Water charges revisited?

McMurphy · 28-06-2018 07:37AM

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 · 28-06-2018 02:45PM

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 · 28-06-2018 02:55PM

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 · 28-06-2018 03:02PM

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 · 28-06-2018 03:12PM

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.

28-06-2018 06:01PM

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 · 28-06-2018 07:02PM

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 · 28-06-2018 07:18PM

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.

28-06-2018 08:13PM

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 · 28-06-2018 08:23PM

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 · 28-06-2018 08:30PM

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 · 28-06-2018 08:32PM

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 · 28-06-2018 10:33PM

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 · 28-06-2018 10:41PM

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 · 29-06-2018 01:18AM

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 · 29-06-2018 01:37AM

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 · 29-06-2018 02:00AM

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 · 29-06-2018 02:45AM

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 · 29-06-2018 05:40AM

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 · 29-06-2018 01:37PM

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 · 29-06-2018 01:42PM

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 · 29-06-2018 01:47PM

Electricity is metered too.

James Brown · 29-06-2018 01:58PM

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 · 29-06-2018 02:16PM

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 · 29-06-2018 02:37PM

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 · 29-06-2018 02:50PM

Matt Barrett wrote: »

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

Yes

29-06-2018 02:59PM

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 · 29-06-2018 03:32PM

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 · 29-06-2018 04:34PM

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 · 29-06-2018 04:57PM

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?

Water charges revisited?

Comments