dxhound2005 wrote: » The Thirtieth Amendment of the Constitution (Houses of the Oireachtas Inquiries) Bill 2011 (No. 47 of 2011) was a bill which, if enacted, would have amended the Constitution of Ireland "in order to provide for the Houses of the Oireachtas to conduct full inquiries". The bill was passed by both houses of the Oireachtas, but rejected at a referendum held on 27 October 2011.[2]
Irish Steve wrote: » OK, so we're up against an issue that the PAC can't go after Tierney, that may not be a bad thing, given how badly we've been served by tribunals in recent times, they've cost a fortune and not done anything to change the system so that the abuses they uncovered can't happen again. Not exactly a good return on investment, but there's nothing new there either. Can anyone go after Tierney, or are quangos like IW outside of any form of control and regulation? If that is the case, then I'm sorry, the whole can of worms has to be shut down and done away with, there is no way that ANY state quango should be in the position where they are spending MY money, but can't be called to account on how they have spent it. What's even more worrying is that it appears that Tierney and his cronies are in a position that they can't be removed, can't be challenged about the quality of the job they are doing, and can't be made to account to anyone for their failures or how they are spending the money that they control. I see some very unacceptable and fundamental flaws in that scenario.
dxhound2005 wrote: » Do you not place any faith at all in the Regulator?http://www.cer.ie/water
Irish Steve wrote: » What's even more worrying is that it appears that Tierney and his cronies are in a position that they can't be removed, can't be challenged about the quality of the job they are doing, and can't be made to account to anyone for their failures or how they are spending the money that they control.
Going Forward wrote: » Not without an Ombudsman.http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/ombudsman-i-should-be-able-to-receive-irish-water-complaints-289527.html
dxhound2005 wrote: » This was covered in the thread before. I fail to see how suddenly the Ombudsman quango (he is appointed by politicians) is so important. He appears to be on an empire building exercise. Has his quango got surplus staff sitting around ready to take on complaints about water, gas and electricity? Or does he envisage having to hire more to duplicate the work already under the remit of the Regulator. Some quangos good, some quangos bad?
gladrags wrote: » It's a sad state of affairs when you need to differentiate between good and bad quangos. All quangos are surely not in the public interest. Including Irish Water. Or is it,that in your opinion,Irish water is a good quango?
Irish Steve wrote: » At least if it was a private company, they'd have to be open to being scrutinised, if the information given to the PAC is correct, IW is answerable to nobody, and can't be checked up on or looked at in any way as things are right now. That's a super quango with a structure that means they can do what they like with pensions, bonuses, expenses, and all the other unacceptable practices that have been seen over the last while, and if they at the same time screw up the job they are supposed to be doing, they can't be fired either. Sorry, but if that's the sort of structure that's in place right now, it would be better privatised, at least the shareholders would be able to say "NO" to some of the extremes that are possibly happening in the quango situation, and fire the people at the top if they are not performing.. I'd much rather have a situation that IW is state owned and controlled, with the executives answerable and accountable to the people of Ireland, but with the way that politics and the state works right now, that's going to be hard to achieve.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » Why would you presume that? It's humour based in reality anyway. The 3 or 4 people on my Facebook feed that throw up all the links to the protests and the like had pics from the march earlier in the month with their kids with them. A couple had the kids holding signs.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » I haven't expressed any pro Iw opinions at all. I do however believe paying for water is a good thing and metering should be introduced.
Little CuChulainn wrote: » It is working as exactly as it was designed.
shinzon wrote: » Really so paying bonuses for underperforming staff is working exactly as designed, the possibility of outside contractors being hired to turn down the pressure due to the fact the council workers are refusing to do it is working exactly as designed, car allowance is working exactly as designed. If the government is the majority shareholder why aren't they turning round to the board and telling them to stop these fat cat perks for a bloated quango that's not fit for purpose. And letting things lie and judging things in a few years will be to late, nows the time to act not in a few years when privatisation happens and youll be paying 2 to 3 times more for your water when not if government pulls its subvention and sells it off Shin
gladrags wrote: » It's a sad state of affairs when you need to differentiate between good and bad quangos.All quangos are surely not in the public interest. Including Irish Water. Or is it,that in your opinion,Irish water is a good quango?
Little CuChulainn wrote: » Like I said, it's working as designed. I suggest you ask the government why they are letting the bonuses and car perks go on but I don't see why you have to. FG have been all about taking care of their own since they got in and immediately started breaking their own pay caps. No government will get rid of IW now that it is in. But hopefully this one or the next will overhaul it.
shinzon wrote: » and that's why this country is the way it is, just get on with everything and hope for the best, not even try and block it just accept the inevitability and **** it just more money to pay out. the government were and are scared ****less since the march, if no one actually marched the sweetners and bribes there throwing our way wouldn't have been even contemplated so don't tell me it cant be beaten. The one thing a politician can be guaranteed is there in it for there seat if theres a threat to that and there fat pensions they'll cause uproar. Galway county council voted to call on the government to immediately suspend the roll out of charges. A Senator is bringing a bill before the seanad to immediately abolish the need for ppsn numbers. You sense a pattern here chip, chip, chip as Tesco says every little helps Shin
Little CuChulainn wrote: » I wouldn't block it because I believe a company like IW is needed and water charges are important for a number of reasons. But I want it to be run well so I will object to undeserved bonuses and unnecessary cars.
shinzon wrote: » you must have a lot of faith that any of the money collected will go anywhere near the upkeep of the pipes Shin
Little CuChulainn wrote: » Ireland doesn't have a hypothecated tax system. For all the talk of ringfencing funds we hear, it still remains a reality that all money collected in taxes and charges goes to a central fund and is distributed via budgets to different departments. The difference in having a IW set up as a company is that all funds remain with Irish Water unless paid out in the form of declared dividends to the state as shareholders. A much more efficient, reliable and transparent method of ensuring the funds collected for water be used by Irish Water .
Finance Minister Michael Noonan has admitted that €490m meant for local services is to be diverted into Irish Water. Mr Noonan said a “subvention” was being made from the local government fund to go to the water metering company. He said Revenue collects the money and the total property tax returns are then transferred to the Local Government Fund for services. People Before Profit TD Richard Boyd Barrett said proceeds from the property tax were being used to set up Irish Water. “The Government, in levying this unpopular, regressive austerity tax, tried to neutralise opposition to it by saying that all the moneys collected would go back into local areas and services,” said Mr Boyd Barrett. “We then discovered not a single cent would go towards local services, but would be used to meet the start-up costs of Irish Water.”
Banjo String wrote: » Like the local property tax?http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/490m-meant-for-local-services-diverted-to-irish-water-255608.html
renegademaster wrote: » and we're supposed to believe that if we pay the double water tax that irish water will divert €400mn towards the roads in 2015!! ROFL!! :rolleyes:
Irish Steve wrote: » If water charges were so wrong, or so unfair, do you really think that the rest of Europe would be accepting them without question? I don't see marches and protests in the media across Europe, so maybe the protests here are being orchestrated by interests that are not really water related in the first place.
Irish Steve wrote: » At least if it was a private company, they'd have to be open to being scrutinised...
Tony EH wrote: » If it was a simple case of the govt. installing a metering system in people's homes and charging a fair price, most people wouldn't really bat an eyelid.
dxhound2005 wrote: » Of all the strange things which I read here that must be the strangest yet. Every time a government tried to introduce water charges since 1977 there was mass protest.
