city council flier in the door, trying to garner support for the council waste service and the council itself?

It's a professionally designed advertisement on card mimicking, iirc., one of the famous WWI recruitment ads. Basically, the idea is that the council are losing business to the likes of Mr. Binman, and are getting grief about various charges from the public (i.e. parking, waste, etc., and soon water), so they are trying to remind people what they are getting in return for their money. In other words, park maintenance, various educational stuff, roads, etc., etc. There's a long list.

I think it's interesting because they are trying to engage the civic spirit of the public to support the council rather than complain about the charges and support cheaper waste services, such as Mr. Binman, who don't provide what the council provides (even in waste disposal -- waver scheme. etc.).

Now the question is, do our citizens have any sense of civic responsibility, or will they laugh at the flier and do whatever it takes to pay the least amount of money. I for one am happy to pay whatever charges they feel they need to levy (their budgets are public and there is no excess), because services need to be provided. But I'd say I'm in the minority. If it wasn't council charges it would be centralised taxes anyway. It's unacceptable that, say, the people's park go to ruin or that the roads aren't repaired or that libraries are closed down.

christophicus

The Libraries in my expeariance are top notch down here, much better than any of the 4 or 5 I have been to up in Dublin, they really are a credit to our city/county. It would be a shame to see them go downhill.

Cabaal

Sadly I think the majority will laugh at the flyer
I'd agree with the library comment

Sully

Professionally designed? With that WWI image? Sounds like a mickey mouse job to me. That image is completely overused.

merlante - you would do pretty much anything for Waterford so it comes as no surprise you would happily pay crazy bin charges.

People are more interested in saving money especially in these times imo. There should be other ways the council can afford to invest in these services without lobbing people with high rates which people struggle to afford in general but especially now in these economic times.

old gregg

Well, I'm a sucker for civic pride so am happy to pay what's required to keep the city functioning and developing.

At the same time, I'd like to know that the folks who are going to be spending my reasonably hard earned money will have the same civic pride if you know what I mean. It's a personal belief and not one that I could back up if pressed but I just get the feeling that there are folks on our city council who think that they are royalty to be entertained lavishly (the gob****e who wanted us to pay for him to jet over to the eurovision a few years back springs to mind).

But, if we're all singing off the same civic pride hymn sheet then lets' all pay for the privelage of havign a great city to live in.

*removes hand from heart and faces away from flag*

Heathen

well at the risk of sounding like a dick.... then can blow me!!

i have spent over 1500 euro in the past 12 months on repairs to my car caused by potholes.. i have being paying roadtax for the past 14 year and all it got me was a near death experience after getting a blowout when hitting a pothole, and hundreds every year on repairs... one time i had a brand new paint job done on the front of my car repairing some damage and the lovely new paintjob lasted all of 12 hours when the gob****es covered my whole road with loose chippings.. so every car/truck/bus that passed sent stones everywhere and ripped the paint right off my bonnet!!

nice one lads!! :rolleyes:

scout353

I am very proud of our city (even though I am not from here!) but I do think we work hard and in the given economic climate we all need to watch everything we spend - if there is better value from another supplier, then that is where we go - isn't that the nature of business!

We are bitching about the current government and behoving them to tackle spiralling costs in order to get us out of this mess so why is it wrong for us to do the same at home!!!!

And don't those other companies offering similar services at a lower price also provide local employment?

Cabaal

Heathen wrote: »

well at the risk of sounding like a dick.... then can blow me!!

i have spent over 1500 euro in the past 12 months on repairs to my car caused by potholes..

your car must be awful weak, either that or the potholes you meet must be almost as big as your car :pac:

Heathen

Cabaal wrote: »

your car must be awful weak, either that or the potholes you meet must be almost as big as your car :pac:

2 CV joints replaced and strutts blown... tellin ya man, its scary sh1t when your driving down the road minding yer own business when BOOM your tyre goes from under you and your forced into oncoming traffic.. i hope you never have to experience it!!

meldrew

I was of the opinion until recently that it was a matter of civic duty to pay the council and not private collectors but unfortunately their service is no longer up to scratch , plus the fact that the smaller number of people paying are subsidsising the waiver scheme to an even greater extent now .
I would prefer if the waiver scheme was for the OAPs only and councillors were'nt seen to be giving out waivers like favours which everybody knows is going on , maybe if this were to happen I'd consider going back to them because if you can afford to fill a bin you can afford to have it emptied .
In relation to the flyer I'd say it cost a few bob and where will the vast majority of them end up , in the green bin

merlante

Heathen wrote: »

2 CV joints replaced and strutts blown... tellin ya man, its scary sh1t when your driving down the road minding yer own business when BOOM your tyre goes from under you and your forced into oncoming traffic.. i hope you never have to experience it!!

Could I ask what road(s) is/are the culprit?

merlante

Sully wrote: »

Professionally designed? With that WWI image? Sounds like a mickey mouse job to me. That image is completely overused.

merlante - you would do pretty much anything for Waterford so it comes as no surprise you would happily pay crazy bin charges.

People are more interested in saving money especially in these times imo. There should be other ways the council can afford to invest in these services without lobbing people with high rates which people struggle to afford in general but especially now in these economic times.

In fairness, I wouldn't be willing to do *anything* for Waterford, and I certainly wouldn't be willing to throw away my hard earned money for no reason. But it seems to me that the council provides services that we'd all miss if they were gone.

The last number of city council budgets have been extremely tight, and the likes of the waste collection waver scheme, a scheme that is a credit to Waterford city (perhaps alone in Ireland at this stage), have pushed them close to the wire. At the end of the day, if the budget doesn't balance, the city manager (an unelected civil servant) has the power (thanks Martin Cullen) to enforce his own budget in order to balance the books. The council have limit sources of funding available to it. The government tends to starve the councils of cash, so they have to go to us, via waste, parking, car tax, water, etc.

Afaik, it's a matter of public record where this money is spent, so those who doubt the good intentions of councillors can go and take a look at what they are spending the money and see if you would have done anything differently.

gscully

Personally speaking, the change to Mr Binman made sense to me. With a young toddler and many dirty nappies, and now another on the way, it was getting difficult to keep the black bin for three weeks without it bursting at the seams. So, the economics of paying a flat fee (knowing I'd be getting the use out of it) and the fact that I'd never have an overflowing bin swung it for me!

merlante

scout353 wrote: »

I am very proud of our city (even though I am not from here!) but I do think we work hard and in the given economic climate we all need to watch everything we spend - if there is better value from another supplier, then that is where we go.

The point the council is trying to make is that although other suppliers offer cheaper services, their service is not as good (no waiver scheme, they may not go to some houses that are inconvenient), and the money you give to the council goes on other things too, not just waste, but also a list of things, including libraries, etc. In my opinion, private competition shouldn't be allowed, because they only have to provide a fraction of what the council have to provide. They're a private company, they care about making money not taking the rubbish out of the city. If the council get out of the business, as many councils have done, a lot of people will notice the difference!

scout353 wrote: »

... isn't that the nature of business!

Good for business does not always equal good for people. The waiver scheme is bad for business, so is putting electricity and telecoms infrastructure into rural areas, so are a lot of things that we consider core things that councils and governments should be about.

merlante

gscully wrote: »

Personally speaking, the change to Mr Binman made sense to me. With a young toddler and many dirty nappies, and now another on the way, it was getting difficult to keep the black bin for three weeks without it bursting at the seams. So, the economics of paying a flat fee (knowing I'd be getting the use out of it) and the fact that I'd never have an overflowing bin swung it for me!

Everyone is entitled to exercising free choice, but are you cognisant of the fact that something is lost by you choosing the non-council service?

I mean if everyone with a young toddler goes to Mr.Binman, maybe the next time you take your toddler to the park or to the library, those places will be in a shambles. Maybe your car will be wrecked in a pothole on the way. I'm not trying to be smart, I'm just saying that sometimes when we experience a council service and think that it's poor, we often forget that the choices that we make collectively -- like moving to a private waste collector -- lead to a change in the quality of those services. I mean, the extra cash you were giving the council wasn't being blown on the dogs.

Heathen

merlante wrote: »

Could I ask what road(s) is/are the culprit?

sure thing man, the road in question was barrack street.. scared the crap out of me.. i was driving at a normal pace (some people Hammer up that road) so luckilly i was able to get the car under control in a timely manner to avoid causing a disaster.. and pulled in then down by stephen st to change the wheel

(was raining too.. how come these things never happen on a lovely sunny day? haha)

TheFlatulator

Here's my 2 cents on waterford city council, anyone remember the tramore roundabout and the way the council wasted money digging it up and putting down again and they did this 3 times to maintain their budget, when there was so many other different things that could have been repaired or updated with the money. Or remember them laying down roadworks and tearing them up a week later.

Supporting the current council spending is like pouring water into a leaky bucket you are basically loosing it all. Until someone either replaces the bucket or changes the structure its still going to leak money.

A primary example is we all had to pay €2.50 for the brown bin and the waste was then turned into compost and sold for a profit. Thus against the principle of a civic structure. Its only now free because they have had competition.

Before anyoine jumps on the bandwagon and starts bashing, I pay the council their rates, I haven't went to Mr. Binman thus I "support" the council but I will vote for who will do it right. So I think the fact is this if they want support then they need to sack all the lazy good for nothing wasters and hire people that will actually do some good for the city, prioritise the necessary repairs and improve there work methodologies. Thus they should start performing like the private sector.

Bards

If Mr Binman can empty the Black and Green Bin every week and the Brown bin every second week then I don;t see why the council can't offer a simmilar service at a competitive price.

I HAD (2 small infants & 2 adults) to move to Mr Binman due to the council providing a vastly inferior service for more money than Mr Binman.

This lark of having both a fixed charge and a per lift charge really is off putting. One or the other but not both

Myggel

merlante wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to exercising free choice, but are you cognisant of the fact that something is lost by you choosing the non-council service?

I mean if everyone with a young toddler goes to Mr.Binman, maybe the next time you take your toddler to the park or to the library, those places will be in a shambles. Maybe your car will be wrecked in a pothole on the way. I'm not trying to be smart, I'm just saying that sometimes when we experience a council service and think that it's poor, we often forget that the choices that we make collectively -- like moving to a private waste collector -- lead to a change in the quality of those services. I mean, the extra cash you were giving the council wasn't being blown on the dogs.

Surely one pays for the bin service as a stand alone service. This money isn't paying for potholes, libraries and parks, to imply it does is incorrect - this is paid for through taxation isn't it?

For the council in the first place to suggest that paying less for a better service is uncivic is really trawling the bottom of the barrell isn't it? The council had decades to streamline their service within a monopoly which they failed to do, if a company can come in an undercut them on price while costing less I'd question what the powers that be were doing all along. Is this a public versus private sector case study here?

Waterford City Budget can be found here:

http://www.waterfordcity.ie/documents/reports.htm

sunnysoutheast

Myggel wrote: »

Surely one pays for the bin service as a stand alone service. This money isn't paying for potholes, libraries and parks, to imply it does is incorrect - this is paid for through taxation isn't it?

For the council in the first place to suggest that paying less for a better service is uncivic is really trawling the bottom of the barrell isn't it? The council had decades to streamline their service within a monopoly which they failed to do, if a company can come in an undercut them on price while costing less I'd question what the powers that be were doing all along. Is this a public versus private sector case study here?

Waterford City Budget can be found here:

http://www.waterfordcity.ie/documents/reports.htm

The point is that Mr. Binman or J.Bloggs can pick and choose who they offer a service to, with no barriers to entry other than a valid waste licence, which is not an option available to the Council. It stands to reason that it's easier to pick up from nice new housing estates rather than congested inner-City areas, which the Council has to pick up from, and of course most of the waivers will be in these areas too.

If the market is deregulated that's fine, but it should be completely deregulated rather than cherry-picked, which is the current situation. If the Council was released from its effective universal service obligation it could probably complete on price. The burden of paying for any social aspects should fall equally on all operators who choose to enter a particular market rather than the incumbent as at present.

SSE

merlante

sunnysoutheast wrote: »

The point is that Mr. Binman or J.Bloggs can pick and choose who they offer a service to, with no barriers to entry other than a valid waste licence, which is not an option available to the Council. It stands to reason that it's easier to pick up from nice new housing estates rather than congested inner-City areas, which the Council has to pick up from, and of course most of the waivers will be in these areas too.

If the market is deregulated that's fine, but it should be completely deregulated rather than cherry-picked, which is the current situation. If the Council was released from its effective universal service obligation it could probably complete on price. The burden of paying for any social aspects should fall equally on all operators who choose to enter a particular market rather than the incumbent as at present.

SSE

I'd agree with that, and add that it seems that the big charges and the parking charges aren't ring fenced into waste and roads, and so on. The councils aren't allowed to raise general rates, so any shortfall from the government has to be raised from the charges they levy. It more or less implies this on the flier they sent around.

So it seems that waste charges do partially cover parks and libraries.

gscully

merlante wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to exercising free choice, but are you cognisant of the fact that something is lost by you choosing the non-council service?

I mean if everyone with a young toddler goes to Mr.Binman, maybe the next time you take your toddler to the park or to the library, those places will be in a shambles. Maybe your car will be wrecked in a pothole on the way. I'm not trying to be smart, I'm just saying that sometimes when we experience a council service and think that it's poor, we often forget that the choices that we make collectively -- like moving to a private waste collector -- lead to a change in the quality of those services. I mean, the extra cash you were giving the council wasn't being blown on the dogs.

I understand where you're coming from, but my choice was made regarding bin collection alone. It made sense to me and I'm glad I did it. I am now also in a position where if I'm doing a minor spring clean, anything I'm throwing out can go in the black bin as it's collected weekly. If I was with the corporation, I could never do that. A couple of years back, I went out and gave the binmen a tenner to take extra stuff for me! Mr Binman is convenient...for me!

Regarding the People's Park, and this could start a whole other debate, I have been down there with my toddler. There is only one playground apparatus she can safely use given her size, and that's the swing. However, anytime I have been there, the swings are being hogged by foreign women with their children. No point asking them to move...they won't speak English!

Mr Flatulator also raises a good point about the roads. One particular bad stretch is along South Parade. When my car was new, it would rattle driving along there. Last year, they closed off that section for roadworks. I thought...'finally!'. Typically, all they did was add some more patchwork tarmac, instead of resurfacing the whole road. Yet, in Lismore Park, they dug up entire paths and relaid them with tarmac! Why??? Were the students feet hurting?? Good use of the budget there City!

Myggel

sunnysoutheast wrote: »

The point is that Mr. Binman or J.Bloggs can pick and choose who they offer a service to, with no barriers to entry other than a valid waste licence, which is not an option available to the Council. It stands to reason that it's easier to pick up from nice new housing estates rather than congested inner-City areas, which the Council has to pick up from, and of course most of the waivers will be in these areas too.

If the market is deregulated that's fine, but it should be completely deregulated rather than cherry-picked, which is the current situation. If the Council was released from its effective universal service obligation it could probably complete on price. The burden of paying for any social aspects should fall equally on all operators who choose to enter a particular market rather than the incumbent as at present.

SSE

Do you have actual examples of any private operator turning away business from these 'congested inner-City areas'. (congested inner-City in Waterford?).

It is outrageous to suggest that a person who uses the most basic right they have, the right to choose, is doing a disservice to their community by choosing a superior service which costs less.

I will pick the best service regardless of who provides it and the fact that the city council sends out those ridiculous leaflets further reinforces my opinion that they haven't a clue.

They had decades to build up an efficient service and they have failed to do so. If they can't compete on price, that is their failing. I point blankly refuse to subsidise their failings.

My taxes will continue to fund roads, parks, hospitals, schools, garda stations....

Cabaal

gscully wrote: »

I Yet, in Lismore Park, they dug up entire paths and relaid them with tarmac! Why??? Were the students feet hurting?? Good use of the budget there City!

Its worth noting alot of those paths are now cracked to hell with parts falling off them,

merlante

Myggel wrote: »

Do you have actual examples of any private operator turning away business from these 'congested inner-City areas'. (congested inner-City in Waterford?).

I've heard of this happening in rural areas over the years. Waterford, being a city, should be easier for them, but in principle the same thing could happen in Waterford.

Myggel wrote: »

They had decades to build up an efficient service and they have failed to do so. If they can't compete on price, that is their failing. I point blankly refuse to subsidise their failings.

My taxes will continue to fund roads, parks, hospitals, schools, garda stations....

It could be extremely efficient for all we know, the charges go into a general fund that funds everything. Also, they are providing a subsidised waste collection for those who can't afford to do so. Mr Binman will never do this.

This is exactly like everyone fleeing VHI for Bupa/whoever, because they don't want to pay to help old and sick people. Young people, who aren't sick, can go with a private crowd and get cheaper insurance. But then the older people pay more. This is not just about individual choice, this is about moving from a more social situation to a more capitalist situation.

In my opinion, opening the waste market up to competition was a cynical attempt to weaken councils further and disrupt their ability to provide the likes of the waiver scheme. Things are just going to get that bit rougher for those worse off, because the scheme will get more and more untenable the more people who switch to the likes of Mr. Binman.

It's not just your income tax that funds those things.

sunnysoutheast

Myggel wrote: »

Do you have actual examples of any private operator turning away business from these 'congested inner-City areas'. (congested inner-City in Waterford?).

It is outrageous to suggest that a person who uses the most basic right they have, the right to choose, is doing a disservice to their community by choosing a superior service which costs less.

I will pick the best service regardless of who provides it and the fact that the city council sends out those ridiculous leaflets further reinforces my opinion that they haven't a clue.

They had decades to build up an efficient service and they have failed to do so. If they can't compete on price, that is their failing. I point blankly refuse to subsidise their failings.

No-one is removing your right to choose, I'm merely pointing out that the current situation is not a fair market. One operator - the Council - is forced to meet expensive obligations which other operators are not forced to do and so the market is currently skewed in favour of private operators. Nothing at all against them, they are operating perfectly legally and, as in the case of Mr. Binman's "split" lorries, innovatively.

It could be that, in future, the Council will stop offering refuse collection and will tender the work out to one or more private operators. This will likely happen at the point when the service stops being a revenue source and turns in to a sink. Then you'll see who will be able to compete on price, I'd also expect the smaller operators to exit the market as a contract of that size would interest the larger players.

Yet it could also be that, in the future, given the potential for energy from waste your "rubbish" may be seen as an asset. At some point, of course, landfilling will have to stop.

Those interested in further research may be interested in bus regulation in the UK. There the market was opened up without any checks or balances, the net effect was the cherry-picking of profitable routes by private operators. The revenues from these routes used to subsidise the less-profitable routes, this cross-funding disappeared reducing services everywhere.

SSE

baronflyguy

I got my leaflet the other day. Here is my 2 cents.

I must say it is cringe reading especially the simple quiz. The questions are very tacky and you can tell a few people spent ages struggling to come up with something for it. What a waste of money.
Using the word 'probably' in the answers comes across as desperate.

A lot of people along my road have changed over to Mr Binman purely because it is more cost effective.

If Waterford City Council want to keep customers they need to reduce the cost of the tickets. The brown is now free, whipidy do - i barely use that.
I remember the good oul days when the green bin tag used to cost 1.50 euro. Now its 4 euro.

If Waterford City Council cant keep the cost of the wheelin service down then they need to let it go and cut their loss. Concentrate on other services they are good at.

Mary Harney always told us to shop around, well guess what people are shopping around and getting better value for money!!!!

merlante

baronflyguy wrote: »

I got my leaflet the other day. Here is my 2 cents.

I must say it is cringe reading especially the simple quiz. The questions are very tacky and you can tell a few people spent ages struggling to come up with something for it. What a waste of money.
Using the word 'probably' in the answers comes across as desperate.

A lot of people along my road have changed over to Mr Binman purely because it is more cost effective.

If Waterford City Council want to keep customers they need to reduce the cost of the tickets. The brown is now free, whipidy do - i barely use that.
I remember the good oul days when the green bin tag used to cost 1.50 euro. Now its 4 euro.

If Waterford City Council cant keep the cost of the wheelin service down then they need to let it go and cut their loss. Concentrate on other services they are good at.

Mary Harney always told us to shop around, well guess what people are shopping around and getting better value for money!!!!

They can't afford to reduce cost of their bin collection (see link to their budget earlier in the thread) and if they get out of bin collection then the poor and the old won't get their collection subsidised anymore.

Basically, we pay more so that old and poor people get their service for less/free (more or less). If everything goes to Mr. Binman to save themselves money, the old and the poor suffer. Laissez-faire capitalism often has a social cost, and this is one such case.

Again, I'm not telling anyone how to spend their money, but pretending that switching to Mr. Binman doesn't affect others negatively is a bit like the simpsons gag, "shoplifting is a victimless crime, like punching someone in the dark".

Paddy@CIRL

It doesn't say too much when the Mayor doesn't use his own City Council's bin collection service ...

wmpdd3

really, where does he live?

AdMMM

Paddy@CIRL wrote: »

It doesn't say too much when the Mayor doesn't use his own City Council's bin collection service ...

Can you confirm this? I can't imagine himself leaving himself open to that.

merlante

Paddy@CIRL wrote: »

It doesn't say too much when the Mayor doesn't use his own City Council's bin collection service ...

Pretty damning if that's true.

south

he live's in grange heights

chrism2007

be very funny now to get a picture of the mayor wheeling out a mr biman bin :pac:

merlante

chrism2007 wrote: »

be very funny now to get a picture of the mayor wheeling out a mr biman bin :pac:

I'll tell you something, it would be priceless to get pictures of Mr. Binman bins outside any of the councillor's houses, after sending out a leaflet like that. It's not that the leaflet is rubbish, but we'd have a few hypocrits caught rotten.

dannydiamond

Paddy@CIRL wrote: »

It doesn't say too much when the Mayor doesn't use his own City Council's bin collection service ...

Could one of our 'public servants' be so funkin retarded?

AdMMM

merlante wrote: »

Pretty damning if that's true.

Well, he did lose €30,000's worth of jewelery, so God only knows what other retarded crap he's capable of.

Bards

AdMMM wrote: »

Well, he did lose €30,000's worth of jewelery, so God only knows what other retarded crap he's capable of.

where,when any link?

AdMMM

He mislaid the silver mayoral chains and they haven't been returned by anyone so they suspect someone has melted them down.

I think I was told it made the papers a few weeks back, if not then it hasn't been made public yet.

Boskowski

Don't agree with this. I will go with whoever provides the best service for the best price. If the state needs everyone to participate in order to make some services viable why allow private competition then?
I think by issuing that flyer the council simply advertises it's service - like everyone else does in competition - and the theme of it's ad is 'local patriotism', something like 'Irish owned'. Legit but a bit cheap at the same time. Better to advertise superior service than to appeal to charitable minds.

merlante

realcam wrote: »

Don't agree with this. I will go with whoever provides the best service for the best price. If the state needs everyone to participate in order to make some services viable why allow private competition then?
I think by issuing that flyer the council simply advertises it's service - like everyone else does in competition - and the theme of it's ad is 'local patriotism', something like 'Irish owned'. Legit but a bit cheap at the same time. Better to advertise superior service than to appeal to charitable minds.

I think the issue is that the state is happy with private competition but the council, since it provides a waiver scheme for one, is being killed by the competition. So you have the council doing something social, maintained by the socialist politicians (SF,WP,Lab, etc.) that we elect in Waterford, being undermined by the state, which wants the councils doing as little as possible so it doesn't have to give them as much funding.