Water charges revisited?

Edward M

Matt Barrett wrote: »

But they're good enough to carry out IW works as long as it's under the pretense it's all shiny and new.



Agree to an extent. They were however underfunded and we simply replaced same with same at great cost to the tax payer.

All that was needed was more money invested and a national led project overseeing LA's as they carried out the work. So what we have know, without the bells and whistles of IW.

But none of any of that addresses where the funding for the infrastructure is to come from.
Its going back over dead issues, I'm wondering for future purposes how this can be solved.
Water is one of our big wastes given so much of it just leaks away, and that causes such problems when we do get dry spells.

Good loser

Edward M wrote: »

But none of any of that addresses where the funding for the infrastructure is to come from.
Its going back over dead issues, I'm wondering for future purposes how this can be solved.
Water is one of our big wastes given so much of it just leaks away, and that causes such problems when we do get dry spells.

Precisely.

As Micheal Healy Rea would say 'anyone with a brain in their head could see that those who use the water should pay for it.' As 20% of the population does already.

The 'campaign' against the charges was mind-numbingly stupid in all its aspects, taking standards of public debate to a new low. Just like the Brexit stuff next door.

Of course it's not fair to blame SF, Paul Murphy or Joe Higgins. It is/was solely the responsibility of Fianna Fail. Long may they languish in the polls!

blanch152

Good loser wrote: »

Precisely.

As Micheal Healy Rea would say 'anyone with a brain in their head could see that those who use the water should pay for it.' As 20% of the population does already.

The 'campaign' against the charges was mind-numbingly stupid in all its aspects, taking standards of public debate to a new low. Just like the Brexit stuff next door.

Of course it's not fair to blame SF, Paul Murphy or Joe Higgins. It is/was solely the responsibility of Fianna Fail. Long may they languish in the polls!

I hadn't thought of it before, but you are right, the anti-water charges lot were intellectually and politically at the same level as the Brexiteers, riding a popular idea to get support even though it made no sense, but it made them popular.

Fann Linn

I look forward to FF/FG suggesting the reintroduction of water charges prior to the next election.

Spanish Eyes

Keep the USC and ring fence it for Irish water. At least everyone is paying for it then.

Well apart from those who have paddling pools galore and do not work/contribute to the taxation fund.

There is so much inequality in this country regarding paying for things!

Nuff said now.

blanch152

Fann Linn wrote: »

I look forward to FF/FG suggesting the reintroduction of water charges prior to the next election.

Too smart for that. EU review after the next election could be the catalyst. Hands are tied etc. Once Brexit is shown up for the mess that it is, the Commission can flex their muscles against us, especially as we may owe them if there is no hard border.

hatrickpatrick

Edward M wrote: »

Well OK, fair play for your view, but how did you equate it to Leo's general disdain for people, like he wasn't taoiseach or minister responsible even, at the time?

Jesus that was a Freudian slip, I meant the current FG establishment (2011-present), not Leo specifically

View

blanch152 wrote: »

Matt Barrett wrote: »

They should have simply revamped the existing water departments. There was one in every council in the country, (overseen by the same government department oversees IW). And ironically, the same local council water departments are the ones orchestrating and overseeing IW in their area.
This draws the suspicion of privatisation that they opted to set up a company and replace a system already in place, with the same system, just with a very expensive head office. An entity separate enough that it could be sold, which was the plan as far as I'm concerned. It's always about short sighted profit which generally results in the tax payer getting a beating down the road.

If they try a run at it again, I would suggest funding the water departments in place and IW should be nothing more than a head office, overseeing for government that targets are met. If metering came back it would be a council job. Before anyone loses it, the council use contractors all the time for everything, so they would look after Dinny or whomever got the contract, (but Dinny).

Funding the water departments in place? Really? The people that were responsible for spending the guts of a century putting in place the worst public water infrastructure in the Western World? Of all of the solutions, this is the most ridiculous.

The local authority water departments had a century to deliver a fit-for-purpose water service, and they didn't, yet you want them to have the job.

As for privatisation being the ultimate objective, there was one line in one European document, out of millions of lines that were written on Irish Water that mentioned privatisation, and the reply from the Irish government was that privatisation wasn't envisaged, yet still people continue to bang the privatisation drum.

I really don't understand how perspective is lost so easily.

Local authorities were until recently entirely dependent on central government for their finances (and largely still are). It is therefore ridiculous to blame them for the state of the water infrastructure.

We have the least local “local authorities” in Europe, yet blame them even though it is the deliberate policy of our central government of keeping local authorities on their knees.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

I hadn't thought of it before, but you are right, the anti-water charges lot were intellectually and politically at the same level as the Brexiteers, riding a popular idea to get support even though it made no sense, but it made them popular.

But wasn't it an independent expert commission, (appointed by the govt,) who ultimately decided that water charges needed to go

You're giving the "anti charges lot" some undeserved credit imo.

blanch152

View wrote: »

Local authorities were until recently entirely dependent on central government for their finances (and largely still are). It is therefore ridiculous to blame them for the state of the water infrastructure.

We have the least local “local authorities” in Europe, yet blame them even though it is the deliberate policy of our central government of keeping local authorities on their knees.

They can't even collect business rates, the only revenue that they have full control of.

http://www.echo.ie/news/article/rates-owed-to-council-came-to-around-13m

Look at that for compliance.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

But wasn't it an independent expert commission, (appointed by the govt,) who ultimately decided that water charges needed to go

You're giving the "anti charges lot" some undeserved credit imo.

Doesn't affect my opinion that anti-water charges people are equivalent to Brexiteers.

Kevin Duffy has made many strange decisions in his previous life as Labour Court chairman, he had a few overturned by the High Court.

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

Doesn't affect my opinion that anti-water charges people are equivalent to Brexiteers.

Kevin Duffy has made many strange decisions in his previous life as Labour Court chairman, he had a few overturned by the High Court.

So, your mind/opinion has been made up regardless of whatever facts and evidence is presented...

In other words, you're right no matter what....

All sounds a bit Brexiteerish tbh.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

You actually don't get it. As independent authorities, the local authorities would not have to follow any orders. Imagine if Offaly County Council or Kildare County Council refused to do the work on the pipeline from the Shannon. It would be stuck half-done for years.

Now, the answer to that is a statutory body with the responsibility to enforce co-operation and to organise the overall supply of water and treatment of wastewater, voila - Irish Water.

Like the Department of the Environment?
So you feel the only way for the state to orchestrate an all country upgrade was to create a quango? Nonsense Blanch.

James Brown

Edward M wrote: »

But none of any of that addresses where the funding for the infrastructure is to come from.
Its going back over dead issues, I'm wondering for future purposes how this can be solved.
Water is one of our big wastes given so much of it just leaks away, and that causes such problems when we do get dry spells.

It relates. They can find the money if it's in their interest to do so. We had water departments in every LA. We had the Dept. of the Environment overseeing works on a national level.
The problem was massive disorganisation, due to disinterest and under funding. it was a patch job for decades.

The solution? Invest money organise a nation wide refit. The state wasn't interested.
Roll on to 2011, in the throws of an economic meltdown, after securing a loan, a quango is set up, which is still under investigation for the metering/siteserv issue.
How can we move forward with the confidence of the public? Cut out the con job/sweet deal/look after our own scams.
All we ever needed was a head office with an eye to the country overseeing the works by contractors and local councils. Essentially what we have, but without Irish Water, which was not needed. It was simply easier to 'look after our own' when there was a quango in the mix.

Amirani

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Like the Department of the Environment?
So you feel the only way for the state to orchestrate an all country upgrade was to create a quango? Nonsense Blanch.

Funding options for the Department of the Environment are much more constrained. Their debt is automatically State debt, not the case with an off balance sheet entity like Irish Water. This is the same model used by many European countries.

James Brown

Amirani wrote: »

Funding options for the Department of the Environment are much more constrained. Their debt is automatically State debt, not the case with an off balance sheet entity like Irish Water. This is the same model used by many European countries.

They DoE could oversee the administration of an all Ireland roll out to ensure areas were working in tandem with each other at a far lower cost than setting up a quango.
The funding for water supply should continue to come from general taxation IMO. The cost would have been far less if the interest had of been there all along. It was the lure of the 'look after our own' quango created IW and metering, not water supply concerns or the environment, IMO.

Matt Barrett

Matt Barrett wrote: »

It relates. They can find the money if it's in their interest to do so. We had water departments in every LA. We had the Dept. of the Environment overseeing works on a national level.
The problem was massive disorganisation, due to disinterest and under funding. it was a patch job for decades.

The solution? Invest money organise a nation wide refit. The state wasn't interested.
Roll on to 2011, in the throws of an economic meltdown, after securing a loan, a quango is set up, which is still under investigation for the metering/siteserv issue.
How can we move forward with the confidence of the public? Cut out the con job/sweet deal/look after our own scams.
All we ever needed was a head office with an eye to the country overseeing the works by contractors and local councils. Essentially what we have, but without Irish Water, which was not needed. It was simply easier to 'look after our own' when there was a quango in the mix.

Please stop kidding yourself. In the bad old days, if you got a leak, you'd be lucky to have a LA crew come look at it a week later and then spend hours looking into the hold they dig to fix the leak. Since Irish Water came into being, leaks were fixed speedily and properly. No fear of the leak recurring weeks or months later.

Now we are faced with water shortages due mainly to wasteful "use" of water. Well done, peaceful protesters. You've gotten the service YOU deserve. Those of us who see the merit of paying for what we use don't thank you.

James Brown

Deleted User wrote: »

Please stop kidding yourself. In the bad old days, if you got a leak, you'd be lucky to have a LA crew come look at it a week later and then spend hours looking into the hold they dig to fix the leak. Since Irish Water came into being, leaks were fixed speedily and properly. No fear of the leak recurring weeks or months later.

Now we are faced with water shortages due mainly to wasteful "use" of water. Well done, peaceful protesters. You've gotten the service YOU deserve. Those of us who see the merit of paying for what we use don't thank you.

Not true. I've depended on the LA for water supply all of my life and maybe was without water twice that I can recall and only for a few hours each time, but it would be foolish for me to assume my personal experience is the same for everyone else.
Who are Irish Water in your mind? It's contractors working with the LA's. Do you think we shipped in these people from abroad?
The rest of your comments are nonsensical. The protests were about the charge, the quango and the con. Where was all this common sense approach over the last fifty or sixty years? We have the service the state is happy to keep, seeing as there's little room for them to 'look after their own' they've lost interest again.

McMurphy

Deleted User wrote: »

Now we are faced with water shortages due mainly to wasteful "use" of water. Well done, peaceful protesters. You've gotten the service YOU deserve. Those of us who see the merit of paying for what we use don't thank you.

Actually.....


We are experiencing water shortages due the above average temperatures and unusual dry spell, (hear wave).

Water shortages have been long associated with heatwaves in this country for years, and undoubtedly will remain so well into the future, with or without your majestical Irish Water.

I shall remind you once again that the country is currently devoid of a system of direct charging for water usage due to the findings of an expert commission put in place by a fine gael govt.

You and blanch (despite being fairly regular posters in water and politics threads) seem to keep missing that fact either purposely or unknowingly.

Perhaps try channelling some of your obvious anger and butt hurt towards them, instead of your various scapegoats.

Johnny Dogs

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Actually.....


We are experiencing water shortages due the above average temperatures and unusual dry spell, (hear wave).

Water shortages have been long associated with heatwaves in this country for years, and undoubtedly will remain so well into the future, with or without your majestical Irish Water.

I shall remind you once again that the country is currently devoid of a system of direct charging for water usage due to the findings of an expert commission put in place by a fine gael govt.

You and blanch (despite being fairly regular posters in water and politics threads) seem to keep missing that fact either purposely or unknowingly.

Perhaps try channelling some of your obvious anger and butt hurt towards them, instead of your various scapegoats.

And, why are we experiencing water shortages in a heatwave? People are using more water. I read where there was an appeal made to some stores to stop selling plastic pools! Now, if people were paying per liter, they’d think twice and hopefully there’d be enough for everyone.

BTW, I’m not angry. Frustrated, maybe at peoples shortsightedness.

crossman47

Matt Barrett wrote: »

They DoE could oversee the administration of an all Ireland roll out to ensure areas were working in tandem with each other at a far lower cost than setting up a quango.
The funding for water supply should continue to come from general taxation IMO. The cost would have been far less if the interest had of been there all along. It was the lure of the 'look after our own' quango created IW and metering, not water supply concerns or the environment, IMO.

The problem is money spent directly has to be borrowed and there are restrictions on government borrowing. IW as a commercial entity could have borrowed off the states books as, say, Electric Ireland do. Water charges would also have made users more careful about wastage. However that argument is over because it was handled so ineptly and gave the likes of Paul Murphy a chance to make a name for themselves. The fact they were harming the nation in the long term was never going to worry them.

McMurphy

Deleted User wrote: »

And, why are we experiencing water shortages in a heatwave? People are using more water. I read where there was an appeal made to some stores to stop selling plastic pools! Now, if people were paying per liter, they’d think twice and hopefully there’d be enough for everyone.

Sigh....

Can you please outline to me how capped charges (which is what we had for a wee while) would have stopped people from filling their super soakers and paddling pools (FG capped charges, do you remember?) You can use Venn diagrams if you feel the need.

BTW, I’m not angry. Frustrated, maybe at peoples shortsightedness.

Whose shortsightedness?

Are you saying the commison of experts put together by FG were wrong in their conclusions?

Still blaming other people are we?

Edward M

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Actually.....


We are experiencing water shortages due the above average temperatures and unusual dry spell, (hear wave).

Water shortages have been long associated with heatwaves in this country for years, and undoubtedly will remain so well into the future, with or without your majestical Irish Water.

I shall remind you once again that the country is currently devoid of a system of direct charging for water usage due to the findings of an expert commission put in place by a fine gael govt.

You and blanch (despite being fairly regular posters in water and politics threads) seem to keep missing that fact either purposely or unknowingly.

Perhaps try channelling some of your obvious anger and butt hurt towards them, instead of your various scapegoats.

That's true, but leakage in is a problem also.
If we could cut that down then there should Bea vastly longer storage time.
Also I see demand in Dublin is surpassing their ability to treat the water to meet that demand even if the water was in copious supply.
We can't just keep saying that the exchequer has to be able to cope with all this.

Akrasia

This entire thread is a fail as long as almost half the water we purify gets lost through leaks.

How is charging people for water a solution to a system where the overwhelming majority of water waste is down to a crumbling network that needs investment. The National debt exists as a way to pay for long term investment in national infrastructure. The government wants to spend a fortune diverting shannon water to dublin before fixing the leaks in the water network?. If Irish water want to cut water wastage, they need to use meters to find and fix the leaks, and then worry about people taking long showers or watering their flowers.

And then there are the low hanging fruits that our government have consistently failed to take advantage of. Why do we still not have regulations requiring dual flush mechanisms on our toilets?

A piece of legislation costing zero, would save a huge amount of water into the future for hardly any consumer cost.

We could ban the sale of washing machines and dishwashers below A+ efficiency

Akrasia

Deleted User wrote: »

And, why are we experiencing water shortages in a heatwave? People are using more water. I read where there was an appeal made to some stores to stop selling plastic pools! Now, if people were paying per liter, they’d think twice and hopefully there’d be enough for everyone.

BTW, I’m not angry. Frustrated, maybe at peoples shortsightedness.

if the leaks were fixed we would have way more water left in the system so that people could use the water for their enjoyment rather than having it soaking into the ground

Good loser

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Sigh....

Can you please outline to me how capped charges (which is what we had for a wee while) would have stopped people from filling their super soakers and paddling pools (FG capped charges, do you remember?) You can use Venn diagrams if you feel the need.


Whose shortsightedness?

Are you saying the commison of experts put together by FG were wrong in their conclusions?

Still blaming other people are we?

What are you talking about?


We have no charges because FF insisted so. FF allowed an exception for excessive use. Which, I believe, has not yet been introduced.

NinetyTwoTeam

Charging again for water will not make improve our water service, and was never going to.

It was such a blatant attempt to fleece people and hand the money over to already rich businessmen in sweetheart deals, that there will be no way to convince the public otherwise, ever. People would love to blame the non-payers if we havr trouble with in future but it became a lightning rod for people to express how fed up they were with the corruption and incompetence in our government, and their inability to collect a water charge is their fault, for being so corrupt and incompetent over and over again.

'Oh, well now we really have a problem and we need to ask you again for money for water. We promise we won't spend it on logos and laughing yoga classes this time and we won't put guys like the guy who bankrupted Sligo (and already was on insane money with a golden handshake and pension) on the board and all that type of craic this time, we promise.'

Yeah, that just won't wash.

jimmycrackcorm

NinetyTwoTeam wrote:

Charging again for water will not make improve our water service, and was never going to.

An improved water infrastructure including fixing leaks requires extra investment. That means raising extra money for that. Whats the best way to do that?

If it helps then a comparable infrastructure model is electricity infrastructure.

mickoneill31

Akrasia wrote: »

How is charging people for water a solution to a system where the overwhelming majority of water waste is down to a crumbling network that needs investment.

Does that question not answer itself?

Our LA is putting out warnings about the amount of water being used. In our local Facebook group people are buying and selling swimming pools. I saw one guy washing his driveway (that's what it looked like to me, I don't know why) on my way home from work and another with a sprinkler in his front garden. This was in the space of about 1Km so not a huge walk.

The Bishop Basher

Good loser wrote: »

We have no charges because FF insisted so. FF allowed an exception for excessive use. Which, I believe, has not yet been introduced.

No. We have no water charges because WE insisted so..

Or at least a significant number of us..

FF were in favour of charges until they saw the popular vote disappear and so they jumped on the bandwagon, as they tend to do, and everyone else who called us scum and spongers at the time are now busy collecting their refunds

James Brown

crossman47 wrote: »

The problem is money spent directly has to be borrowed and there are restrictions on government borrowing. IW as a commercial entity could have borrowed off the states books as, say, Electric Ireland do. Water charges would also have made users more careful about wastage. However that argument is over because it was handled so ineptly and gave the likes of Paul Murphy a chance to make a name for themselves. The fact they were harming the nation in the long term was never going to worry them.

I understand the 'off the books' angle. Everything I said stands. Paul Murphy was and is a minor politician. Fine Gael and Labour made him the focus not the people. Who harmed the nation, the crony wasters of tax payer money or the people who said no to it? This was never about water supply and maintenance, they, along with the environment, were mere vehicles to gouge the tax payer, off the books.

James Brown

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

An improved water infrastructure including fixing leaks requires extra investment. That means raising extra money for that. Whats the best way to do that?

If it helps then a comparable infrastructure model is electricity infrastructure.

I think he means, not if the lions share of the money went on sweet deals, looking after our own, metering, laughing yoga and not repairs. Which is what happened.

IMO, water should continue to be paid though general taxation. If the state can't carry out it's house keeping maybe we need politicians who can, or more truthfully, want to.

Chips Lovell

Electricity is metered too.

James Brown

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Electricity is metered too.

And both Electricity and gas is still fully state owned and operated right?
Do you genuinely believe water would never be privatised once metered? We'd have the FF/FG bright lights telling us IW is a company and 'can't have a monopoly, that's just the way it is' and then we'd have some Maltese led consortium getting a sweet deal and then the public charged what ever, with those on welfare getting state aid anyway and politicians telling the squeezed middle 'our hands are tied'. It's not like any of this would be a shock to be fair.

Red_Wake

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Electricity is metered too.

And both Electricity and gas is still fully state owned and operated right?
Do you genuinely believe water would never be privatised once metered? We'd have the FF/FG bright lights telling us IW is a company and 'can't have a monopoly, that's just the way it is' and then we'd have some Maltese led consortium getting a sweet deal and then the public charged what ever, with those on welfare getting state aid anyway and politicians telling the squeezed middle 'our hands are tied'. It's not like any of this would be a shock to be fair.

Not everyone gets a bee in their bonnet over privatisation Matt. Private businesses provide the majority of services we explicitly interacts with on a daily basis.

And again, as has already been pointed out to you, one lines about privatisation amongst how many thousands? The idea of privatisation of IW being inevitable was a bogeyman made up by its detractors.

James Brown

Red_Wake wrote: »

Not everyone gets a bee in their bonnet over privatisation Matt. Private businesses provide the majority of services we explicitly interacts with on a daily basis.

And again, as has already been pointed out to you, one lines about privatisation amongst how many thousands? The idea of privatisation of IW being inevitable was a bogeyman made up by its detractors.

As already was responded to this is not based on any published line. Detractors because they believed it would be.
They didn't set up IW in the manner they did because they are stupid. It was no accident the sweet deal was so sweet, (currently under investigation), it was no accident 'we look after our own', the board appointments weren't a lottery. The consultant fees were at their discretion. So you believe these self interested parties would never privatise? What's wrong with privatisation of water? Companies are profit led not quality led. And the public would be held to ransom IMO. Would we see repairs slowed in rural areas where there wasn't enough profit for them to rush into it? We should never privatise essential services.

Chips Lovell

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Do you genuinely believe water would never be privatised once metered? .

Yes

Rennaws

Rennaws wrote: »

No. We have no water charges because WE insisted so..

Or at least a significant number of us..

FF were in favour of charges until they saw the popular vote disappear and so they jumped on the bandwagon, as they tend to do, and everyone else who called us scum and spongers at the time are now busy collecting their refunds

and are also suffering from water shortages thanks to a serious serious lack on investment.

Red_Wake

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Red_Wake wrote: »

Not everyone gets a bee in their bonnet over privatisation Matt. Private businesses provide the majority of services we explicitly interacts with on a daily basis.

And again, as has already been pointed out to you, one lines about privatisation amongst how many thousands? The idea of privatisation of IW being inevitable was a bogeyman made up by its detractors.

As already was responded to this is not based on any published line. Detractors because they believed it would be.
They didn't set up IW in the manner they did because they are stupid. It was no accident the sweet deal was so sweet, (currently under investigation), it was no accident 'we look after our own', the board appointments weren't a lottery. The consultant fees were at their discretion. So you believe these self interested parties would never privatise? What's wrong with privatisation of water? Companies are profit led not quality led. And the public would be held to ransom IMO. Would we see repairs slowed in rural areas where there wasn't enough profit for them to rush into it? We should never privatise essential services.

I don't believe there were any plans to privatise IW, and there is no credible evidence of these plans, no more than there is evidence of alients.

"Companies are profit led not quality led" is utter nonsense. This completely ignores that many modern companies attempt to be as ethical as possible[environmentally friendly practices as an example].

Rural areas are not currently provided with water. Many rural dwellers drill their own wells for water - is this not exactly the same behaviour you're afraid of?

You seem to have an ideological hatred of private companies that hark back to the practices of Victorian Britain.

The Bishop Basher

Aegir wrote: »

and are also suffering from water shortages thanks to a serious serious lack on investment.

No we're suffering water shortages because of unusual drought conditions..

That aside..

The government already get more then half of everything I earn in both direct and indirect taxes.

Those of us on the high rates, also pay separately again for all the services that would be normally be provided for by our taxes in any properly run state.

I'm not paying another tax just for the existence of a company who's sole purpose is to raise the money to pay for it's own existence and even then it would barley pay for itself. That was the lunacy of Irish Water.

Not a cent of the money raised was ever going to be spent on infrastructure.

Austerity is over. We're supposed to be in recovery yet we're still losing as much in our take home pay as we ever were.

Why is that and when do we start seeing our money back ?

James Brown

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

Yes

Touché

Red_Wake wrote: »

I don't believe there were any plans to privatise IW, and there is no credible evidence of these plans, no more than there is evidence of alients.

"Companies are profit led not quality led" is utter nonsense. This completely ignores that many modern companies attempt to be as ethical as possible[environmentally friendly practices as an example].

Rural areas are not currently provided with water. Many rural dwellers drill their own wells for water - is this not exactly the same behaviour you're afraid of?

You seem to have an ideological hatred of private companies that hark back to the practices of Victorian Britain.

It's utter 'nonsense' because 'many', not all? Not so much nonsense so. Don't we have problems with broadband roll out in rural areas because it's not worth the cost?
I've issue with the tax payer losing out for government shortsighted nest feathering. Look, don't personalise it thank you very much. I've explained my reasoning why, don't try fudge and make out it's me saying 'just 'cause, that's why'.
How do you think water charges may be re-introduced?

blanch152

NinetyTwoTeam wrote: »

Charging again for water will not make improve our water service, and was never going to.

It was such a blatant attempt to fleece people and hand the money over to already rich businessmen in sweetheart deals, that there will be no way to convince the public otherwise, ever. People would love to blame the non-payers if we havr trouble with in future but it became a lightning rod for people to express how fed up they were with the corruption and incompetence in our government, and their inability to collect a water charge is their fault, for being so corrupt and incompetent over and over again.

'Oh, well now we really have a problem and we need to ask you again for money for water. We promise we won't spend it on logos and laughing yoga classes this time and we won't put guys like the guy who bankrupted Sligo (and already was on insane money with a golden handshake and pension) on the board and all that type of craic this time, we promise.'

Yeah, that just won't wash.

I just cannot believe that there are still people spouting the nonsense in bold.

There was no plan to privatise.
There was no plan for sweetheart deals.

What I can tell you is that now that we are facing the water shortages predicted by the supporters of water charges, there seems to be no sign of the countless posters who were telling us time and again that Ireland doesn't have a water supply issue because it rains so much. They got that one wrong.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Actually.....


We are experiencing water shortages due the above average temperatures and unusual dry spell, (hear wave).

Water shortages have been long associated with heatwaves in this country for years, and undoubtedly will remain so well into the future, with or without your majestical Irish Water.

I shall remind you once again that the country is currently devoid of a system of direct charging for water usage due to the findings of an expert commission put in place by a fine gael govt.

You and blanch (despite being fairly regular posters in water and politics threads) seem to keep missing that fact either purposely or unknowingly.

Perhaps try channelling some of your obvious anger and butt hurt towards them, instead of your various scapegoats.

There is a lot of blame to throw around in relation to water charges.

The behaviour of the charlatans like Sinn Fein, Paul Murphy et al. was the worst.
FF changing their mind twice was not unexpected, but typically depressing.
FG were weak by allowing FF to force them into the expert commission route in the negotiations for government. They should have had another election.

But mostly the people themselves who believed we had an endless supply of water (shown up today to be completely false), who believed we all had a divine right to water, who believed the fairy tales about privatisation and what forming a company means etc. They were all fools taken in by the conmen of the left.

The Legend Of Kira

The Uk which has a system of direct water charges since their water supplies got privatised in the late 1980,s yet despite direct charging for water + privatisation- there is still talk of possible water shortage to hit the Uk.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-weather-latest-water-shortage-hosepipe-ban-northern-ireland-forecast-heatwave-a8422401.html

https://news.sky.com/story/water-shortages-warning-on-hottest-day-of-the-year-11419923

blanch152

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

The Uk which has a system of direct water charges since their water supplies got privatised in the late 1980,s yet despite direct charging for water + privatisation- there is still talk of possible water shortage to hit the Uk.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-weather-latest-water-shortage-hosepipe-ban-northern-ireland-forecast-heatwave-a8422401.html

https://news.sky.com/story/water-shortages-warning-on-hottest-day-of-the-year-11419923

They privatised, we were never going to do that.

The Legend Of Kira

The Legend Of Kira wrote: »

The Uk which has a system of direct water charges since their water supplies got privatised in the late 1980,s yet despite direct charging for water + privatisation- there is still talk of possible water shortage to hit the Uk.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-weather-latest-water-shortage-hosepipe-ban-northern-ireland-forecast-heatwave-a8422401.html

https://news.sky.com/story/water-shortages-warning-on-hottest-day-of-the-year-11419923

It’s not a shortage of water. It’s struggling to treat enough to supply the increased demand, hence the hose pipe ban. I’ve seen some posts on Facebook of Irish home made pools leaking away and a hose running continually to keep them filled! Shur, they’re not paying for it so what’s the problem?

The Bishop Basher

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It’s not a shortage of water. It’s struggling to treat enough to supply the increased demand, hence the hose pipe ban. I’ve seen some posts on Facebook of Irish home made pools leaking away and a hose running continually to keep them filled! Shur, they’re not paying for it so what’s the problem?

Even if we were all paying water charges it would only be enough to keep the lights on at Irish Water..

It would have made zero difference to investement in the infrastructure.

Seeing as you ask, the problem is that successive governments throughout previous decades have failed to prioritize and invest in our infrastructure despite introducing taxes to do so.. sound familiar ??

McMurphy

Deleted User wrote: »

It’s not a shortage of water. It’s struggling to treat enough to supply the increased demand, hence the hose pipe ban. I’ve seen some posts on Facebook of Irish home made pools leaking away and a hose running continually to keep them filled! Shur, they’re not paying for it so what’s the problem?

Who is paying for it then? Is it magic free water they're getting pumped into their abode, cos I know Simon Coveney was reminding us a while ago about just how much it took to keep the water services running.

Oh and by the way, if water charges were still here under FGs regimes they'd still be free to leave their hoses on, as they seen fit to cap charges, and only meter some people, while averaging the others.

Get over it maryanne, they buckled and bent.

Drumpot

Ironically I didn’t mind the water charge as much as the property tax. At least you are actually getting something for the charge!

But my issue with water charges was that it was setting us up for private water companies. As soon as we hit another financial meltdown (question is only when) there will be plenty of private companies happy to bail us out if we just let them look after our water system.

I would love it enshrined in our constitution that there are no conditions that our water can be privatized. It’s literally the most important thing in our lives and yet most of the worlds water supply is in private hands. Ever wonder why ??

Rennaws

Rennaws wrote: »

Even if we were all paying water charges it would only be enough to keep the lights on at Irish Water..

It would have made zero difference to investement in the infrastructure

I do believe that your misinformation was pointed out to you before. Every new business has set up charges. These are usually one offs and very different from running charges.

Political suicide.
FG ruined it with their built for sale version of IW

They were looking at lining their pockets (privately) and that of their close supporter, in a few years, but were seen through.

They also refused to guarantee that IW would be solely used for network upgrade and repair. Just like how property tax was meant to be a supplement income for local government, it really meant that central government slashed the funds being given to local. Along with redirecting funds elsewhere.

If they had stated IW can not be sold, all funds raised will service the network, and rates drop as the network is repaired there would have been no mass protests.
Just the regular rabble