Waterford Politics MEGATHREAD

Max Powers

7upfree wrote: »

Would agree with some of your sentiments Max, but, again, the reality is that no matter how you dress this up, this is not about water OR improving infrastructure. It is about the servicing of that gambling debt you mention above. We can dance around it all night, but this is the bottom line.

to be fair 7upfree, im not dressing this up at all, im not dancing around the issue about servicing our debt/deficits. Im saying unless we get a massive debt right off (highly unlikely) we either need, more taxes, greater productivity or less spending. You have been commenting and dancing around the issues continuously such as 'we already pay for water' complaining about bertie, bankers and other not being in jail etc etc all the while intimating that there is a better easier way.....there isnt, we need more money in taxes such as LPT, USC etc etc, less spending or greater productivity. I reckon the majority can see that and hopefully they will see the the AAA, SF, Murphy, Coppinger, Socialist party etc who trot out the we will do away with Water tax, USC etc etc just cant be taken seriously, they are highly irresponisble in saying they can do that by wealth taxes and a couple of other measures and highly dangerous in the way they go about their business.

Obvioulsy I would love to see bertie and all those responsible for draggin Ireland into this mess locked up but even if the laws existed to do that, it still wouldnt solve our problems. Its a nice lightning rod some TDs and parties use to get blinkered people irrate.

Suryavarman

7upfree wrote: »

Are you overlooking the fact that we are already paying for water? Twice?

How exactly are we already paying for it twice?

Absolute baloney. How does it help close the "budget deficit"? This quango has cost an obscene amount of money at a time when the country cannot provide an adequate heath service. It is at the behest of the Troika and its sole purpose is not to improve infrastructure, but to tax overburdened citizens so that the interest on a gambling debt can be paid. This is reality.

It closes the budget deficit because water charges are a means of raising revenue. One would have thought that was pretty self explanatory.

The country can't provide an adequate health service without raising the revenue to fund it.

Again more baloney. It has been proven several times over. If you have to have this explained to you then you shouldn't even be discussing the topic.

There's a lot going on in this debate. It's easy to miss things from time to time. How exactly is it already being paid for?

Lol! "A good job"? Taxing its citizens to death?

Saying they ARE doing a good job is, to put it mildly, a delusion.

If Irish citizens are being taxed to death then half of Europe must already be dead. Personally I think our top marginal tax rates are too high but it's a bit extreme to say we're being taxed to death. We have some of the lowest tax receipts as a %of GDP in Europe.

How exactly is the Government doing a bad job? The economy is among the fastest growing in Europe, unemployment is falling and Government finances are under control. What is it exactly that they are doing so wrong?

robtri

Suryavarman wrote: »

How exactly are we already paying for it twice?



It closes the budget deficit because water charges are a means of raising revenue. One would have thought that was pretty self explanatory.

The country can't provide an adequate health service without raising the revenue to fund it.



There's a lot going on in this debate. It's easy to miss things from time to time. How exactly is it already being paid for?



If Irish citizens are being taxed to death then half of Europe must already be dead. Personally I think our top marginal tax rates are too high but it's a bit extreme to say we're being taxed to death. We have some of the lowest tax receipts as a %of GDP in Europe.

How exactly is the Government doing a bad job? The economy is among the fastest growing in Europe, unemployment is falling and Government finances are under control. What is it exactly that they are doing so wrong?

posted here a few times..

1997 local government and financing act clearly defines that money from certain taxes, namely motor tax and excise are to be used to provide a water service and to meet future needs...
these taxes at the time where increased to cover this... so as you can see we are already paying for it

robtri

Suryavarman wrote: »

How exactly is the Government doing a bad job? The economy is among the fastest growing in Europe, unemployment is falling and Government finances are under control. What is it exactly that they are doing so wrong?

how about the increase in suicides since FG took over

How about our failing HSE services

how about the massive emigration

how about the taxes.. which as u say % of GDP is low... so what, what really matters is the how much or little money the average man has in his pocket.. which is **** all, hence the uproar at the straw that breaks the camel back the water tax

How about that no one has been held responsible for bringing this country to its knees

how about the elections promises they made and have completely ignored.

making the books look good at these costs is not acceptable.

Cabaal

robtri wrote: »

posted here a few times..

1997 local government and financing act clearly defines that money from certain taxes, namely motor tax and excise are to be used to provide a water service and to meet future needs...
these taxes at the time where increased to cover this... so as you can see we are already paying for it

But the tax take didn't cut it. the water services have been underfunded for years and years.

Just curious,
Considering bin services used to be provided by councils, are we not all paying for bins twice by the same sort of logic?

First time is due to the tax we pay which used to go towards bin services which council decided to stop...but we didn't get tax breaks for. Second time for the bin services we now have to pay for.

Cabaal

robtri wrote: »

how about the increase in suicides since FG took over

Do you know something we don't know?
Can you specifically link the rise in suicides to FG?
If so you might be up for some sort of award for amazing research.

Suicides have many many contributing factors, you could for example blame the increase in at home drinking and below cost selling of drink. Or the increase in drink sponsorship at sporting events (which apparently the drink company's say does not increase the amount people drink :rolleyes: ).

How about our failing HSE services

So during previous governments it worked fine? :eek:

The complaints people have about the HSE are the same complaints they had when the were regional health boards. To claim its down to FG ignores numerous governments decisions before them

how about the elections promises they made and have completely ignored.

Promising like saying they would introduce water charges?

After all it was in their manifesto, I read it at the time...anyone that blindly voted for FG without reading what they stood for was an idiot if they later complained about FG doing exactly what they said they would when it came to Water Charges.

Everyone knows that a party will make promises to get into power that they later will simply not fulfill, this is not unique to Ireland by any stretch of the imagination and if you think it is then bigger fool you.

Some proposals will go ahead, others will not...often for a variety of reasons ranging from lobbying by groups against such changes (both inside government and outside) or due to lack of funds for example.

robtri

Cabaal wrote: »

But the tax take didn't cut it. the water services have been underfunded for years and years.

Just curious,
Considering bin services used to be provided by councils, are we not all paying for bins twice by the same sort of logic?

First time is due to the tax we pay which used to go towards bin services which council decided to stop...but we didn't get tax breaks for. Second time for the bin services we now have to pay for.

tax didnt cut it or service was so poorly managed? did all the money due go towards the water services?


I see where you are coming for on the bins...
Bins where never enshrined in law as being a service provided by increasing taxes which water was...

Cabaal

robtri wrote: »

tax didnt cut it or service was so poorly managed? did all the money due go towards the water services? .

thats something you'll have to ask your local council,

The problem with our water charges stems back to an election stunt which scrapped water rates from residential property's.

Now we have another election stunt promising the exact same thing from SF....what is funny is they are more then happy for commercial property's to continue to pay for water.

Its one thing party's are good at doing and that is not actually dealing with an issue and instead just choosing to do the popular thing rather then something that is more workable long term and is scalable in relation to costs for maintaining the network.

In relation to people being unhappy about Irish Water setup costs and tax payer money being used. It seems some people forget that Irish tax payer money was also used to setup ESB, Bord Gais, CIE and any number of services and utilities. The annoying thing about setting up anything is it costs money to do so, reality sucks that way.

Has the setup of IW been handled the best? Nope, but the underlying idea of getting rid of separate councils and having one utility company makes sense. As does metering.

If we didn't have metering for electric or gas then we'd have huge waste of these services, the fact we have no metering for water means we have wastage of this service which costs money to clean and pipe to property's. (treatment plants, generators and pipes etc are not free)

fuzzy dunlop

Cabaal wrote: »

thats something you'll have to ask your local council,

The problem with our water charges stems back to an election stunt which scrapped water rates from residential property's.

Now we have another election stunt promising the exact same thing from SF....what is funny is they are more then happy for commercial property's to continue to pay for water.

Its one thing party's are good at doing and that is not actually dealing with an issue and instead just choosing to do the popular thing rather then something that is more workable long term and is scalable in relation to costs for maintaining the network.

In relation to people being unhappy about Irish Water setup costs and tax payer money being used. It seems some people forget that Irish tax payer money was also used to setup ESB, Bord Gais, CIE and any number of services and utilities. The annoying thing about setting up anything is it costs money to do so, reality sucks that way.

Has the setup of IW been handled the best? Nope, but the underlying idea of getting rid of separate councils and having one utility company makes sense. As does metering.

If we didn't have metering for electric or gas then we'd have huge waste of these services, the fact we have no metering for water means we have wastage of this service which costs money to clean and pipe to property's. (treatment plants, generators and pipes etc are not free)

Your obfuscating the issues of why IW is such a f*ck up and why ordinary people of a conservative nature make up the majority of resistance to this debacle. People will accept things if they are reasonable, transparent and fair. This is none of these things. There is absolutely no redeeming feature in the setup of Irish Water.From the awarding of contracts to Site-serve to Phil Hogans parochialism in locating regional centres. Its called GRAFT!

http://www.kilkennypeople.ie/news/kilkenny-news/irish-water-centre-to-be-based-in-kilkenny-1-5318822

So to try and paint it as some unreasonable attitude by people is totally disingenuous. This is not the same as the ESB and Bord Gais. Water is fundamental to life so it differs in that regard. It has to be paid for sure but there is an agreed fundamental principle across the political spectrum that it should not be made a commodity of. Which is what the government is doing. And the same agents involved in this are the same agents that were involved in the ESAT Digifone fiasco! Tell us would you be so sanguine if it was FF or SF? Also tell us when the equivalent waste of money and incompetence was demonstrated in the setting up of the ESB and Bord Gais?

You should actually read what you post. Its Textbook peasant mentality, "Ah sure their all the same so their is no point in voting for the other fella!" and that's not meant to be a barbed comment.

Suryavarman

robtri wrote: »

posted here a few times..

1997 local government and financing act clearly defines that money from certain taxes, namely motor tax and excise are to be used to provide a water service and to meet future needs...
these taxes at the time where increased to cover this... so as you can see we are already paying for it

Just had a quick look through that act. I found a part where it says that local authorities can't charge for domestic water. I don't see where it says that water must be funded by motor tax.

Motor tax also doesn't fund the whole cost of our water supply. So we aren't paying for water. We're half paying for it. Water charges mean that we are now paying for it.

robtri wrote: »

how about the increase in suicides since FG took over

How about our failing HSE services

how about the massive emigration

how about the taxes.. which as u say % of GDP is low... so what, what really matters is the how much or little money the average man has in his pocket.. which is **** all, hence the uproar at the straw that breaks the camel back the water tax

How about that no one has been held responsible for bringing this country to its knees

how about the elections promises they made and have completely ignored.

making the books look good at these costs is not acceptable.

Suicides are occurring at the same rate as they were in 2009.

Our healthcare system has always been poor. At the moment we have more important things to be focusing on than the healthcare system such as getting the deficit under control so we can still have a Government supplied healthcare system.

You admit that taxes as a % of GDP are low relative to other countries. Then you go on to tell us how over taxed we are. You appear to be suffering from cognitive dissonance.

I'd also like to point out that a water tax hasn't been introduced. A water charge has been introduced. They are different things.

Who would you like to be put in jail and why?

What election promises have been ignored?

robtri

Cabaal wrote: »

Do you know something we don't know?
Can you specifically link the rise in suicides to FG?
If so you might be up for some sort of award for amazing research.

Suicides have many many contributing factors, you could for example blame the increase in at home drinking and below cost selling of drink. Or the increase in drink sponsorship at sporting events (which apparently the drink company's say does not increase the amount people drink :rolleyes: ).



So during previous governments it worked fine? :eek:

The complaints people have about the HSE are the same complaints they had when the were regional health boards. To claim its down to FG ignores numerous governments decisions before them




Promising like saying they would introduce water charges?

After all it was in their manifesto, I read it at the time...anyone that blindly voted for FG without reading what they stood for was an idiot if they later complained about FG doing exactly what they said they would when it came to Water Charges.

Everyone knows that a party will make promises to get into power that they later will simply not fulfill, this is not unique to Ireland by any stretch of the imagination and if you think it is then bigger fool you.

Some proposals will go ahead, others will not...often for a variety of reasons ranging from lobbying by groups against such changes (both inside government and outside) or due to lack of funds for example.

I never said they pushed anyone off the bridge... but an oireachtas report into suicide is very damning that the government has failed to act,... so don't need an amazing research :rolleyes:...
your example of below cost alcohol selling,again government failed to legislate to prevent this.
the government has successively failed to act over the last few years.

Just because a previous government didnt do a good job is no excuse for this government to make a balls of it. thats the laziest argument ever..

yes we all understand that not all policies will go ahead.. but to blatantly lie and completely ignore some of the main pints they where voted in on is wrong... maybe you are ok with that, but I am not

robtri

Cabaal wrote: »

thats something you'll have to ask your local council,

The problem with our water charges stems back to an election stunt which scrapped water rates from residential property's.

Now we have another election stunt promising the exact same thing from SF....what is funny is they are more then happy for commercial property's to continue to pay for water.

Its one thing party's are good at doing and that is not actually dealing with an issue and instead just choosing to do the popular thing rather then something that is more workable long term and is scalable in relation to costs for maintaining the network.

In relation to people being unhappy about Irish Water setup costs and tax payer money being used. It seems some people forget that Irish tax payer money was also used to setup ESB, Bord Gais, CIE and any number of services and utilities. The annoying thing about setting up anything is it costs money to do so, reality sucks that way.

Has the setup of IW been handled the best? Nope, but the underlying idea of getting rid of separate councils and having one utility company makes sense. As does metering.

If we didn't have metering for electric or gas then we'd have huge waste of these services, the fact we have no metering for water means we have wastage of this service which costs money to clean and pipe to property's. (treatment plants, generators and pipes etc are not free)

I do not disagree with what you are saying here, I am in favour of a body like IW... makes so much more sense than numerous councils...
its the whole package on how it has been set up and the way it is taxed i disagree with...

Cabaal

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

its Textbook peasant mentality, "Ah sure their all the same so their is no point in voting for the other fella!" and that's not meant to be a barbed comment.

Thats not what I'm saying at all,
What I'm saying is people should first of all actually read about who they are voting for and not just go with a party or person because they made some populist opposition claim.

They are not all the same, there are certainly similarity's between all partys. But certainly not the same.

Water is fundamental to life so it differs in that regard. It has to be paid for sure but there is an agreed fundamental principle across the political spectrum that it should not be made a commodity of.

But is it not paid for in numerous European country's the same way as Irish Water model is proposing?

People are often big on picking very progressive country's like Finland (for example) who have good childcare etc and using them as something Ireland should aim to be (they charge for water). You know what, I spoke to a person from Finland in December, he honestly could not understand Irish people being against paying for what water they use and being against water meters.

robtri

Suryavarman wrote: »

Just had a quick look through that act. I found a part where it says that local authorities can't charge for domestic water. I don't see where it says that water must be funded by motor tax.

Motor tax also doesn't fund the whole cost of our water supply. So we aren't paying for water. We're half paying for it. Water charges mean that we are now paying for it.



Suicides are occurring at the same rate as they were in 2009.

Our healthcare system has always been poor. At the moment we have more important things to be focusing on than the healthcare system such as getting the deficit under control so we can still have a Government supplied healthcare system.

You admit that taxes as a % of GDP are low relative to other countries. Then you go on to tell us how over taxed we are. You appear to be suffering from cognitive dissonance.

I'd also like to point out that a water tax hasn't been introduced. A water charge has been introduced. They are different things.

Who would you like to be put in jail and why?

What election promises have been ignored?

"Suicide rates in Ireland saw significant changes over
the past decade, and the official CSO figures indicate
that there were 554 deaths by suicide in 2011. This is
the highest figure since 2001 and marks a 12% increase
on 2010. However, provisional data from 2012 and
2013 suggest a levelling-out of this rise,"

yep nothing to see here... all good.

maybe some people would rather see the people of the country been taken care than servicing a debt they where responsible for.... but sure as long as the bond holders are kept happy doesnt matter that people are on trollies.
again using its just a little bit worse than before is no excuse... lazy argument

charge / tax ... lol

maybe you need to figure out the difference between % of GDP and takehome pay....

7upfree

Max Powers wrote: »

to be fair 7upfree, im not dressing this up at all, im not dancing around the issue about servicing our debt/deficits. Im saying unless we get a massive debt right off (highly unlikely) we either need, more taxes, greater productivity or less spending. You have been commenting and dancing around the issues continuously such as 'we already pay for water' complaining about bertie, bankers and other not being in jail etc etc all the while intimating that there is a better easier way.....there isnt, we need more money in taxes such as LPT, USC etc etc, less spending or greater productivity. I reckon the majority can see that and hopefully they will see the the AAA, SF, Murphy, Coppinger, Socialist party etc who trot out the we will do away with Water tax, USC etc etc just cant be taken seriously, they are highly irresponisble in saying they can do that by wealth taxes and a couple of other measures and highly dangerous in the way they go about their business.

Obvioulsy I would love to see bertie and all those responsible for draggin Ireland into this mess locked up but even if the laws existed to do that, it still wouldnt solve our problems. Its a nice lightning rod some TDs and parties use to get blinkered people irrate.

Here's what's needed:

1. Reduce SW.

2. Reduce PS pay and numbers.

3. Streamline HSE.

Until that's done why should the rest of us pay for all of the above by "extra taxes".

7upfree

Suryavarman wrote: »

How exactly are we already paying for it twice?



It closes the budget deficit because water charges are a means of raising revenue. One would have thought that was pretty self explanatory.

The country can't provide an adequate health service without raising the revenue to fund it.



There's a lot going on in this debate. It's easy to miss things from time to time. How exactly is it already being paid for?



If Irish citizens are being taxed to death then half of Europe must already be dead. Personally I think our top marginal tax rates are too high but it's a bit extreme to say we're being taxed to death. We have some of the lowest tax receipts as a %of GDP in Europe.

How exactly is the Government doing a bad job? The economy is among the fastest growing in Europe, unemployment is falling and Government finances are under control. What is it exactly that they are doing so wrong?

Still laughing at those replies.

The rules of capitalism.

1. Don't apply to bankers and "developers"

2. Were changed for banks.

3. And still being applied to ordinary citizens as if nothing changed.

Come back when you develop a fair and equitable system.

Not this bastardised one.

7upfree

robtri wrote: »

tax didnt cut it or service was so poorly managed? did all the money due go towards the water services?


I see where you are coming for on the bins...
Bins where never enshrined in law as being a service provided by increasing taxes which water was...

Got it in one Robtri.

But hey - don't let facts like that get in the way of a blinkered capitalist rant.:)

7upfree

Suryavarman wrote: »

Just had a quick look through that act. I found a part where it says that local authorities can't charge for domestic water. I don't see where it says that water must be funded by motor tax.

Motor tax also doesn't fund the whole cost of our water supply. So we aren't paying for water. We're half paying for it. Water charges mean that we are now paying for it.



Suicides are occurring at the same rate as they were in 2009.

Our healthcare system has always been poor. At the moment we have more important things to be focusing on than the healthcare system such as getting the deficit under control so we can still have a Government supplied healthcare system.

You admit that taxes as a % of GDP are low relative to other countries. Then you go on to tell us how over taxed we are. You appear to be suffering from cognitive dissonance.

I'd also like to point out that a water tax hasn't been introduced. A water charge has been introduced. They are different things.

Who would you like to be put in jail and why?

What election promises have been ignored?

You're going in circles. Again.

fuzzy dunlop

Cabaal wrote: »

Thats not what I'm saying at all,
What I'm saying is people should first of all actually read about who they are voting for and not just go with a party or person because they made some populist opposition claim.

How do you know people haven't just done that? It sounds like your saying your the only person in the country that took an informed decision when it comes to voting. Your argument also fails for two reasons.Either people listened to the hype and were taken in hence affirming that their decision was a monumental mistake. Or else they actually believed FG were going to make a decent stab at reforming the country politically and restructuring the debt burden. The failed significantly in each case but the point is there is no scenario where the present government performance can be seen moe positively.

Cabaal wrote: »

They are not all the same, there are certainly similarity's between all partys. But certainly not the same.

I know they are not the same. You are inferring that they are.

Cabaal wrote: »

But is it not paid for in numerous European country's the same way as Irish Water model is proposing?

Is it? Let's see a link? Show me another European country who has a model that involves a businessman that was a benefactor of a corrupt FG politician. The nearest comparison I can think of is Sylvio Berlisconi and Italy. But at least in his case he was elected.

Cabaal wrote: »

People are often big on picking very progressive country's like Finland (for example) who have good childcare etc and using them as something Ireland should aim to be (they charge for water). You know what, I spoke to a person from Finland in December, he honestly could not understand Irish people being against paying for what water they use and being against water meters.

Because we do pay for water under the 1997 act. This fact is not going away no matter how much you try to ignore it. If you told him otherwise then you were misinforming him. Did you tell him the complete context? Like the cronyism involved and the people involved. I doubt you did otherwise he would have fully understood because this is what is driving the popular opposition.

The Bowling Alley

You didn't answer my question 7upfree

7upfree

The Bowling Alley wrote: »

You didn't answer my question 7upfree

Probably not. One shower of gob****es after the other.

robtri

Suryavarman wrote: »

Just had a quick look through that act. I found a part where it says that local authorities can't charge for domestic water. I don't see where it says that water must be funded by motor tax.

Motor tax also doesn't fund the whole cost of our water supply. So we aren't paying for water. We're half paying for it. Water charges mean that we are now paying for it.

Really????? its the first big paragraph on page three of the PDF copy...
its very very clear.. let me copy the paragraph out...
shall i under line the important parts so it is clear for you??

ACT TO ENABLE LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO ENJOY
THE REVENUES FROM DUTIES CHARGED UNDER
THE FINANCE (EXCISE DUTIES) (VEHICLES) ACT,
1952, AND FROM DUTIES AND FEES CHARGED
UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ENACTMENTS, TO REMOVE
THE POWER OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO MAKE
CHARGES FOR THE SUPPLY OF WATER FOR DOMESTIC
PURPOSES OR FOR THE DISPOSAL OF DOMESTIC
SEWAGE, TO ENABLE STEPS TO BE TAKEN FOR
THE PURPOSE OF SECURING THE PROVISION BY
LOCAL AUTHORITIES OF SERVICES IN A MORE
ECONOMICAL AND EFFICIENT MANNER, TO OTHERWISE
MAKE PROVISION IN RELATION TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENT (IN PARTICULAR FOR THE PURPOSE
OF ENSURING THAT THE REVENUES FROM DUTIES
AND FEES AFORESAID ARE APPORTIONED AMONG
LOCAL AUTHORITIES ON AN EQUITABLE AND FAIR
BASIS) AND TO PROVIDE FOR RELATED MATTERS.
[20th May, 1997]

wellboytoo

Arguing , discussing anything with 7upfree is completely futile . She is the Borg, resistance is futile .she will asimulate .

Cabaal

7upfree wrote: »

Here's what's needed:

1. Reduce SW.

so reduce social welfare, how's that work?
How do you think that'll be accepted by the avg joe and media?

I'll give you a hint....in a very very negative fashion.

3. Streamline HSE.

Until that's done why should the rest of us pay for all of the above by "extra taxes".

Good luck with that, stream lining means getting rid of lots of needless admin jobs and also stopping ways people abuse the system.

I know of several people that are in the HSE that are off on full pay for well over 12 months claiming various reason. You would never ever get away with this in the private sector.

These things need to be changed, will they? Nope, and its not the governments fault its the unions who will fight every change tooth and nail.

Sometimes its not always the governments fault, its the citizens...in this case many HSE workers.

Outside of the HSE I know of atleast two employee's in the public sector who are under disciplinary action.

The action has resulted in them coming into work each day and doing zero work as they don't even have a pc or phone at their desk anymore. One of them used to just go into work and nit scarfs!

They get full pay and the review into their job has been going on over 12 months once again.

This would never ever happen in any company I've ever worked for,

7upfree

wellboytoo wrote: »

Arguing , discussing anything with 7upfree is completely futile . She is the Borg, resistance is futile .she will asimulate .

Nope. She is the one presenting the side of the argument that certain blinkered people ant to ignore and bury. What we are witnessing is the attempted corporate takeover of countries, including Ireland.

History will prove this.

7upfree

Cabaal wrote: »

so reduce social welfare, how's that work?
How do you think that'll be accepted by the avg joe and media?

I'll give you a hint....in a very very negative fashion.



Good luck with that, stream lining means getting rid of lots of needless admin jobs and also stopping ways people abuse the system.

I know of several people that are in the HSE that are off on full pay for well over 12 months claiming various reason. You would never ever get away with this in the private sector.

These things need to be changed, will they? Nope, and its not the governments fault its the unions who will fight every change tooth and nail.

Sometimes its not always the governments fault, its the citizens...in this case many HSE workers.

Outside of the HSE I know of atleast two employee's in the public sector who are under disciplinary action.

The action has resulted in them coming into work each day and doing zero work as they don't even have a pc or phone at their desk anymore. One of them used to just go into work and nit scarfs!

They get full pay and the review into their job has been going on over 12 months once again.

This would never ever happen in any company I've ever worked for,

This is economics 101 - something you love quoting. You cannot spend more than you take in.

Hard decisions need to be taken.

Unfortunately, no-one has the balls to do this.

Yourself included apparently.

Suryavarman

robtri wrote: »

Really????? its the first big paragraph on page three of the PDF copy...
its very very clear.. let me copy the paragraph out...
shall i under line the important parts so it is clear for you??

ACT TO ENABLE LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO ENJOY
THE REVENUES FROM DUTIES CHARGED UNDER
THE FINANCE (EXCISE DUTIES) (VEHICLES) ACT,
1952, AND FROM DUTIES AND FEES CHARGED
UNDER CERTAIN OTHER ENACTMENTS, TO REMOVE
THE POWER OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES TO MAKE
CHARGES FOR THE SUPPLY OF WATER FOR DOMESTIC
PURPOSES OR FOR THE DISPOSAL OF DOMESTIC
SEWAGE, TO ENABLE STEPS TO BE TAKEN FOR
THE PURPOSE OF SECURING THE PROVISION BY
LOCAL AUTHORITIES OF SERVICES IN A MORE
ECONOMICAL AND EFFICIENT MANNER, TO OTHERWISE
MAKE PROVISION IN RELATION TO LOCAL
GOVERNMENT (IN PARTICULAR FOR THE PURPOSE
OF ENSURING THAT THE REVENUES FROM DUTIES
AND FEES AFORESAID ARE APPORTIONED AMONG
LOCAL AUTHORITIES ON AN EQUITABLE AND FAIR
BASIS) AND TO PROVIDE FOR RELATED MATTERS.
[20th May, 1997]

That mentions that councils can use the revenues they collect from motor tax and it also mentions they can no longer charge for domestic water.

Maybe you should underline the important parts. Because I don't see where it says that motor tax must go towards the funding of water. I also don't see where it says that water must be funded by motor tax.

That act says that local authorities can't charge for domestic water, it says nothing about the national Government charging for Waterford. It also says that local authorities can use the funds they collect from motor tax. Since local authorities are no longer providing water that means that motor tax doesn't fund water at all.

robtri

Suryavarman wrote: »

That mentions that councils can use the revenues they collect from motor tax and it also mentions they can no longer charge for domestic water.

Maybe you should underline the important parts. Because I don't see where it says that motor tax must go towards the funding of water. I also don't see where it says that water must be funded by motor tax.

That act says that local authorities can't charge for domestic water, it says nothing about the national Government charging for Waterford. It also says that local authorities can use the funds they collect from motor tax. Since local authorities are no longer providing water that means that motor tax doesn't fund water at all.

your first paragraph is the important part... Money from motor tax and excise duties was legally set aside to pay for water so it wouldnt have to be charged for...... since this has never been changed it still stands

MRnotlob606

Interesting discussion going on here. Do I pick a side ?

Suryavarman

robtri wrote: »

your first paragraph is the important part... Money from motor tax and excise duties was legally set aside to pay for water so it wouldnt have to be charged for...... since this has never been changed it still stands

No it wasn't.