**ALL THINGS IRISH WATER/WATER RELATED** Part 2 - MOD WARNING IN OP

Tony EH wrote: »

But, it is that easy, IF the agenda was really about fixing the leaks and conservation, which, I think most honest people agree by now, it isn't.

As usual, ripoff Ireland kicked in and the charges got tangled up with lots of of other crap, until we end up with extreme bloat and jobs/perks/bonuses for the boys in an unnecessary billing company that Fine Gael and their buddies were hoping the Irish people would just simply accept.

The agenda has to be about a lot more than just fixing the leaks and conservation, it's about changing the whole way that the political system operates, and how some of that system is paid for,

The emphasis in this thread has been heavily on the potable water side of water, and while that is important, the other side of the coin is the waste water treatment side, and that's way more complex in many respects, and significantly more expensive than providing the water, in that the waste side has to deal with not only domestic waste, which is relatively simple, but the same system also has to deal with all manner of trade effluent, which varies from day to day, and from location to location, and if it is not correctly assessed and the right treatment systems used, it can cause all manner of problems in the treatment facility, and further downstream.

Historically, waste water has been very poorly managed in Ireland, if at all managed in some areas, and those failings are one of the reasons for the high levels of boil notices in some areas, and dealing correctly with those issues is going to be expensive and time consuming, and will not succeed unless the whole process is removed from short term political interference, it is a long term fundamental project that can no longer be long fingered without costing Ireland huge penalties in EU fines for failing to comply with regulations and directives that have been in place for (in some cases) over 10 years.

For a country the size of Ireland, and with the population distribution we have, it really is not appropriate to have multiple small units dealing with all aspects of water, the right level is to have one national body, and to significantly enhance the ability of that central unit to analyse, manage and deal with the waste water side. Most of that infrastructure is not effectively in place, some of it may be there at local levels, but the overall structure is inadequate, and it HAS to be made fit for purpose in order to keep people and our environment safe.

There are also issues with water harvesting, processing and distribution that will be better managed at a national level without having to worry about local or county borders, and there are significant benefits in having treatment facilities that then provide water to a wider area than just a local town.

A significant part of this sort of infrastructure is absent through neglect. It is needed in order to comply with European legislation, and to ensure that we meet our obligations.

What such an organisation does NOT need is the baggage of semi state structure, semi state dead wood that's been moved sideways by the local authorities, semi state "entitlement" culture, and semi state senior management with a visible track record of failure in previous roles in other semi state organisations.

That's why it wasn't easy, there are over 2000 people in IW that they didn't need, but they got anyway.

What needs to happen is that the political elite need to recognise that we have seen through their deceptions and self serving, and are no longer prepared to blindly bank roll their excesses and inappropriate activities, and that change needs to also extend to the state services, where many outdated and inappropriate practices and methods have to be ended.

I am under no illusions, this is not going to be easy, or quick, and it will take some very dedicated people to make it happen, and some of them are going to have to be considerably younger than me in order to make sure that the necessary changes are carried through, and made a permanent part of the new structure.

It would have been far more painful if the IMF/Troika had forced through these changes, as they would not have allowed any flexibility or fudge factors, and they would also have ensured that the changes made were permanent. That didn't happen, so it's down to the people of this country to make the politicians aware that we no longer accept their methods, or party structures or cronyism, corruption and greed, and all the other things that have been highlighted over the last number of weeks in this thread.

So no, it's not going to be easy, as it's about far more than just leaks and conservation.

moxin wrote: »

It is already paid for by everyone through indirect taxation. You want us to pay twice for it which is outrageous.

No, your post was wrong, it WAS paid for by SOME through indirect taxation, but in order to meet our obligations under EU regulations and directives, it WILL be paid for by the consumer going forward, and in order to be fair, it will be paid for on the basis of metered consumption.

That part of it is fixed and irrevocable.

After that, the exact how is now back in the melting pot, for all the reasons that are being argued about in this thread, and clearly, the Government parties are in deep trouble, as even they can't agree about how the new system is going to work.

The only thing we can be sure of is that some form of new system that will be based on the consumer paying will be in place at the end of the discussions.

Daith wrote: »

How is it fixed if not everyone can be metered?

For now, it will be on the basis of a standard charge based on occupancy, which wont be that far adrift, there are plenty of figures for water use available from other countries where they've metered for years.

What should have happened is that metering should not have been optional for some areas, such as apartments. There are ways to deal with that, but it needs some clear heads to put it into place and make it happen, there are very few places where it is impossible to put meters into place,

I don't see any places where ESB supplies power without a meter, (other than for things like street lights, where the usage can be very precisely calculated), if they can do it, so can the water authority. Maybe not from day 1, but certainly before too much time elapses.