Irish Water pushing ahead with privatisation of Water Infrastructure on the DL?

irishfeen

A memo has been released to County Council Union shop stewards working in the Water departments yesterday on behalf of SIPTU, IMPACT, UNITE, TEEU & LAPO.

Irish Water are looking to break a Service Level Agreement agreed with the public service and want to take full control making "Significant" changes to how the Water infrastructure is run in Ireland - looks like taking county councils completely out of the equation in favour of private companies given operation contracts.

"Irish Water announced that they wish to make significant changes to the way water services are delivered. In short they announced that the Board of Ervia (the parent company of Irish Water) had decided that they would not be entering into a further service level agreement with local authorities and that they wished to exit the current service level agreements prior to the expiry date of 2025, preferably in 2021. Irish Water further announced that they had informed the Minister of this and the Minister had noted their decision

In response the unions said that this announcement would create a lot of uncertainty and anger amongst the staff of Local Authorities and it would add to anxiety about the future ownership of Irish Water"

Have seen nothing in the press today about this very worrying development, you would have to wonder how private companies (who are out to make money full stop) can be good in terms of the tax payer. At least the local authorities sole job was providing a service, trying to make profits on the backs of tax payers is going to be hard to stomach.

Bishopsback

Last I heard, it was being mooted that a referendum would be held to enshrine the ownership of IW in the constitution.
I'll look it up.

Bishopsback

Here it is.
http://campus.ie/surviving-college/ff-set-back-referendum-irish-water

irishfeen

Bishopsback wrote: »

Last I heard, it was being mooted that a referendum would be held to enshrine the ownership of IW in the constitution.
I'll look it up.

Seems up in the air at the minute, nobody knows what’s going on but this is one of the first times IW have publicaly made it known they want to end all public sector involvement in the distribution of water in Ireland.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

irishfeen wrote: »

Seems up in the air at the minute, nobody knows what’s going on but this is one of the first times IW have publicaly made it known they want to end all public sector involvement in the distribution of water in Ireland.

That's a long stretch from privatisation though. Delivering the service through contractors other than the local authorities is not privatisation and may be a more economical and efficient means of maintain and improving our water services.

Inviere

Baby steps...

hmmm

irishfeen wrote: »

At least the local authorities sole job was providing a service, trying to make profits on the backs of tax payers is going to be hard to stomach.

Oh come off of it, the public sector are all about feathering their own nests. They never gave a damn about the taxpayer other than to suck them dry.

irishfeen

Vaughn Skinny Hurricane wrote: »

That's a long stretch from privatisation though. Delivering the service through contractors other than the local authorities is not privatisation and may be a more economical and efficient means of maintain and improving our water services.

How could it be more economical when private contractors sole purpose is to make a profit? ... currently water caretakers in the councils are on a set salary - 7 days a week, 365 days a year with approx 99.5 compliance to standards... how can private contractors make money for less?

irishfeen

hmmm wrote: »

Oh come off of it, the public sector are all about feathering their own nests. They never gave a damn about the taxpayer other than to suck them dry.

You might be completely right but are you trying to tell me private companies sole purpose isn’t to do the exact same?

Allinall

The councils made a dogs dinner of managing the water, so this can only be a good move.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

hmmm wrote: »

Oh come off of it, the public sector are all about feathering their own nests. They never gave a damn about the taxpayer other than to suck them dry.

And, certainly around here, the local authority did very little to either maintain or improve the system when they were responsible for it. Only when obligated to SLAs from IW did they begin any serious work on the network.

Wheeliebin30

We should take the 13 billion from Apple and buy the water network from the government.

And we will all own irish water.

Then we can finally stop hearing about poxy water charges

irishfeen

Allinall wrote: »

The councils made a dogs dinner of managing the water, so this can only be a good move.

Approx 99.5%+ total water quality compliance from the councils, on par with England, USA, Scotland etc.

Networks are in a bad way but water quality standards are world class. Maybe private companies can continue these standards but if your sole purpose is to make money then it’s open to question.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

irishfeen wrote: »

How could it be more economical when private contractors sole purpose is to make a profit? ... currently water caretakers in the councils are on a set salary - 7 days a week, 365 days a year with approx 99.5 compliance to standards... how can private contractors make money for less?

Because they are more efficient, have better managed overheads, are results driven and more focused. Who is contracted to carry out work on behalf of IW is immaterial to the ownership status of IW. If the aim is for IW to get more done for less cost then they are fulfilling an important role for the consumer. ESB uses contractors for many aspects of their business. It doesn't mean they are privatised - just that those operations are done more cost and resource effectively.

TallGlass

This issue hasn't gone away. Its making a gradual come back.

Just like the uproar when the pay by weight bin charges fiasco was kicked down the road last year. Its slowly coming onto bills now. I see a fair usage policy in place and charges per KG. Only the FUP is 50kg or lower pm. And it doesn't matter if you've 2/3/4 lifts based on the loft cycle that month your FUA is static. Water is going the same route. Irish government have realised general public are ticks best way not to aggravate them is baby steps over 4/5 years.

Corrupt little country we have here in Ireland. Government are tossers to be blunt about it and couldn't give a flying **** about tax payers.

gctest50

irishfeen wrote: »

................ currently water caretakers in the councils are on a set salary - 7 days a week, 365 days a year with approx 99.5 compliance to standards... how can private contractors make money for less?

It's leaking like a sieve all over the place

99.5 to who ? the useless setup they are would drown f****ing Spongebob

Phoebas

irishfeen wrote: »

Approx 99.5%+ total water quality compliance from the councils, on par with England, USA, Scotland etc.

Networks are in a bad way but water quality standards are world class. Maybe private companies can continue these standards but if your sole purpose is to make money then it’s open to question.

When the councils were in charge or it, they let almost half of that world class water leak out of the network.
Maybe someone whose 'sole purpose' is to make money would do a better job at managing their assets.

oppenheimer1

Great. The utterly useless councils should be kept away from anything important.

Richard Hillman

They were always going to privatise it. It would have been under EU Monopoly laws like the ESB, Bord Gas and Telecom Eireann

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Richard Hillman wrote: »

They were always going to privatise it. It would have been under EU Monopoly laws like the ESB, Bord Gas and Telecom Eireann

The ESB network, Distribution Operation, Transmission Operation and much more is not privatised nor will they be, as the EU accepts them as natural monopolies. All that was opened to private business in the electricity market as Generation and supply and even then none of the ESB business was privatised. Privatisation of water distribution, under EU opinion, would require more than one company operating and installing their own distribution networks. That ain't going to happen.

irishfeen

Phoebas wrote: »

When the councils were in charge or it, they let almost half of that world class water leak out of the network.
Maybe someone whose 'sole purpose' is to make money would do a better job at managing their assets.

Possibly so but where are the private firms going to get the money to fix all the leaks???

Phoebas

irishfeen wrote: »

Possibly so but where are the private firms going to get the money to fix all the leaks???

Same place as the councils are/were getting it.

irishfeen

Phoebas wrote: »

Same place as the councils were getting it.

The tax payer?? So you want to give private firms public money to run the water system at a profit??

Phoebas

irishfeen wrote: »

The tax payer?? So you want to give private firms public money to run the water system at a profit??

Eh?
This story is about Irish Water using private contractors to deliver services instead of councils.

If they can get the job done more competitively then I'm all for it. I couldn't give a toss if they are private or public.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

irishfeen wrote: »

The tax payer?? So you want to give private firms public money to run the water system at a profit??

You seem to keep missing the point. The private companies, no more so than the councils of late, will not run the water system. Irish water will still run the system but will get a bigger bang for their buck from those they contact to carry out work. The taxpayer will benefit for such an arrangement.

Councils contract out work on council houses (repairs, decoration etc.) but we haven't privatised the councils or council housing; they are just getting work done at better value than when they employed the staff to fulfill those roles.

CeilingFly

The thread title is utterly misleading just like 99% of the utter BULLSH1T spouted by Murphy and his sheep.

Many local authorities were utterly incompetent in managing their water services - here's two examples.

Louth CC - using a totally differ guage and style of pipe than ANY other council in the country, thus when the pipe burst there was no spare pipe available and a new pipe had to be made to order.

But more stupid - Roscommon CC built a sewage treatment plant next to a water treatment plant, spend MILLIONS on it only to realise afterwards that putting sewage treatment beside clean water for drinking was not exactly a good move - meant that residents of Boyle had to boil water for years until Irish Water took over and corrected the issue.


There are many many more examples of utter waste and stupidity by local authorities because they simply did not have the experience or expertise.

The sooner the local authorities are out of the picture, the better for our water.


But the Murphy types and the sheep that follow and believe every word the fool says will simply not understand

irishfeen

CeilingFly wrote: »

The thread title is utterly misleading just like 99% of the utter BULLSH1T spouted by Murphy and his sheep.

Many local authorities were utterly incompetent in managing their water services - here's two examples.

Louth CC - using a totally differ guage and style of pipe than ANY other council in the country, thus when the pipe burst there was no spare pipe available and a new pipe had to be made to order.

But more stupid - Roscommon CC built a sewage treatment plant next to a water treatment plant, spend MILLIONS on it only to realise afterwards that putting sewage treatment beside clean water for drinking was not exactly a good move - meant that residents of Boyle had to boil water for years until Irish Water took over and corrected the issue.


There are many many more examples of utter waste and stupidity by local authorities because they simply did not have the experience or expertise.

The sooner the local authorities are out of the picture, the better for our water.


But the Murphy types and the sheep that follow and believe every word the fool says will simply not understand

Granted I will accept that the councils have not covered themselves in glory over the years but the underinvestment was staggering and the fact remains the the quality of drinking water provided by the councils is superb to world standards..

Here is an example where private operators did not work in the industry -

West Cork WWTP’s - A few Wastewater treatment plants which were given to a large private firm had to be reclaimed by the council due to the massive deterioration in the plant inside and out. Permanent caretakers were replaced, the private company basically had one guy calling every week or 2 to take figures and the plant got so bad that the Council reclaimed the site.

This is what happens when private companies run plants... thank god this was Wastewater and not a drinking water plant ... water that babies and the sick use every single day.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

irishfeen wrote: »

Granted I will accept that the councils have not covered themselves in glory over the years but the underinvestment was staggering and the fact remains the the quality of drinking water provided by the councils is superb to world standards..

Here is an example where private operators did not work in the industry -

West Cork WWTP’s - A few Wastewater treatment plants which were given to a large private firm had to be reclaimed by the council due to the massive deterioration in the plant inside and out. Permanent caretakers were replaced, the private company basically had one guy calling every week or 2 to take figures and the plant got so bad that the Council reclaimed the site.

This is what happens when private companies run plants... thank god this was Wastewater and not a drinking water plant ... water that babies and the sick use every single day.

You continue to misled with comments on private companies running IW. They won't be. It's simply (so simple I can't see how it escapes you) that contractors will carry out the physical work, as opposed to council workers - who can now perhaps get on with doing some work for the council.

irishfeen

Vaughn Skinny Hurricane wrote: »

You continue to misled with comments on private companies running IW. They won't be. It's simply (so simple I can't see how it escapes you) that contractors will carry out the physical work, as opposed to council workers - who can now perhaps get on with doing some work for the council.

What physical work is there in the Water/Wastewater treatment plants??

Where are the council staff going to be redeployed to?

Don't Chute!

irishfeen wrote: »

Granted I will accept that the councils have not covered themselves in glory over the years but the underinvestment was staggering and the fact remains the the quality of drinking water provided by the councils is superb to world standards..

Here is an example where private operators did not work in the industry -

West Cork WWTP’s - A few Wastewater treatment plants which were given to a large private firm had to be reclaimed by the council due to the massive deterioration in the plant inside and out. Permanent caretakers were replaced, the private company basically had one guy calling every week or 2 to take figures and the plant got so bad that the Council reclaimed the site.

This is what happens when private companies run plants... thank god this was Wastewater and not a drinking water plant ... water that babies and the sick use every single day.

You are talking absolute nonsense. I work in the water treatment business for a private company and I can tell you for a fact that what you are saying about councils vs private contractors is the exact opposite. Every single plant I've ever seen run by councils have been in a terrible state. We run plants to a much higher standard with way less people and a much smaller budget. The reason for this is because these self same councils hold us to account for the running of the plants, something they can't do with their own plants because of unions and lazy good-for-nothing workers. You come across as someone who has an axe to grind about private contractors. Work for a council yourself do you?

irishfeen

Don't Chute! wrote: »

You are talking absolute nonsense. I work in the water treatment business for a private company and I can tell you for a fact that what you are saying about councils vs private contractors is the exact opposite. Every single plant I've ever seen run by councils have been in a terrible state. We run plants to a much higher standard with way less people and a much smaller budget. The reason for this is because these self same councils hold us to account for the running of the plants, something they can't do with their own plants because of unions and lazy good-for-nothing workers. You come across as someone who has an axe to grind about private contractors. Work for a council yourself do you?

No I do not but have seen it from both sides through inspections of private and publicly run plants... "We run plants to a much higher standard" - how exactly?

As I have said quality compliance is running at 99.5%+ in drinking water at the moment, what are you doing to improve this?

I have been on both private and council run plants during audits and during site visits for college and other courses - drinking water plants (bored wells, river/lake extraction, infiltration) and WWTP's with 4 stage treatment.

As I have said plants have been taken off private contractors in West Cork and in another situation a WWTP was offered to various private firms who in turn said it was not "financially viable" to run the plant and was left in an awful state without investment with a council caretaker trying to run the plant as best he can.

So I can tell you for a "FACT" that it is not black and white - it is impossible to make profits from treatment plants - the profits will come on the backs of us taxpayers greasing up fatcats in big companies.

SEPT 23 1989

Ireland's water will be worth as much as Norway's oil in 100 years time if the global warming merchants are right

irishfeen

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Ireland's water will be worth as much as Norway's oil in 100 years time if the global warming merchants are right

Yes and knowing this country it will be the private companies making the mula laughing at us taxpaying amadán's

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

irishfeen wrote: »

Yes and knowing this country it will be the private companies making the mula laughing at us taxpaying amadán's

Why do you persist with this notion of private ownership? Wait until the constitutional referendum before you start panicking over it.

irishfeen

Vaughn Skinny Hurricane wrote: »

Why do you persist with this notion of private ownership? Wait until the constitutional referendum before you start panicking over it.

It doesn't matter.. if IW go down the route of giving private firms full control over the infrastructure ... DBO's (Design, Build and Operate) and the likes for periods of 20-30 years then the taxpayers will be taken for a ride - if profit margins are tight then either water quality, man power or other areas of the water network will collapse.

There is no way to make a profit from Water production without fees, fees are gone so SLA's should be retained so the public service for the public good in maintained. Yes IW is needed but not the privitisation of the infrastructure... water is too precious to let private companies play games with it.

elperello

Mr Varadker has ruled out a water referendum.
Speaking in the Dail on Wednesday he said any urgency for such a poll was gone.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/taoiseach-rules-out-referendum-on-ownership-of-water-system-1.3244471

Indestructable

What would become of the hundreds or even thousands of council workers who currently do the job?

irishfeen

Indestructable wrote: »

What would become of the hundreds or even thousands of council workers who currently do the job?

It would surely be thousands... we have no idea - either the dole que or a redistribution throughout the public sector but where the hell would people trained with Water Production qualifications (level 5) not mention Chlorine, Fluoride, leak detection courses etc. undertaken be assigned to.

It makes absolutely no sense to give the jobs to private firms but there goes...

Don't Chute!

irishfeen wrote: »

It doesn't matter.. if IW go down the route of giving private firms full control over the infrastructure ... DBO's (Design, Build and Operate) and the likes for periods of 20-30 years then the taxpayers will be taken for a ride - if profit margins are tight then either water quality, man power or other areas of the water network will collapse.

There is no way to make a profit from Water production without fees, fees are gone so SLA's should be retained so the public service for the public good in maintained. Yes IW is needed but not the privitisation of the infrastructure... water is too precious to let private companies play games with it.

DBO's have been in operation in this country since at least 2004. I don't think you understand how water/wastewater treatment is done in this country.

irishfeen

Don't Chute! wrote: »

DBO's have been in operation in this country since at least 2004. I don't think you understand how water/wastewater treatment is done in this country.

Yes I do, vast vast majority of plants are still under the responsibility of County Council staff - DB contracts used too while some of main WWTP's are currently operating under Operate and Maintenance contracts.. to varying degrees of success as I have already pointed out.

Don't Chute!

Indestructable wrote: »

What would become of the hundreds or even thousands of council workers who currently do the job?

A lot would be offered jobs with the private contractors, however, they would actually have to work instead of what they are used to with the council. I have seen plants operated by private companies with 2/3 people as opposed to anything up to 22(!) by the council.

hmmm

It's becoming obvious that this thread is less about "public ownership of water" (whatever that means) and is more about keeping public sector workers happy. Is water supplied by water plants maintained by private operators different water to that supplied by the public sector? Why should a government be in the business of running water plants in the first place?

irishfeen

Don't Chute! wrote: »

A lot would be offered jobs with the private contractors, however, they would actually have to work instead of what they are used to with the council. I have seen plants operated by private companies with 2/3 people as opposed to anything up to 22(!) by the council.

22 running the plant on the Water Production side? if so please name it - the largest number of staff I have seen in water production was 4/5 on shiftwork in a single plant.

irishfeen

hmmm wrote: »

It's becoming obvious that this thread is less about "public ownership of water" (whatever that means) and is more about keeping public sector workers happy. Is water supplied by water plants maintained by private operators different water to that supplied by the public sector? Why should a government be in the business of running water plants in the first place?

The exact same water from the exact same source with one side providing a public service and the other trying to generate profit... how can you make a profit form a Water Treatment Plant??

How can private firms afford caretakers on a permanent basis getting results of 99.5%+ compliance?

Why? because Water is loss making - you either pay a public service workforce (who are already in place) or pay companies profits?

flutered

Allinall wrote: »

The councils made a dogs dinner of managing the water, so this can only be a good move.

councils were deprived of funding from 2011

hmmm

irishfeen wrote: »

Why? because Water is loss making - you either pay a public service workforce (who are already in place) or pay companies profits?

There are plenty of examples of private companies meeting the same standards as public sector staff while generating a profit, and for cheaper than the public sector can do it. We'd still be paying Aer Lingus 600 quid a trip to fly to London, or waiting six months to get a phone line for a start.

In many cases public sector organisations over over-staffed, overpaid and are run extremely inefficiently.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

flutered wrote: »

councils were deprived of funding from 2011

That doesn't explain networks leaking and ignored for decades though.

irishfeen

hmmm wrote: »

There are plenty of examples of private companies meeting the same standards as public sector staff while generating a profit, and for cheaper than the public sector can do it. We'd still be paying Aer Lingus 600 quid a trip to fly to London, or waiting six months to get a phone line for a start.

But you are not telling me how you make a profit from a WTP without charges...

flutered

Bishopsback wrote: »

Last I heard, it was being mooted that a referendum would be held to enshrine the ownership of IW in the constitution.
I'll look it up.

the t-shock said when releasing the number of referenda to be held, claimed there was no reason to hold one on iw, he also said that the super duper new bot hq would not cost money to run

irishfeen

Vaughn Skinny Hurricane wrote: »

That doesn't explain networks leaking and ignored for decades though.

Water was underfunded for decades - its very simple to understand... money was redirected to roads, bins, lighting, footpaths etc

The bad thing about a water network is its underground and nobody sees it so people forget about it!

In the name of Jazus, who would buy Irish water? It’d cost more than it’d ever make to upgrade the infrastructure. Murphy and Co have moved on to their latest pet cause - ghettos for the homeless and abortions for all. Courtesy of the taxpayer, of course.