Water charges for excessive usage

McMurphy · 30-10-2019 10:15am

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Let it go lad . You've asked several times you ain't going to get a coherent answer. MA has made lots of claims about IW and has been wrong more often than she has been right. ;-)

Maryanne was one of the lucky ones, didn't she openly claim that she availed of the bribe grant, which if memory serves me correctly, she used towards taxing the motor.

I also believe she said she has her own sceptic tank, and so was only ever liable for 50% of any charges anyway (water in, but not out).

She therefore profited from the brain fart, so no doubt isn't part of the siffed middle Ireland crew.

Benedict · 30-10-2019 10:23am

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Let it go lad . You've asked several times you ain't going to get a coherent answer. MA has made lots of claims about IW and has been wrong more often than she has been right. ;-)

You're correct of course. Waste of time - but I thought I'd give it one last shot just for luck.

30-10-2019 10:28am

Benedict wrote: »

I could respond to M84's comments - but she first needs to address the issue of how IW can know if a house without a meter is using excessive amounts and the extent of that usage so that an appropriate fine can be imposed.

This challenge is still live and needs to be addressed.

She appears to be the only contributor who insists that this is possible and we would all love to hear evidence - or an admission that she is withdrawing the claim.

I DO wish you would read posts fully. This was answered in a post that I copied and pasted AND supplied the link to the source.

Charges for excessive use are coming. Get over it and move on. By conserving water, these charges won’t affect you. Look at the bigger picture and protect the planet for our children’s children.

Snow Garden · 30-10-2019 11:11am

You wont see arrogance like this from FG for a long long time

Plumbthedepths · 30-10-2019 11:13am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I DO wish you would read posts fully. This was answered in a post that I copied and pasted AND supplied the link to the source.

Charges for excessive use are coming. Get over it and move on. By conserving water, these charges won’t affect you. Look at the bigger picture and protect the planet for our children’s children.

I remember a former spokesperson for IW stating if people conserve water the unit price will increase. How does that help conservation?
The excessive use limit is all about boiling the frog slowly.

_Kaiser_ · 30-10-2019 12:21pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Charges for excessive use are coming. Get over it and move on. By conserving water, these charges won’t affect you. Look at the bigger picture and protect the planet for our children’s children.

I do love this attitude :rolleyes:

Shut up and pay up, and think of the children!

It's nonsense.. it's FG's superquango trying to justify its existence and them trying to get us used to paying for something we already pay for through taxation so they can ultimately sell it off under undoubtedly more questionable circumstances.

FF may be all about the builders but at least they built. With FG it's all about double taxation and privatisation... and then people wonder why FF always get back in?

Brendan Bendar · 30-10-2019 2:00pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I do love this attitude :rolleyes:

Shut up and pay up, and think of the children!

It's nonsense.. it's FG's superquango trying to justify its existence and them trying to get us used to paying for something we already pay for through taxation so they can ultimately sell it off under undoubtedly more questionable circumstances.

FF may be all about the builders but at least they built. With FG it's all about double taxation and privatisation... and then people wonder why FF always get back in?

I love this attitude

Shure don’t we pay for everything through taxation?

I love the newfound sexiness about climate change, kids marching, protests outside the Dail but when asked to pay a few bob for clean potable water all hell breaks loose and FG are hammered from every angle.

Kind of proves the point we are up for everything we won’t pay for anything.

This privatisation crack also makes me chuckle.

We have very short memories.

What the lefties want is a workforce who when bedded in cannot be gotten rid of, low productivity, highly unionized , industrial unrest due to the above always on the horizon and then the Govt. will be dragged in and John Q Tee will be stiffed.

Have a good day y’all.

James Brown · 30-10-2019 2:15pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I love this attitude

Shure don’t we pay for everything through taxation?

I love the newfound sexiness about climate change, kids marching, protests outside the Dail but when asked to pay a few bob for clean potable water all hell breaks loose and FG are hammered from every angle.

Kind of proves the point we are up for everything we won’t pay for anything.

This privatisation crack also makes me chuckle.

We have very short memories.

What the lefties want is a workforce who when bedded in cannot be gotten rid of, low productivity, highly unionized , industrial unrest due to the above always on the horizon and then the Govt. will be dragged in and John Q Tee will be stiffed.

Have a good day y’all.

This been covered Bren lad.

Irish Water contracts never went to tender
FOUR major contracts were awarded by Irish Water without being put out to public competition, the Irish Independent has learned.

The company used exemptions in EU procurement rules to award contracts for computer services to four suppliers already working for parent company Bord Gais.

The revelation comes just a week after the company's managing director, John Tierney, said all contracts were awarded following "open competition".

The matter is expected to be raised today when Mr Tierney appears before the Dail Environment Committee to answer questions on how the utility company spent €50m on external consultants.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/irish-water-contracts-never-went-to-tender-29913224.html

People whinging about the left possibly doing what the right already does.

That means that any Irish Water employee with more than a year’s service can automatically bring a claim for unfair dismissal if they are terminated. Employees with less than this period of service can usually be dismissed with greater ease, but it is likely that a significant proportion, if not the majority, of employees within the company already have the requisite service.
https://fora.ie/readme/irish-water-staff-2772451-May2016/

IW was a brand shiny new quango and look what they gone and done...

We do pay for everything in taxation. If FF/FG can't manage it, that's their fault not ours.

seamus · 30-10-2019 2:15pm

I think you'll find that people who protest on enviromental issues are very supportive of the state imposing charges on people who are wasteful with water.

In hindsight a lot of the resistance to Irish water was a primitive example of the more modern rabble-rousing we see on Facebook and other social media. People were whipped up into believing that the state was preparing to privatise the water network and the average individual would be paying thousands a year for a trickle of water. And fuelled by a backdrop of austerity; people were legitimately panicking about their personal financial situation.

Introducing charges now will go through with barely a peep.

Plumbthedepths · 30-10-2019 2:18pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I love this attitude

Shure don’t we pay for everything through taxation?

I love the newfound sexiness about climate change, kids marching, protests outside the Dail but when asked to pay a few bob for clean potable water all hell breaks loose and FG are hammered from every angle.

Kind of proves the point we are up for everything we won’t pay for anything.

This privatisation crack also makes me chuckle.

We have very short memories.

What the lefties want is a workforce who when bedded in cannot be gotten rid of, low productivity, highly unionized , industrial unrest due to the above always on the horizon and then the Govt. will be dragged in and John Q Tee will be stiffed.

Have a good day y’all.

Another piece of vacuous nonsense but at least you are consistent.

Plumbthedepths · 30-10-2019 2:20pm

seamus wrote: »

Introducing charges now will go through with barely a peep.

Amazing then how it hasn't happened, I suggest you don't place a bet on your contention.

James Brown · 30-10-2019 2:20pm

seamus wrote: »

I think you'll find that people who protest on enviromental issues are very supportive of the state imposing charges on people who are wasteful with water.

In hindsight a lot of the resistance to Irish water was a primitive example of the more modern rabble-rousing we see on Facebook and other social media. People were whipped up into believing that the state was preparing to privatise the water network and the average individual would be paying thousands a year for a trickle of water. And fuelled by a backdrop of austerity; people were legitimately panicking about their personal financial situation.

Introducing charges now will go through with barely a peep.

Not at all. There was a series of foul slaps in the face. Privatisation was only a part of it. Siteserv deal still under investigation.
People were use to paying tax towards water supply.

malinheader · 30-10-2019 2:31pm

I reported two very bad leaks, two or three times to Irish water and also a couple of times to local council. Nearly
4 weeks since reported and still nothing done. Rang Irish water last week and was told it's under investigation. This country has no interest in water conservation only taxing people.

_Kaiser_ · 30-10-2019 2:40pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I love this attitude

Shure don’t we pay for everything through taxation?

I love the newfound sexiness about climate change, kids marching, protests outside the Dail but when asked to pay a few bob for clean potable water all hell breaks loose and FG are hammered from every angle.

Kind of proves the point we are up for everything we won’t pay for anything.

This privatisation crack also makes me chuckle.

We have very short memories.

What the lefties want is a workforce who when bedded in cannot be gotten rid of, low productivity, highly unionized , industrial unrest due to the above always on the horizon and then the Govt. will be dragged in and John Q Tee will be stiffed.

Have a good day y’all.

Ah I've missed your foghorn leghorn schtick! :rolleyes:

We DO pay for water through taxation Bren - or do you think the lads in FG and IW do a whiparound when the invoices/(and massive) wage bills come in?

I agree with you on the Climate change stuff though :eek: - another Internet Crusade designed to punish those with no choices and no money to "go green"

You're deluded if you think the end-game (as with most things FG turn their attention to) isn't to privatise and sell off the operation once they've forced the public into providing a nice steady income for the eventual buyer.

As for being a lefty.. far from it pal! But by all means, try and use that well-worn and just as transparent tactic to deflect from the points anyway.

I think when you say "Middle Ireland won't be stiffed", what you really mean is "I'm not paying if someone else is getting away with it" - good ole begrudgery, nothing to do with fairness at all. If it was "fair" we wouldn't be saddled with a bloated billing agency who couldn't even manage that part right at the time!

K.Flyer · 30-10-2019 2:41pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Charges for excessive use are coming. Get over it and move on. By conserving water, these charges won’t affect you. Look at the bigger picture and protect the planet for our children’s children.

Banging the drum about conservation is all well and good, but we have been conserving water for years, as have others, meter or no meter.
This argument is about the ineptitude of a quango trying to re-introduce water charges by a different way, allowing them to slowly bring in fees based on meter readings but ignoring those without meters.

Even if they manage to get this in, it still stands that the people with meters will be discriminated against those who don't.
Even the article that you linked to is flawed.
Not every development has a group meter. If a development does not have a group meter they Cannot quantify leakage or usage by any one individual. Offering to put a meter inside your property shows they have no proof and they can be told to sod off.
Even developments with group meters but no individual metering will still be difficult enough to prove over usage and would usually need to be done in the dead of night over several days. The cost in man hours and overtime will cost I.W. a fortune, much more than they will collect.
So, it's people with meters who will be easy pickings and easy to monitor, while most with no meters can do what they like with their water FOR FREE!

Benedict · 30-10-2019 2:43pm

Time and time again it comes back to the fairness issue.

There is an area in West Dublin called Tallaght which houses more than 75000 people and there isn't a single home with a meter.

Then there are the apartments - they won't pay a cent either.

And there are the houses which have no meters because IW took their ball and walked off the pitch.

So now the eejits with meters are told "You suckers will have a quota imposed - and if you break it, we'll break you".

Oh really?

Well, we'll see about that.

Brendan Bendar · 30-10-2019 3:34pm

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Ah I've missed your foghorn leghorn schtick! :rolleyes:

I think when you say "Middle Ireland won't be stiffed", what you really mean is "I'm not paying if someone else is getting away with it" - good ole begrudgery, nothing to do with fairness at all. If it was "fair" we wouldn't be saddled with a bloated billing agency who couldn't even manage that part right at the time!

You are perfectly correct there, my friend.

I have to chuckle when I see ‘bloated ‘ mentioned yet there is big push to get water services back under local authority control.

Those bhoys take ‘bloated’ to a totally different level.

You couldn’t make it up, I say, you couldn’t make it up:eek:

James Brown · 30-10-2019 3:57pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

You are perfectly correct there, my friend.

I have to chuckle when I see ‘bloated ‘ mentioned yet there is big push to get water services back under local authority control.

Those bhoys take ‘bloated’ to a totally different level.

You couldn’t make it up, I say, you couldn’t make it up:eek:

You just did.
IW is more bloated than the LA's water departments were/are.
LA's used outside contractors.
IW uses LA's to use outside contractors.
IW has employees embedded that can't be easily let go.
And we've covered the laughing yoga, consultants, Tierney, 'jobs for our own' ad nauseam.

Spinning yarns to try make IW look better than what went before it isn't helping middle Ireland. All IW has different is more funding and it's surplus to requirements.

Brendan Bendar · 30-10-2019 5:18pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You just did.
IW is more bloated than the LA's water departments were/are.
LA's used outside contractors.
IW uses LA's to use outside contractors.
IW has employees embedded that can't be easily let go.
And we've covered the laughing yoga, consultants, Tierney, 'jobs for our own' ad nauseam.

Spinning yarns to try make IW look better than what went before it isn't helping middle Ireland. All IW has different is more funding and it's surplus to requirements.

Where is yer one Arnott, pal?

Just arsking ?

James Brown · 30-10-2019 5:45pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Where is yer one Arnott, pal?

Just arsking ?

Honestly can't understand this. I'm guessing it's dodging the facts as pointed out to you anyway.

IW, bloated and embedded staff.

charlie14 · 30-10-2019 6:03pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Where is yer one Arnott, pal?

Just arsking ?

I presume you mean Elisabeth Arnott Irish Water`s very own Comical Ali ?
No idea where she is now, but I for one will always remember her interview with Sean O Rourke in 2014 on Irish Water`s bonus culture. Comedy gold.

Brendan Bendar · 30-10-2019 6:03pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Honestly can't understand this. I'm guessing it's dodging the facts as pointed out to you anyway.

IW, bloated and embedded staff.

Lot of stuff you can’t understand Matthew.

Let’s all take a time out and consider our positions, buddy.

Brendan Bendar · 30-10-2019 6:05pm

charlie14 wrote: »

I presume you mean Elisabeth Arnott Irish Water`s very own Comical Ali ?
No idea where she is now, but I for one will always remember her interview with Sean O Rourke in 2014 on Irish Water`s bonus culture. Comedy gold.

2014..Fair play Charles, you seem to be a driven sort of dude.

No harm there, I hasten to add.

James Brown · 30-10-2019 6:08pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Lot of stuff you can’t understand Matthew.

Let’s all take a time out and consider our positions, buddy.

You said the lefties wanted control of IW and it would lead to embedded staff.
IW has embedded staff.

I can see from your last few comments you've gone into ramble mode

Plumbthedepths · 30-10-2019 6:09pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

2014..Fair play Charles, you seem to be a driven sort of dude.

No harm there, I hasten to add.

Can you not retain information that interested you from 5 years ago B?
Many people can and for even things from many years ago it's not really a reason for a veiled sneer of contempt.

charlie14 · 30-10-2019 6:16pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

2014..Fair play Charles, you seem to be a driven sort of dude.

No harm there, I hasten to add.

I would not say driven Brendan.

Just someone who isn`t easily conned to "engage" with a scam.

Brendan Bendar · 30-10-2019 6:17pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You said the lefties wanted control of IW and it would lead to embedded staff.
IW has embedded staff.

I can see from your last few comments you've gone into ramble mode

Incorrect Matthew, I intimated that lefties wanted control of water services, not IW.

Lookit... best thing for the lefties is get dug into the non private operations.

We all know that... PS ..Local Authorities, Fire Brigade, HSE, stuff like that.

Get well lodged in and you are on easy street.

C’mon man.... get real.

charlie14 · 30-10-2019 6:29pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Incorrect Matthew, I intimated that lefties wanted control of water services, not IW.

Lookit... best thing for the lefties is get dug into the non private operations.

We all know that... PS ..Local Authorities, Fire Brigade, HSE, stuff like that.

Get well lodged in and you are on easy street.

C’mon man.... get real.

If you are insinuating that some of those non private operations are a shambles because of these mysterious lefties, then they are well heeled lefties at but senior management and senior political level.

Benedict · 30-10-2019 6:42pm

Elizabeth Arnett left IW 3 years ago to take up a very senior position with Ulster Bank.

Brendan Bendar · 30-10-2019 6:53pm

charlie14 wrote: »

If you are insinuating that some of those non private operations are a shambles because of these mysterious lefties, then they are well heeled lefties at but senior management and senior political level.

Eh......right.

James Brown · 30-10-2019 6:56pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Incorrect Matthew, I intimated that lefties wanted control of water services, not IW.

Lookit... best thing for the lefties is get dug into the non private operations.

We all know that... PS ..Local Authorities, Fire Brigade, HSE, stuff like that.

Get well lodged in and you are on easy street.

C’mon man.... get real.

Embedded workers is what we have currently. And if ever a thing was bloated, it's IW. Point is, your fears are a reality as is lad.

Again, the LA's used contractors. Did for many years, currently do except now we've IW surplus to requirements.

Brendan Bendar · 30-10-2019 7:07pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Embedded workers is what we have currently. And if ever a thing was bloated, it's IW. Point is, your fears are a reality as is lad.

Again, the LA's used contractors. Did for many years, currently do except now we've IW surplus to requirements.

And round and round we go..... good lad.

James Brown · 30-10-2019 7:14pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

And round and round we go..... good lad.

Yep, because you dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge. Your comment was baloney chief.

Brendan Bendar · 30-10-2019 7:50pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Yep, because you dodge, duck, dip, dive and dodge. Your comment was baloney chief.

What comment was baloney pal.

is_that_so · 30-10-2019 7:59pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Embedded workers is what we have currently. And if ever a thing was bloated, it's IW. Point is, your fears are a reality as is lad.

Again, the LA's used contractors. Did for many years, currently do except now we've IW surplus to requirements.

The surplus is the other way round. Most of those LAs seconded or "attached" to IW will be gone in 5 years. At the time of the IW setup, they recruited 1600 IIRC and were saddled with a further 2500 LA staff for 10 years, courtesy of the genius of one P Hogan.

James Brown · 30-10-2019 8:03pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

What comment was baloney pal.

What the lefties want is a workforce who when bedded in cannot be gotten rid of

We have that in IW as is.

is_that_so wrote: »

The surplus is the other way round. Most of those LAs seconded or "attached" to IW will be gone in 5 years. At the time of the IW setup, they recruited 1600 IIRC and were saddled with a further 2500 LA staff for 10 years, courtesy of the genius of one P Hogan.

The newly hired IW workers are embedded and can't be easily let go which was Bren's suggestion that the lefties wanted.
I guarantee you IW has a great deal more surplus staff than any LA water dept. ever did.

Benedict · 01-11-2019 10:04am

We are told that the "generous" allowance of 1.7 times average usage is on the understanding that the average is 85 litres per day per person (based on 4 sharing). But remember that a 5 minute power alone is around 125 litres.

Bear in mind that the current allowance is only guaranteed for a limited period - and when that expires, what will the revised allowance be?

So even at 1.7 times allowance, the householder has to watch it in order to avoid bills of up to E500 per annum for excessive usage.

(And remember, you might have to earn a lot more than 500 to end up with 500 net.)

OK so this would be fine - IF it weren't for the fact that only about 55% of IW users will have to worry about how much they use.

The other 45%?

Happy days!

Sleeper12 · 01-11-2019 10:08am

Benedict wrote:

We are told that the "generous" allowance of 1.7 times average usage is on the understanding that the average is 85 litres per day per person (based on 4 sharing). But remember that a 5 minute power alone is around 125 litres.

Average power shower pumps out 14 litres of water per minute. This is 140 litres for 10 minutes and 70 litres for 5 minutes. Not disagreeing with your point just fact checking

01-11-2019 10:55am

Benedict wrote: »

We are told that the "generous" allowance of 1.7 times average usage is on the understanding that the average is 85 litres per day per person (based on 4 sharing). But remember that a 5 minute power alone is around 125 litres.

Bear in mind that the current allowance is only guaranteed for a limited period - and when that expires, what will the revised allowance be?

So even at 1.7 times allowance, the householder has to watch it in order to avoid bills of up to E500 per annum for excessive usage.

(And remember, you might have to earn a lot more than 500 to end up with 500 net.)

OK so this would be fine - IF it weren't for the fact that only about 55% of IW users will have to worry about how much they use.

The other 45%?

Happy days!

A water saving shower head reduces the amount of water dramatically. Just saying!

Don’t worry yourself about those of us with meters. We’ll make sure to keep our usage as low as possible. After all, some of us want to save the planet. We just don’t go around shouting about it.

Benedict · 01-11-2019 11:12am

Some of the newer fancy ones with boosted pressure output, large head and multi-directional outlets really do eat up the litres - but yes, for the average power shower I'm sure you (Sleeper 12) are right.

I think that if IW could figure out a way of convincing the public that the non-metered houses would be dealt with equally, then they'd be on a winner.

The fairness issue is the elephant in the room and it is hard to see how they can fix that with their current plan.

They've already accepted that the thousands upon thousands of apartments will not be subject to a quota and even that alone is enough to scupper their plan. And their childish insistence that they will know what non-metered homes are using (and bill them accordingly) is not helping them at all because anyone with a brain knows this is nonsense.

Sleeper12 · 01-11-2019 11:24am

Benedict wrote:

Some of the newer fancy ones with boosted pressure output, large head and multi-directional outlets really do eat up the litres - but yes, for the average power shower I'm sure you (Sleeper 12) are right.

It's what I do for a living

K.Flyer · 01-11-2019 11:29am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A water saving shower head reduces the amount of water dramatically. Just saying! .

You shouldn''t use them on instant hot water showers, they can cause problems with the internal pump and the heating of the water.

On a slightly off topic note, and not wanting to give them any ideas, how come gas and electricity suppliers don't impose excessive usage tariffs.

This excessive usage fee from Irish Water is going to be their back door way to getting water charges going, but only on half the country.

Benedict · 01-11-2019 12:26pm

K.Flyer wrote: »

You shouldn''t use them on instant hot water showers, they can cause problems with the internal pump and the heating of the water.

On a slightly off topic note, and not wanting to give them any ideas, how come gas and electricity suppliers don't impose excessive usage tariffs.

This excessive usage fee from Irish Water is going to be their back door way to getting water charges going, but only on half the country.

If it wasn't for the unfairness issue, it could have been the "back door" to introducing charges. Gradually decrease the quota and increase the fines and eventually, effectively you'll have to pay for a second cup of tea with your breakfast.

But once they backed off when householders refused to allow installation, they'd had it. The war was lost - and it's still lost.

Brendan Bendar · 01-11-2019 12:57pm

Benedict wrote: »

If it wasn't for the unfairness issue, it could have been the "back door" to introducing charges. Gradually decrease the quota and increase the fines and eventually, effectively you'll have to pay for a second cup of tea with your breakfast.

But once they backed off when householders refused to allow installation, they'd had it. The war was lost - and it's still lost.

Yes.... and Middle Ireland was stiffed...... but it won’t happen again.

charlie14 · 01-11-2019 1:22pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Yes.... and Middle Ireland was stiffed...... but it won’t happen again.

It wasn`t an attempt at stiffing just the middle class.
It was an attempt at stiffing all and sundry.
In fairness to the middle class they played a major part in defeating that attempt by marching in the protests, scaring the life out of FG/Lab TD`s and casting their votes in GE 2016

James Brown · 01-11-2019 2:44pm

charlie14 wrote: »

It wasn`t an attempt at stiffing just the middle class.
It was an attempt at stiffing all and sundry.
In fairness to the middle class they played a major part in defeating that attempt by marching in the protests, scaring the life out of FG/Lab TD`s and casting their votes in GE 2016

And that's when they made the clever move of trying to make it all about Paul Murphy. Easier to knock Murphy than the electorate. And Leo and his "very sinister fringe" and his pal likening them to ISIS.
My local FG TD lied in the Herald that her clinic was over run by protesters and the poor OAP's there were terrified. She even blubbed a little on the radio.
Then the video came out. One or two people in the clinc, as OAP's came in to give out to her. Her elderly neighbours were the protesters. There was zero intimidation.

Benedict · 01-11-2019 2:49pm

Still wondering if even one single home received the warning letter for over-use supposed to be sent out in quarter-3 to anyone using too much.

If nobody got one, does that mean nobody's overusing? Or is it just another empty threat?

James Brown · 01-11-2019 2:54pm

Benedict wrote: »

Still wondering if even one single home received the warning letter for over-use supposed to be sent out in quarter-3 to anyone using too much.

If nobody got one, does that mean nobody's overusing? Or is it just another empty threat?

The over use and leaks was a red herring to justify metering. We don't over use and the mains leaks are the real concern. The meters was just a nice earning angle and a solid from Fine Gael to Denis O'Brien IMO.

01-11-2019 2:56pm

Benedict wrote: »

Still wondering if even one single home received the warning letter for over-use supposed to be sent out in quarter-3 to anyone using too much.

If nobody got one, does that mean nobody's overusing? Or is it just another empty threat?

Has it actually been implemented yet? Is it just a proposal?

Brendan Bendar · 01-11-2019 3:16pm

charlie14 wrote: »

It wasn`t an attempt at stiffing just the middle class.
It was an attempt at stiffing all and sundry.
In fairness to the middle class they played a major part in defeating that attempt by marching in the protests, scaring the life out of FG/Lab TD`s and casting their votes in GE 2016

Don’t think so, it was a strategy which was handled extremely badly, really really badly.

What happened then was left wing politicians locked onto the concern by a very significant coterie of folk that unlike previous policies, this one will actually get down to us!!!

We will actually be on some books!!!

Suddenly slates were potentially lifted and flying columns were organised and the bullhorn politicians harnessed the fear .

Where are all the meters, my friend, not where the bonfires and burning cars were last night .

Time to get some straight talking about this episode on our books, I feel.

Water charges for excessive usage

Comments