Gormley talking rubbish again...

Lenny Lovett · 10-10-2010 10:17AM #1

So we have John Gormley droning on about the need for water charges again on the Marian Finucane show now. While I agree we should pay for water, we should be paying by use, not a flat fee as they are going to implement. Most councils have installed water metres on the properties in their areas over the past few years so why not charge by use? Why should I pay for my neighbours eight children's water use? Yet another ill thought out Green policy.

MagicSean · 10-10-2010 10:41AM

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

So we have John Gormley droning on about the need for water charges again on the Marian Finucane show now. While I agree we should pay for water, we should be paying by use, not a flat fee as they are going to implement. Most councils have installed water metres on the properties in their areas over the past few years so why not charge by use? Why should I pay for my neighbours eight children's water use? Yet another ill thought out Green policy.

And the rates should be dependent on treatment quality too.

Pete_Cavan · 10-10-2010 11:25AM

A lot of the water mains in this country have been upgraded from rusted cast iron to HDPE pipes in the past decade and new water meter boxes were installed with all house connections. There are many more similar upgrade schemes planned and most of these seem to be going ahead (I work for a civil engineering company who tenders for these works). All new houses built in the last 15 years have had water meter boxes installed also. Our network of water main pipes needed upgrade and the government is taking this opertunity to get things in place for metered water charges. The water charges idea is not a new one they came up with to raise money due to the recession, it is something that they have been planning to implement for years. They obviously didnt count on the recession and now are being forced to introduce water charges sooner than expected. Everything is not in place for the metering so it looks like they will have to bring in flat charges for a few years until the metering can be done. It is fairer to have a flat charge for everyone than it is to charge some people by usage and some on a flat charge. I would have thought everything will be in place for metering in the next 5-10 years.

dan_d · 10-10-2010 11:49AM

If the stuff didn't fall on our heads everyday, I'd be a little less annoyed about water charges. But anyway, assuming they come in, I'll only be happy to pay them if the money is absolutely guaranteed to be put back into redeveloping the water main system, and not thrown into the numerous black holes that abound in this country.

That probably won't happen. Therefore, I'm not happy to pay them.

Manach · 10-10-2010 11:51AM

Persumably as part of this service the government then will be under a contractual obiligation to provide water and can be taken to court for any break in service .... [slightly OT, but memories of the winter of last year resurfacing]

mikemac · 10-10-2010 11:56AM

I'm going to assume people with private wells are exempt?

After all, the council didn't provide this service.

And with an annual service by a fitter and electricity to power your pump, it's not like it's free anyway even if you are lucky to have a well on your land

CoalBucket · 10-10-2010 12:02PM

Just out of curiosity, does anybody know how people with their own well will be charged or will they be charged at all ?

GarlicBread · 10-10-2010 12:23PM

Heres the real John Gormley before he was corrupted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cebpJJeiL_E

Perhaps if he was to make public the cost of buying fluoride and then pumping it into our water we could give it up and save a few euro's? Instead we are going to pay for it, lovely stuff, ill have John to thank when my kids get bone cancer.

Pete_Cavan · 10-10-2010 12:41PM

Manach wrote: »

Persumably as part of this service the government then will be under a contractual obiligation to provide water and can be taken to court for any break in service .... [slightly OT, but memories of the winter of last year resurfacing]

In many areas the main reason there was no water last winter was because the councils had to turn off the supply to preserve what clean water they had available. This is becuase the reserviors were very low, mainly because people assume there is an endless supply of clean water and feel they can waste it, also during the bad weather some people leave taps running in the hope that their pipes wont freeze, wasting the water. If people have to pay for water they will think twice about wasting it so there should be more water available.

bijapos · 10-10-2010 01:15PM

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

So we have John Gormley droning on about the need for water charges again on the Marian Finucane show now. While I agree we should pay for water, we should be paying by use, not a flat fee as they are going to implement. Most councils have installed water metres on the properties in their areas over the past few years so why not charge by use? Why should I pay for my neighbours eight children's water use? Yet another ill thought out Green policy.

He never said on Finucane that it was going to be a flat rate charge.

Where did he say that it was going to be a flat fee and not metered?

charlemont · 10-10-2010 01:19PM

they will have another thing coming coming if they think this neighbourhood is going to stand aside and allow the installation of water meters.

Scofflaw · 10-10-2010 01:25PM

charlemont wrote: »

they will have another thing coming coming if they think this neighbourhood is going to stand aside and allow the installation of water meters.

You'll be supporting a flat rate charge, then?

He never said on Finucane that it was going to be a flat rate charge.

Where did he say that it was going to be a flat fee and not metered?

I don't think it's been said anywhere as such - however, if the system isn't ready, as per Pete_Cavan's post, then presumably it's not possible to roll out a metered charge in those areas. It may be possible to roll out a metered charge in some council areas, but the OP is not, I think, interested in nuances that don't lend themselves to a bit of Green-bashing.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Coyler · 10-10-2010 02:14PM

The Greens have said time and again that their proposal is that there should be a household allowance before the flat fee or metering kicks in. In other words, if you remain under what two adults with 2.4 children would use on average you're fine.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me as a father of two but I'm sure that doesn't suit rants about the Green Party.

Pete_Cavan · 10-10-2010 02:16PM

charlemont wrote: »

they will have another thing coming coming if they think this neighbourhood is going to stand aside and allow the installation of water meters.

Your attitude encapsulates everything that is wrong with this country. Not paying for water directly actually costs you more than if it was metered. The cost of installing and maintaining the pipe network, building and maintaining pumping/purification stations, maintaining reservoirs and purchasing of chemicals and testing the water already and will always exist, you just pay for it indirectly through taxes rather than directly through water charges.

With metered water charges people would be more careful about their use of water, if they have to pay for it they wont waste a drop. Also people will look at ways of reducing their water usage, such as rainwater harvesting for non-potable water so you dont have to pay to flush the toilet. Less water is needed and this reduces the cost of providing water. The entire mains pipe network is currently being upgraded so no more leaky pipes, meaning less water is lost in the system, meaning less cost.

Upgrading our water infrastructure and introducing metered water charges is one of the best thing this country can be doing at the minute as there will be huge savings and the money can be spent in other areas.

Charlemont, there is a good chance there is already a box for a meter installed at your house. If not, and you think the rest of your neighbourhood will stand by you to prevent boxes being installed I'd say you will be on your own because I doubt they will be as short sighted as you.

meditraitor · 10-10-2010 02:46PM

I cant wait for the first court cases that will result from the inevitable water charges....... ;-)

Mrs brown, single mother of 4 Jailed for not paying water charges in the wettest country in europe!

The Mirror, some time in 2011

P. Breathnach · 10-10-2010 03:19PM

CoalBucket wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, does anybody know how people with their own well will be charged or will they be charged at all ?

Not authoritative, but I was told by a senior local government officer that people with their own supplies can not be charged under present legislation. We have our own supply, but still pay through general taxation for the supply to other people.

meditraitor wrote: »

I cant wait for the first court cases that will result from the inevitable water charges....... ;-)

Mrs brown, single mother of 4 Jailed for not paying water charges in the wettest country in europe!

The Mirror, some time in 2011

When I want my politics guided by the The Mirror, I'll buy that paper. If our fictitious Mrs, Brown wants to avoid water charges, all she need do is capture the rainwater from her roof.

Lenny Lovett · 10-10-2010 04:40PM

feelingstressed wrote: »

I'm going to assume people with private wells are exempt?

Apparrantley not. Initially, as there are not metres in all areas a flat fee will be levied and everyone will be obliged to pay.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

If people have to pay for water they will think twice about wasting it so there should be more water available.

Only if it is metred and they are going to be paying for what they use. You see, this is what makes the whole scheme ridiculous. It will not stop people wasting water as if we're all paying a flat charge then it makes no difference whether we wast it or not we still have to pay the same.

bijapos wrote: »

He never said on Finucane that it was going to be a flat rate charge.

Where did he say that it was going to be a flat fee and not metered?

He didn't, Brian Lenihan said the other day that a flat charge would be brought in initially as metres will not be available to every property for some years to come.

Scofflaw wrote: »

It may be possible to roll out a metered charge in some council areas, but the OP is not, I think, interested in nuances that don't lend themselves to a bit of Green-bashing.

cordially,
Scofflaw

There's no need for that kind of sniping. I made valid points. I am not a fan of the Green Party, I will grant you. Why? Because I am involved in a business that strives to be eco friendly and we hit walls all the time because of ill thought out policies instigated by the Green Party. This is yet another of these ill conceived taxes. They have spent the past few years in Govt doing anything but what they should have been doing to promote the real Green agenda. There are many environmentally friendly changes they could have made that wouldn't have cost them or us much but would, in fact, have saved everyone money but they didn't.

Perhaps, Scofflaw, instead of attempting to ridicule me you'd be kind enough to tell us how they have made a change for the better in your life and business????

Callan57 · 10-10-2010 05:44PM

I used to be against water charges until RTE did that prog on sustainable living & one of the families featured had a swimming pool, outdoor hot tub and a daughter who I think took 45 mins to have a shower ... now why the hell should I and my family pay for that?

As already pointed out anyone who doesn't want to pay for water can revert to collecting it off their roof and see how they like that!

flutered · 10-10-2010 05:59PM

the vast majority of people who live in rural areas pay their local council for water each year, i had a metre installed roughly 35 years ago.

juuge · 10-10-2010 06:56PM

It is noticable that everthing the Greens put forward ends up costing money. I really don't give a flying fkuc about tadpoles, carbon foot prints etc. We are a tiny island in the atlantic ocean and to think that what we can do as a country with a population less than that of Manchester, is somehow going to make a difference is nonsense. Go away Gormless your time is up, you've had your day and stop squirming to hold on to power it's pathetic.

Liam Byrne · 10-10-2010 07:04PM

Small point, folks; "metre" is a distance measurement, as in the length of the pipe bringing water to your home.

A "meter" is a device that measures usage.

thebman · 10-10-2010 07:19PM

I don't have a problem with the greens implementation assuming private wells are exempt and there is a standard allowance.

I do think that we must put the issue of fluoridation of the water on the table for discussion.

Scofflaw · 10-10-2010 08:37PM

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

Apparrantley not. Initially, as there are not metres in all areas a flat fee will be levied and everyone will be obliged to pay.

Only if it is metred and they are going to be paying for what they use. You see, this is what makes the whole scheme ridiculous. It will not stop people wasting water as if we're all paying a flat charge then it makes no difference whether we wast it or not we still have to pay the same.

He didn't, Brian Lenihan said the other day that a flat charge would be brought in initially as metres will not be available to every property for some years to come.

There's no need for that kind of sniping. I made valid points. I am not a fan of the Green Party, I will grant you. Why? Because I am involved in a business that strives to be eco friendly and we hit walls all the time because of ill thought out policies instigated by the Green Party. This is yet another of these ill conceived taxes. They have spent the past few years in Govt doing anything but what they should have been doing to promote the real Green agenda. There are many environmentally friendly changes they could have made that wouldn't have cost them or us much but would, in fact, have saved everyone money but they didn't.

Perhaps, Scofflaw, instead of attempting to ridicule me you'd be kind enough to tell us how they have made a change for the better in your life and business????

In this case I'm forced to say that your criticism seems to me the part that was ill thought out. You criticised the introduction of water charges on a flat rate without any of the detail that has been added by other posters, which change the picture rather radically from your version, which has been the case with other comments by you on Green policy - hence my comment.

I'd be interested, naturally, to know which Green policies cause your business to "hit walls".

cordially,
Scofflaw

mikemac · 10-10-2010 09:11PM

Callan57 wrote: »

As already pointed out anyone who doesn't want to pay for water can revert to collecting it off their roof and see how they like that!

Well if you read the post above you it seems that people in rural areas that build their own well, service it and pay ESB for it and are going to pay the same flat rate charge.

Pay a charge to the council for what? What did the council provide? Nothing!:mad:
Why can't people in this situation go to council offices and sign a declaration and get out of this tax.
After all, you can't easily lie about having a well on your land

Lenny Lovett · 10-10-2010 09:25PM

Scofflaw wrote: »

In this case I'm forced to say that your criticism seems to me the part that was ill thought out. You criticised the introduction of water charges on a flat rate without any of the detail that has been added by other posters, which change the picture rather radically from your version, which has been the ase with other comments by you on Green policy - hence my comment.

I don't get what you're on about re the criticism but I will make my views on the water tax clear anyway:
Water charges should only be brought in when the water meters are in place so that people pay for waht they use. This will encourage people to conserve water as well as generate revenue. The way they're going to do it now is unfair as people will pay the same whether they live alone in a one bed house or as a family of seven in a five bed house using seven times as much water. If it was a proper Green initiative they would be promoting water conservation rather than using it as a revenue generator.

Scofflaw wrote: »

I'd be interested, naturally, to know which Green policies cause your business to "hit walls".

cordially,
Scofflaw

The recycling policies and the wind energy policy.

bytey · 10-10-2010 10:18PM

Gormely can GFH if he thinks im paying for flouridated water
take the poison out and i might consider it .

Shea O'Meara · 10-10-2010 11:34PM

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Small point, folks; "metre" is a distance measurement, as in the length of the pipe bringing water to your home.

A "meter" is a device that measures usage.

Cordially,
Liam Byrne:D

the groutch · 10-10-2010 11:34PM

he should be worrying more about how to deal with the snow this time around (assuming he's not off on a sking holiday)

Shea O'Meara · 10-10-2010 11:46PM

We need to pay our way, yes.

To be honest, I always get a little confused on the issue of water charges and other charges such as for bins etc.
We pay tax, (those fortunate to have a job) and I'm wondering if we continue to separate these services and get charged accordingly can one not begin to ask the government for a statement at the end of each year showing where their tax money goes? Also, individualising seems to cause issues where people believe they were already paying for such services, why the new charges? Would it not make more sense to raise taxes to cover costs or on that note, lower them when water charges come in?
How far away are we from those living near parks getting bills for gardening etc.?
I can see water protests similar to the bin protests is all.

Scofflaw · 11-10-2010 12:58PM

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

I don't get what you're on about re the criticism but I will make my views on the water tax clear anyway:
Water charges should only be brought in when the water meters are in place so that people pay for waht they use. This will encourage people to conserve water as well as generate revenue. The way they're going to do it now is unfair as people will pay the same whether they live alone in a one bed house or as a family of seven in a five bed house using seven times as much water. If it was a proper Green initiative they would be promoting water conservation rather than using it as a revenue generator.

I agree, but the plan, as far as I can see, is still to introduce metering.

Lenny Lovett wrote: »

The recycling policies and the wind energy policy.

How do they cause your business to hit brick walls, though?

cordially,
Scofflaw

meditraitor · 11-10-2010 01:36PM

P. Breathnach wrote: »

When I want my politics guided by the The Mirror, I'll buy that paper. If our fictitious Mrs, Brown wants to avoid water charges, all she need do is capture the rainwater from her roof.

Your politics are guided by papers? sorry to hear that.

Gormley talking rubbish again...

Comments