Why do you want to pay the Water Charges

shinzon

I thought it wasn't appropriate in the abbey park thread so im asking the question in the thread title.

There seems to be an inordinate amount of people willing to hand over cash to Irish Water and id like to know why, simple question simple answer.

No derailing of the thread anyone who isn't paying it don't reply here, id just like to get a handle on peoples thought processes on this

Cheers

Shin

Sam Kade

Probably the same reason people pay their esb, phone, heating bills etc.

wellboytoo

it's a commodity that is supplied and you pay for it, the more you use the more you pay, simple enough.

er1983

Agree with the other posters, simple!

shinzon

and can I ask then are you happy to continue to pay for water twice through indirect taxes because that isn't going to stop with the setup of this

Shin

cookie.monster

i would have no problem paying if they reduce the tax that they increased to cover the cost of water years ago when they took away the water charge

fricatus

We are paying for it already through our taxes, just not directly. Not paying for it directly means that anyone can basically use as much as they like.

I see people the whole time watering their lawn during the summer. That's madness in this country! I can understand why you'd water delicate plants, but even then, it doesn't take much engineering to collect rainwater in a butt and use that.

I remember a car-sales place that would do all the valeting up at the owner's house because the water there was free. At the business premises, it was metred and presumably paid for. That fcuker got literally millions of litres of clean, treated water over the years - subsidising his business, and all paid for by the rest of us. That is just plain wrong!

In an ideal world, we would get a reduction in our taxes to compensate us for the water charges, because now the water treatment won't be paid for out of taxes any more. Of course with the shower we have in office, that won't happen.

Also in an ideal world, the water utility would be a non-profit semi-state without undue interference from politicians or well connected business people, but there you go! We don't live in an ideal world! But it makes sense that people who use treated water pay for it.

At least there's an election in a couple of years!

wellboytoo

shinzon wrote: »

and can I ask then are you happy to continue to pay for water twice through indirect taxes because that isn't going to stop with the setup of this

Shin

That is a hoary old chestnut trundled out every time, for a variety of causes, if you are going to blame someone blame Charles J Haughey for getting rid of rates in 1977, that was the demise of local government and the route of all these double taxation calls. It was an election stunt.

shinzon

wellboytoo wrote: »

That is a hoary old chestnut trundled out every time, for a variety of causes, if you are going to blame someone blame Charles J Haughey for getting rid of rates in 1977, that was the demise of local government and the route of all these double taxation calls. It was an election stunt.

Hoary it maybe but its still true is it not

Shin

fiachr_a

Because we're an island and water is scarce!

The_Shotz

I remember there was a huge out cry against water rates in the early 90's.

What has changed to make people more acceptable to it now? Have we becoming conditioned through the Celtic tiger years, that you must now pay for everything.

As Shin already said, no matter what way to portray it, we do currently pay 1.2 billion towards water already, so at present we are not getting "Free" water.

I think I'd be more open to paying for water if it was guaranteed to remain in the hands of Irish people. Currently it can not be sold, but a stroke of the government's/future government's pen, change in legislation and it can to sold.

It's the greatest and biggest natural resource that we have and it's to much of a risk to allow the current set up (Irish Water) to succeed with the future change of it being sold off.

Wanderer2010

shinzon wrote: »

I thought it wasn't appropriate in the abbey park thread so im asking the question in the thread title.

There seems to be an inordinate amount of people willing to hand over cash to Irish Water and id like to know why, simple question simple answer.

No derailing of the thread anyone who isn't paying it don't reply here, id just like to get a handle on people thought processes on this

Cheers

Shin

Im with you on how strange it is. I really cannot understand how so many people are not only happy to fork out money on a yearly basis to a private company who trespass on your property and charge you for a service which you did not consent to, but apparently dont even see it as an issue. No wonder Ireland is gone to the absolute dogs when we have such meek and timid citizens who wont even stand up for their rights and bend over to take every single cut and price raise handed out. They really are laughing at us up in the Dail.

So, obviously im NOT going to pay this illegal charge, and ironically enough my Water supply is fine but I pay more than enough in tax and the citizens of this country are entitled to free water. I reckon its only the people who have more money than sense who are happy to pay this but it will be interesting to read their mindset...

TheQuietFella

I would suggest that the majority of people that advocate the payment are probably paying for it already through a business & want everyone else to be screwed in the same way. Political party members also advocate the charges to look good. I can't accept that people are that willing to be taxed AGAIN without a fight!

jezko

wellboytoo wrote: »

it's a commodity that is supplied and you pay for it, the more you use the more you pay, simple enough.

I have no Problem with paying for a Commodity or Service that I make use off.
I do have a problem if one customer has major issues with Limey (And All the financial problems this causes) and contaminated water in one district and in the neighbouring districts have "perfect" water.. but the Service Provider charges both customers the same rates. And they Have No intention of Improving this Water to an acceptable quality level.
If you want to Charge us for a Service, Provide one that is equal in Quality.

Its Not as if we can go to another Service Provider...

barneystinson

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Im with you on how strange it is. I really cannot understand how so many people are not only happy to fork out money on a yearly basis to a private company who trespass on your property and charge you for a service which you did not consent to, but apparently dont even see it as an issue. No wonder Ireland is gone to the absolute dogs when we have such meek and timid citizens who wont even stand up for their rights and bend over to take every single cut and price raise handed out. They really are laughing at us up in the Dail.

So, obviously im NOT going to pay this illegal charge, and ironically enough my Water supply is fine but I pay more than enough in tax and the citizens of this country are entitled to free water. I reckon its only the people who have more money than sense who are happy to pay this but it will be interesting to read their mindset...

So basically, you've no business on this thread, if you read the OP...

I'll be paying for it because its a utility and a scarce resource, it makes perfect sense that the cost should be borne by the people using it and not have it all come from general taxation - I can't understand the attitude of people who expect us to have some kind of utopia without paying for it.

When it suits, the same people will say how we should be more like this country or that country, but somehow when it comes to our water infrastructure and paying for it we shouldn't be like most of the western world.

Wanderer2010

barneystinson wrote: »

So basically, you've no business on this thread, if you read the OP...

I'll be paying for it because its a utility and a scarce resource, it makes perfect sense that the cost should be borne by the people using it and not have it all come from general taxation - I can't understand the attitude of people who expect us to have some kind of utopia without paying for it.

When it suits, the same people will say how we should be more like this country or that country, but somehow when it comes to our water infrastructure and paying for it we shouldn't be like most of the western world.

But what Irish Water are doing is illegal because a private company cannot force their product on you without some form of consent on that part of the customer (you). Thats the law. You wouldnt accept it if a new phone company changed your connections around and basically forced you to pay for it, why would a private company (there in black and white, not state, not semi state, PRIVATE) be allowed get away with that and you not question it?

MRnotlob606

How obsequious people can be.

obezyana

A poll here would be interesting. I wonder the amount of people who plan on paying and those that dont. I know some say they wont pay but they probably will, a poll would give an idea as to whose for or against in this debate.

fricatus

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

But what Irish Water are doing is illegal because a private company cannot force their product on you without some form of consent on that part of the customer (you). Thats the law.

I'm no fan of Irish Water, but what you're saying is nonsense. They're not forcing their product on you in any way. They're telling you that they're the ones providing it now and you'd better pay for it.

If you don't want to pay for the product, fine, that's your prerogative, but then they have no obligation to provide it to you, and will presumably cut it off.

Wanderer2010

fricatus wrote: »

I'm no fan of Irish Water, but what you're saying is nonsense. They're not forcing their product on you in any way. They're telling you that they're the ones providing it now and you'd better pay for it.

If you don't want to pay for the product, fine, that's your prerogative, but then they have no obligation to provide it to you, and will presumably cut it off.

Read back to yourself what I have bolded and that is exactly the point I was making. If a private company could invade your property and install meters and charge you for same then UPC would have invaded the whole country and demanded you pay for their service instead of Sky (as an example). Its bully boy tactics from a desperate Government who are actually breaking the law trying to cream yet more cash from the ordinary people. You can be damn sure there would be no talk of property and water taxes if the bankers hadn't p!ssed away all our money and the powers-that-be needed a patsy. How that point is lost on so many people is actually scary.

fricatus

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

You can be damn sure there would be no talk of property and water taxes if the bankers hadn't p!ssed away all our money and the powers-that-be needed a patsy.

Yeah, that's true all right. While I think it makes sense to pay for water, it also makes sense to reduce people's taxes when the water is no longer being paid for out of taxation, and that obviously didn't happen.

Successive governments spinelessly backed away from introducing water charges when they could easily have done so in the good times, and sweetened the pill with tax cuts elsewhere. However that's the way we roll in Ireland...

moans3536

If you don't want irish water to supply water to your home that's fine, just go out side dig a well and pump clean water into your own home.
People that have lived in the countrythat have there own private wells and sewage system have paid privately for this privilege for years.

barneystinson

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Read back to yourself what I have bolded and that is exactly the point I was making. If a private company could invade your property and install meters and charge you for same then UPC would have invaded the whole country and demanded you pay for their service instead of Sky (as an example). Its bully boy tactics from a desperate Government who are actually breaking the law trying to cream yet more cash from the ordinary people. You can be damn sure there would be no talk of property and water taxes if the bankers hadn't p!ssed away all our money and the powers-that-be needed a patsy. How that point is lost on so many people is actually scary.

What law are they breaking?

The fact that you equate UPC with water, rather than ESB which is actually a more suitable analogy, says a lot!

Bottom line here is that it has to be paid for. I'm already paying for it through the nose in income tax. Lets say it currently costs a billion a year, and that's all coming out of income tax.

If next year IW is going to collect half a billion, and the Govt is going to subvent a further half billion, then that's half a billion less that they need to factor into general taxation. Some category of taxpayers, somewhere will get the benefit of that half billion less that needs to be collected, or you could look at it as an additional half billion that the Govt can direct elsewhere in the economy.

Now, if they squander it, that's a different matter and they can be punished for that come election time. But that's neither here nor there when considering whether it's correct in principle to have water paid for in the same way as any other utility.

barneystinson

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

But what Irish Water are doing is illegal because a private company cannot force their product on you without some form of consent on that part of the customer (you). Thats the law. You wouldnt accept it if a new phone company changed your connections around and basically forced you to pay for it, why would a private company (there in black and white, not state, not semi state, PRIVATE) be allowed get away with that and you not question it?

I'm no legal expert, but I'd very surprised if the legislation that allowed for the creation and operation of IW doesn't allow for what you call them "forcing" their product on you.

If you really feel that strongly that you don't want your water from them then you can ask to be disconnected from the mains, and source your water elsewhere.

But if the law governing the provision of water through the mains has been changed, and I'll have a crisp tenner with you that it has and it will withstand the inevitable legal challenge, then you'll have to pay just like everyone else.

Wanderer2010

barneystinson wrote: »

I'm no legal expert, but I'd very surprised if the legislation that allowed for the creation and operation of IW doesn't allow for what you call them "forcing" their product on you.

If you really feel that strongly that you don't want your water from them then you can ask to be disconnected from the mains, and source your water elsewhere.

But if the law governing the provision of water through the mains has been changed, and I'll have a crisp tenner with you that it has and it will withstand the inevitable legal challenge, then you'll have to pay just like everyone else.

The law they are breaking is very obvious: Look at the info and share information for IW. They are a private company and therefore do not have the right to force product on you. Forget about how clever my analogy with UPC is for a second and consider this (I mean, you are the dream of the current Government, they have you thinking that we should pay for water and that its ok): If i walked up to your home and demanded you pay me 200euros a year for a product whether you wanted to or not, you would tell me where to go, no?

Yet you seem to think its ok to accept water charges. From a PRIVATE company who are trespassing on your property and forcing meters on it. Do you think if we were not in recession that water taxes, or property taxes, would even be considered? Why do you think they need this extra money after decades of not charging us ever for water. Think about that, And if you give the base reply of "economy", go back again a bit further and ask yourself are you happy being a patsy? If so, its your life.

wellboytoo

Amazing observation to me if I may draw attention to it is the quite common mention of PRIVATE COMPANY as if it was a revelation or admission of cross dressing by the Pope.
The whole argument has a rebel without a cause feel to it. General disgruntlement

barneystinson

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

The law they are breaking is very obvious: Look at the info and share information for IW. They are a private company and therefore do not have the right to force product on you. Forget about how clever my analogy with UPC is for a second and consider this (I mean, you are the dream of the current Government, they have you thinking that we should pay for water and that its ok): If i walked up to your home and demanded you pay me 200euros a year for a product whether you wanted to or not, you would tell me where to go, no?

Yet you seem to think its ok to accept water charges. From a PRIVATE company who are trespassing on your property and forcing meters on it. Do you think if we were not in recession that water taxes, or property taxes, would even be considered? Why do you think they need this extra money after decades of not charging us ever for water. Think about that, And if you give the base reply of "economy", go back again a bit further and ask yourself are you happy being a patsy? If so, its your life.

I've already set out very clearly what my thinking is.

You using the word trespass doesn't make it so.

Water has always had to be paid for, all they're doing is making it more transparent.

Can you explain why Ireland should be the exception to the rule in the developed world, without using words like trespass?

I don't know how they operate it in other jurisdictions but I'm sure it's been privatised in plenty of those countries, and the world hasn't ended.

Digital Society

These Water Protesters are worse than Jahovas forcing their Ideas onto others and causing friction in estates.

I now want a meter just to spite the OP.

gobo99

Whats all this about IW forcing their product on people. Are they going in flushing peoples toilets and watering their flowers?:pac:
If you dont want their product turn off the tap or better still turn of the stopcock. Trouble is you'll still get charged if you dont have a meter.
Also where have they tresspassed, are meters not installed on footpaths with public right of way?

shinzon

just a few things picking up on people points

1) how has water suddenly become so scarce all of a sudden, has water ever run out I don't think it has and tbh the only reason it would be scarce is the admission from Irish Water that 48-49% of the water is lost through leakage that is a staggering amount of loss and do you really think that IW will have the resources to fix the leaky pipes from decades of neglect even with the money there supposedly going to get from all of us, I don't think so

2) I think people have forgotten about civil disobedience, if no one pays the water charges go away simple as that, they cant bring the entire country to court plus if you don't sign your forms you DO NOT HAVE A CONTRACT WITH IW, they cannot cut you off, they cannot deduct from source they can do nothing except bring you to court.

3) and also everyone seems to have forgotten about the legally recognised boundary of your property, its called curtilage which extends the boundary of you property beyond your own gates which entitled you to peacefully protest wherever you want within the bounds of that curtilage, so unless you headbut a Guard they have no legal right to stop you from standing on where the meters are being installed and cannot arrest you.

Shin

Sully

Sadly, the level of debate on the subject of Irish Water has been shockingly poor and very much 'face palm' moments. It's the same nonsense each time.

- Water is currently free, why should I pay?
- Water is already covered for in taxation, why should I pay double?
- We get loads of rain compared with other countries which have Water rates, why should I pay for something freely available?
- It's only there to service debts and nothing will be used to pay for the water services.
- Can't Pay. Won't Pay.
- It's a private business.
- It's going to be sold.
- That Denis O'Brien fella is involved. Don't like him, won't be paying.
- No Contract. No Consent.

There appears to be very little genuine debate on the pros and cons, why exactly we need to pay for water and what the benefits (if any) it will bring us. It just descends into a political farce or people with no knowledge on the subject shouting and roaring.

Yes we get BUCKET loads of water whereas Spain gets sweet feck all compared to Ireland. But that's not what comes out of your taps and into your toilet, out of your taps and showers. All that lovely water gets processed in treatment plants to make it (subject to separate debates depending on viewpoint and your location) safe. Waste water is perfectly clean. We flush litres of clean water down the loo every single day. All that water goes into a treatment plant too and is processed before finally being disposed off. All this treatment costs the state money. All those pipes that go all around the country, down streets, into estates and so on all cost money. Unlike rainwater which we get bucket loads of and for free - pipes, equipment and treatment plants cost the state millions each year.

We do already pay for water along with everything else in the form of general taxation. But it's never been enough and the previous administration didn't bother doing anything about it. The general taxation goes into the big bucket that goes into the general running of the state. That's paying for the public service, the buildings the public service use, the various equipment and materials the public service use and likewise for the civil service. It pays for roads, footpaths, social welfare, grants, state bodies, and so so much more. That's why a country needs taxation.

Water Charges have been on the cards for YEARS. Fianna Fail proposed it BEFORE we ended up effectively being bankrupt. Businesses already pay for water (either via a meter or fixed charge) and many residents in rural Ireland pay some form of water charges to private businesses. Besides that, it was in the Fine Gael program for government and for those who didn't read it Labour put up hundreds of signs warning people about it! They said it in many debates too on radio & TV, just in case you didn't spot the signs or read the papers. Putting that aside, it was also in the EU/IMF agreement that Fianna Fail prepared. Remember, Sinn Fein have no hesitation implementing the water rates in government up North and will happily do what they are told by the UK but when it comes to the Republics affairs and the EU/IMF they keep telling us that the taxes are unfair and to get the EU/IMF to go stick it. Clearly talking out of both sides of their mouth.

I can see why people would be sceptical about where the charges go but there has been a commitment that the charges will be ring-fenced and invested into Irish Water and all that goes along with it. We can only hope that the current and future administrations agree and stick to that. If we are seeing lack of investment and the funds going elsewhere, the country should rightly be up in arms. I'm in favour, personally, of the charges on the condition we see an immediate investment into our water network and people get decent drinkable water.

Irish Water is owned by Board Gais. It's a state-owned company. People are misleading when they talk about this. Various bodies we deal with on a daily basis are state-owned. But it suits to point out the fact as if it's horror when it's completely normal and has been for years. I'd say what will more than likely happen is, in the future under some government, it will be opened up just like Electricity, Gas, Telephone & Broadband. To prevent a monopoly and to bring in competition in the market. Many people are happy to use Energia instead of Electric Ireland, Vodafone instead of ESB, and so on. That's what could potentially happen in years to come. As for the suggestion the state have zero control over Irish Water and completely sell it off, well I really can't see how that would work and it makes little sense.

Denis O'Brien owns Siteserv. Not Irish Water. The connection? The installation of water meters. Interesting fact. Sierra Support Services is owned by Siteserv. Guess what? Sierra install UPC & Sky. So those thousands of people who have Sky or UPC are technically supporting Denis O'Brien. Some of the protesters even work for them. Denis owns Topaz too btw and has strong connections with the FAI and the salary our current and past managers of the national team get. He is a clever businessman, no doubt, and makes his fair share in business dealings.

The old chestnut is back to roost - No Contract. My favouirte, but this year they spiced it up and claimed it's a 'gift' we have to legally refuse. Hate to burst the bubble but you already pay for water tax and it's far from a gift as it is. The contract is now with Irish Water, on behalf of the state, which is perfectly legal. You already have a contract when you connected to the mains supply and used the water services supplied by the state at an enormous cost.

Lots of people brandying that about with the Property Tax and it went as far as quoting a legal firm that had to come out and deny they ever gave such legal advice and were not standing over the statement. Reminds me of the time Sinn Fein quoted an economist in one of their anti-europe campaigns and the economist pulled them up on it and said he was in favour!

You would think that with all the big legal wigs that the state get advise from that they would spot something so glaringly obvious that the average joesoap on the ground without any legal background does. Even so, if there really that stupid, where did it all go wrong with the Property Tax? Where were all these court cases the No camp promised where they would challenge it's legality and get it thrown out because it's unconstitutional and illegal?

Wanderer2010

@ Sully, regarding your points. Water charges were on the cards years ago, yes, but only as a scare tactic the same way with this budget next month, little bits of information drip feeding out like "we are going to cut tax" "Dole Christmas bonus may return" etc, its a well known political tactic to gauge public reaction and adjust accordingly. When they proposed these taxes years ago, it was a shallow threat and either way was opposed from day one.

You seem to think that we should pay for something which we are entitled to already- safe clean water. And may I remind you that thousands of people in this country dont even get that, they have contaminated, dirty and undrinkable water, so why on earth should thay pay a cent? IW being a private company is a very important point. You pay taxes when you work because you signed a contract and know that after your wages, you need to contribute towards our rotten HSE system, taxes and PRSI etc. If you dont sign any contract with IW, THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO INSTALL ANYTHING ON YOUR PROPERTY. such a simple point missed.

And on that, remember a few years ago when cuts to the medical card were scrapped? That was 100% due to the power of our elderly protesters, who had something sadly very lacking in this generation- a backbone and morals to protest against something which is wrong to the core. Do you think the Government would be proposing water charges if we didnt hit recession in 2008 due to the bankers and their actions?

H3llR4iser

Sully wrote: »

Sadly, the level of debate on the subject of Irish Water has been shockingly poor and very much 'face palm' moments. It's the same nonsense each time...

I see exactly where you are coming from and agree with all of your points; When I moved to Ireland years ago, as a foreigner I was actually a bit shocked that there was no "water bill". Believe it or not, I kept asking everybody about if for the first 6-7 months and was even more shocked when people simply went "why should you pay? It always rains, there's a lot of water here!".

To be honest I expected that some sort of water metering and billing would be put in place at some point...and I expected it to be unfair like many other charges here.

To begin with, the apartment I live wasn't fitted with a meter. Irish Water says I'll be paying based on an "average", and they claim the average will be based on the number of people living in the apartment. Problem is, this "average" will necessarily be skewed depending on what kind of household they calculate it on; For example, the "per person average" of a 4 bedroom house with a garden and occupied by two adults and two children will necessarily be higher than mine, living alone in an apartment and basically out 75% of the time.

I have no problem paying what I use, I can't understand why they couldn't simply install a meter. They CAN be installed in apartments, as they exist in many places in the EU.

The second, and this is the biggest one, are the allowances: 30.000 liters (in/out) per year per household. Fine. Good idea. If that was it; Why is there an additional allowance of 38.000 liters/year per children under 18 y.o. living in the houseold? Do people under 18 need to sleep in a swimming tank with water refreshed every night? And as soon as they turn 18, do their water needs immediately disappear? Why is kids allowance calculated per person, while adult one is "household" based?

It reeks of the typical "will anybody think of the children!" attitude:

Single: 30.000 L/year;
Couple with no kids: 30.000 L/year;
Family with 2 kids: 108.000 L/year;
Family with 2 18 y.o. kids: 30.000 L/year;

See anything wrong there? Why does the couple have to pay for my allowance? Why do I, the couple and the family with grown up kids need to pay for the family with 2 underage children?

barneystinson

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

IW being a private company is a very important point. You pay taxes when you work because you signed a contract and know that after your wages, you need to contribute towards our rotten HSE system, taxes and PRSI etc. If you dont sign any contract with IW, THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO INSTALL ANYTHING ON YOUR PROPERTY. such a simple point missed.

Just because you say these things doesn't make them so!

IW is a semi-state company, not a private company. That's a fact.

And if the appropriate legislation / regulations are in place, I'm sure they do have the right to install meters - where's the legal challenge if its not legal?!

This is heading towards Freeman of the land type stuff.

Wanderer2010

barneystinson wrote: »

Just because you say these things doesn't make them so!

IW is a semi-state company, not a private company. That's a fact.

And if the appropriate legislation / regulations are in place, I'm sure they do have the right to install meters - where's the legal challenge if its not legal?!

This is heading towards Freeman of the land type stuff.

Its a private company, check out the info on their about us website.

shinzon

barneystinson wrote: »

Just because you say these things doesn't make them so!

IW is a semi-state company, not a private company. That's a fact.

And if the appropriate legislation / regulations are in place, I'm sure they do have the right to install meters - where's the legal challenge if its not legal?!

This is heading towards Freeman of the land type stuff.

As much as you think there a semi state there actually not, they are indeed a private company of that there is no doubt.

Shin

CatFromHue

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

You seem to think that we should pay for something which we are entitled to already- safe clean water. And may I remind you that thousands of people in this country dont even get that, they have contaminated, dirty and undrinkable water, so why on earth should thay pay a cent? IW being a private company is a very important point. You pay taxes when you work because you signed a contract and know that after your wages, you need to contribute towards our rotten HSE system, taxes and PRSI etc. If you dont sign any contract with IW, THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO INSTALL ANYTHING ON YOUR PROPERTY. such a simple point missed.

For every right you have a duty.

You have the right to clean water but you have a duty to help pay for it's processing and delivery.

There's nothing free, someone somewhere has to pay.

It's a terrible situation for the people with un drinkable water but hopefully IW will be able to sort the problem out, what we do know is the council hasn't been able to. I don't know the numbers exactly but I'm happy to say that the people with undrinkable water are in the vast minority in the country. You say thousands but there's 4.5 million people in Ireland.

fiachr_a

Most water in Irish homes is undrinkable, full of fluoride!

S.O

barneystinson wrote: »

Just because you say these things doesn't make them so!

IW is a semi-state company, not a private company. That's a fact.

And if the appropriate legislation / regulations are in place, I'm sure they do have the right to install meters - where's the legal challenge if its not legal?!

This is heading towards Freeman of the land type stuff.

When it says on their website in the small print.

( Irish Water. Private Company Limited by Shares,)

When people read that what other conclusion are people to come to other then Irish water is a private company.

S.O

CatFromHue wrote: »

For every right you have a duty.

You have the right to clean water but you have a duty to help pay for it's processing and delivery.

There's nothing free, someone somewhere has to pay.

It's a terrible situation for the people with un drinkable water but hopefully IW will be able to sort the problem out, what we do know is the council hasn't been able to. I don't know the numbers exactly but I'm happy to say that the people with undrinkable water are in the vast minority in the country. You say thousands but there's 4.5 million people in Ireland.

Water isn,t free at the moment, we are already paying for water through general taxation.

Sully

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

Its a private company, check out the info on their about us website.

shinzon wrote: »

As much as you think there a semi state there actually not, they are indeed a private company of that there is no doubt.

Shin

S.O wrote: »

When it says on their website in the small print.

( Irish Water. Private Company Limited by Shares,)

When people read that what other conclusion are people to come to other then Irish water is a private company.

It's a legal requirement to be on the website. There are NUMEROUS private companies owned by the state without a whimper from the public.

Worth pointing out that semi-state bodies are private companies owned by the state. There not lying - it's a private company owned by the state. People are being disingenuous with the truth and playing on words. It's a subsidiary of Board Gais. So SoloCheck is correct. It's a private company. But who owns it? The state. Therefore it's publicly owned private company. Examples; ESB, RTE, Board Bia, Irish Rail (a subsidiary like Irish Bus, Dublin Bus etc).

It's that kind of **** that I hate about Irish politics. Come referendums, and the loonies are out trying to convince us that it's all doom and gloom and by voting Yes the world will end.

Sully

S.O wrote: »

Water isn,t free at the moment, we are already paying for water through general taxation.

Water has NEVER been free. Any service that is provided by the state for the public is PAID for by the tax payers. That's obvious to anybody, even the economically illiterate Sinn Fein. It's stupid to see the campaigners twist the obvious into some form of a defence so that it looks like the obvious wasn't that obvious at all and it really is an outrage. It's clever, but not everyone is stupid enough to be conned by a play of the truth.

Taxation covers the cost of running the state. This is normal. You pay for the roads several times over. You pay for foothpaths several times over. You pay for other peoples social welfare several times over. You pay for public sector wages several times over. The taxation system is a big pot of money that is divided up between all costly state services like, you guessed it, WATER! The state has to PAY to deliver the water to your house.

The difference now is that you're also being asked to pay a direct tax to bump up an area that the state cannot afford to fund purely based on indirect taxation alone. Just like Gas, Electricity, Telecommunication and so on. At least now people can't turn around and say 'Where does our tax be spent?' - the state is getting a much larger pool of money to fix our water supply and we now pay directly, with a regular bill from an existing contract but a new supplier using the same infrastructure that is being replaced (lots being done in Waterford replacing old piping), so we can no hammer home that we expect to see change and improvement in our supply without excuses.

S.O

Sully wrote: »

Water has NEVER been free. Any service that is provided by the state for the public is PAID for by the tax payers. That's obvious to anybody, even the economically illiterate Sinn Fein. It's stupid to see the campaigners twist the obvious into some form of a defence so that it looks like the obvious wasn't that obvious at all and it really is an outrage. It's clever, but not everyone is stupid enough to be conned by a play of the truth.

Taxation covers the cost of running the state. This is normal. You pay for the roads several times over. You pay for foothpaths several times over. You pay for other peoples social welfare several times over. You pay for public sector wages several times over. The taxation system is a big pot of money that is divided up between all costly state services like, you guessed it, WATER! The state has to PAY to deliver the water to your house.

The difference now is that you're also being asked to pay a direct tax to bump up an area that the state cannot afford to fund purely based on indirect taxation alone. Just like Gas, Electricity, Telecommunication and so on. At least now people can't turn around and say 'Where does our tax be spent?' - the state is getting a much larger pool of money to fix our water supply and we now pay directly, with a regular bill from an existing contract but a new supplier using the same infrastructure that is being replaced (lots being done in Waterford replacing old piping), so we can no hammer home that we expect to see change and improvement in our supply without excuses.

Except it didn,t seem obvious to the poster I was replying to, when the poster implied water is free .

There's nothing free, someone somewhere has to pay.

www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=92374918&postcount=37

barneystinson

S.O wrote: »

When it says on their website in the small print.

( Irish Water. Private Company Limited by Shares,)

When people read that what other conclusion are people to come to other then Irish water is a private company.

A private company owned by whom? Bord Gais, which is a semi-state company. This isn't rocket science. :rolleyes:

shinzon

Sully let me ask you this is there any scenario anywhere in your sphere of influence that would convince you that the water tax is simply a tax to far. ?

Don't just rush and answer this question, sit down for 5-10 minutes and really think about it, just really ask yourself is there anything even some nagging doubt that this is wrong, or are so so convinced its right that there is no point in even asking the question.

While im at it let me ask this question is there a monetary value where you would say no im not paying it because its to much 300-400 1000 euro, because that's what this really come down to in the end money and ability to pay.

Shin

Wanderer2010

I also have a question for you Sully. Do you think that, had we not been in recession from 2008 onwards because of the actions of the bankers, the Government would be pressing for water charges? Do you think if we were still a successful economy, Irish Water would exist? Again, think about it and please dont give me the base "the economy needs it" reply so beloved of the naive.

hmmm

Who would you prefer pays for the treated water you use?

CatFromHue

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

I also have a question for you Sully. Do you think that, had we not been in recession from 2008 onwards because of the actions of the bankers, the Government would be pressing for water charges? Do you think if we were still a successful economy, Irish Water would exist? Again, think about it and please dont give me the base "the economy needs it" reply so beloved of the naive.

Just remember in 08 the govt was running at a massive loss which had nothing to do with the bankers.

S.O

CatFromHue wrote: »

Just remember in 08 the govt was running at a massive loss which had nothing to do with the bankers.

Were it not for the bailout of banks,Irish public debt levels would now be below those of Germany ( quote from Enda Kenny )

shinzon

hmmm wrote: »

Who would you prefer pays for the treated water you use?

We already do pay for the water we use to the tune of 1.2 billion euro, why is the same mantras being trotted out again and again, there seems to be no coherent thought behind paying the water charges.

Its either some political affiliation or some variation of it has to be paid for when we already do.

There actually doesn't seem to be any answer to the question Why do you want to pay the charges, all im seeing here is why we have to pay the charges, when in actual fact we don't. Water charges were defeated in the 90's and they can be again. The Government only governs by the will of the people, they work for us we don't work for them. If we en masse as a state say no then that's the end of the matter the government cannot govern or dictate to us under those circumstances.

Shame people forget that

Shin

barneystinson

shinzon wrote: »

We already do pay for the water we use to the tune of 1.2 billion euro, why is the same mantras being trotted out again and again, there seems to be no coherent thought behind paying the water charges.

Its either some political affiliation or some variation of it has to be paid for when we already do.

There actually doesn't seem to be any answer to the question Why do you want to pay the charges, all im seeing here is why we have to pay the charges, when in actual fact we don't. Water charges were defeated in the 90's and they can be again. The Government only governs by the will of the people, they work for us we don't work for them. If we en masse as a state say no then that's the end of the matter the government cannot govern or dictate to us under those circumstances.

Shame people forget that

Shin

So we all agree it has to be paid for.

If it has to be paid for, then why shouldn't the user pay, rather than general taxation?

All the other services that require an infrastructure network have to be paid for based on use... Electricity has to be paid for by the user, phone/Internet too. Why do YOU think water to residences should be different, from those other utilities, and from water supplied to business users..??