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

Red Pepper wrote: »

You guys clearly aren't getting it. As a result you are going around in ever increasing waffley circles.

2 words will explain the protests...concentrate....

Tipping & Point

exactly - the tax could be for Irish Oxygen, Garden Tax etc.

the protests would be have occur, and so it actually has nothing to do with the fact that it is a water tax, quite simple put it is an extra tax that people cannot afford. but yet we have people making it sound like the majority of irish people don't want to pay for water - which is not actually true.

Many posters have actually said that they would pay if the entity IW wasn't the way it was.

But people who try to argue the point of paying water tax, others like yourself choose to ignore the issue of WATER TAX and just throw all sorts of stuff at us.

If you gave people (who own property) in this country a choice - Water Tax or property Tax - i reckon the majority would be happy to pay water over property.

Ace2007 wrote: »

How much would it cost to fix the pipes and all the leaks - put a figure on it - and then tell me where you are going to get this figure from in order to fix the problems?

You asked me to put a figure on it well here it is im taking it directly from the Joint Oireachtas Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht

http://www.water.ie/news/summary-of-submission-by-/Irish-Waters-Submission-to-the-Joint-Oireachtas-Committee-on-the-Environment-Culture-and-the-Gaeltacht-11th-February-2014..pdf

2) In 2009 the Water Services Investment Programme would have cost €6bn to implement. Indeed the overall requirement to upgrade services has been estimated at €10bn.

And the way I would pay for it is through the progressive tax system

Shin

Red Pepper wrote: »

What's your point? Is it that people shouldn't be allowed protest because the tipping point came too late?

What about the people that do not want to pay water charges because of the wasteful way the Irish Water quango was set up?

No my point is, based on your post, people are protesting against a tax, and not a Water Tax. Many posters on here have said they are not against the idea of a water tax, and indeed would pay if not for the way the IW entity was set up.

Do you accept this?

I'm pro water tax, but people on here are attacking me and making false assumptions that because i am pro water tax, that i am therefore pro IW despite me saying that it shouldn't have been set up the way it was.

shinzon wrote: »

You asked me to put a figure on it well here it is im taking it directly from the Joint Oireachtas Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht

http://www.water.ie/news/summary-of-submission-by-/Irish-Waters-Submission-to-the-Joint-Oireachtas-Committee-on-the-Environment-Culture-and-the-Gaeltacht-11th-February-2014..pdf

2) In 2009 the Water Services Investment Programme would have cost €6bn to implement. Indeed the overall requirement to upgrade services has been estimated at €10bn.

And the way I would pay for it is through the progressive tax system

Shin

Ok, please explain how exactly through the tax system this would be funded.
Are you going to increase taxes?

Ace2007 wrote: »

I'll pay whatever bill comes through the door.

even if it means you have nothing at the end of it? not even enough to clothe and feed yourself? when will enough be enough for you? you can't just keep paying everything that comes through the door when you haven't got anything to pay it.

Stargate wrote: »

LIMERICK City and County Council looks set to hand over details of its 5,000-plus tenants to Irish Water.

http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/business/business-news/limerick-council-to-hand-over-tenant-details-to-irish-water-1-6413219#.VGOgHfhT0Zo.twitter

And? If the tenants dont sign up the landlords will be on the hook for it, should the landlords pay for their tenants? No of course they shouldn't.

BTW you are doing this wrong you should be angry at IW's procedures for renters and landlords not the council FYI

VinLieger wrote: »

And? If the tenants dont sign up the landlords will be on the hook for it, should the landlords pay for their tenants? No of course they shouldn't.

BTW you are doing this wrong you should be angry at IW's procedures for renters and landlords not the council FYI

Hmmmm , i think there is already enough people at that point .

But sure , everything is cool with you regardless of what is done in the name of this Government .
My point in posting the link was to hightlight this pure BS called " data protection " lark with Enda's cronies.

Red Pepper wrote: »

Maybe stop hiring useless people on over €100,000 for no reason e.g. this guy...

Hubert Kearns was Sligo County Manager for 17 years and when he retired in 2013 he received a lump sum of €270,000 and a pension of €68,000 per year. His time as Sligo manager was controversial and he left behind a County debt of €80 million. "It's not the end of the world, nobody died," he said about the council's financial woes. At one stage he refused to attend council meetings in a dispute with an independent Councillor and spent more than €50,000 council money hiring HR consultant Declan Naughton to monitor meetings. Asked to comment on reports that his own pay as Sligo Manager, at €136,000, was €30,000 more than that of the Spanish prime minister, Mr Kearns said his salary was fixed by Government. “I am surprised that the Spanish prime minister earns so little.”

Some people get so lucky in life

VinLieger wrote: »

Nope wrong again people seem to keep assuming i agree with everything the government does cus I agree with water charges? I disagree with the government on a number of things and how they set up IW is one of them but im realistic to know we need to paying water charges right now.

Also im gonna guess they wont be passing on the PPS numbers which is where data protection comes in. If the tenants want to obtain their allowances they will need to send the PPS numbers themselves

Alert Alert VinLieger doesn't agree with the Government :rolleyes:

Look , just " Save time... see it my way. "

Tarzana2 wrote: »

Got my details over the phone.

The way I see it is if it doesn't happen, I won't be paying anyway but if it does happen, I'm paying half what I'll be paying if I don't register.

Not getting pulled into this thread, as it's a head wreck to read even a few posts on it. But I will say that I grew up in a part of the country where my folks were part of a group water scheme and have been paying for water for 30 years, so I can't help finding anti-IW people to be the biggest bunch of whiners.

they aren't whiners. they haven't got the money to pay for another jobs for the boys club

end of the road wrote: »

they aren't whiners. they haven't got the money to pay for another jobs for the boys club

what % would you say cannot afford to pay, as oppose to do not want to pay because of the IW entity?

VinLieger wrote: »

Nope wrong again people seem to keep assuming i agree with everything the government does cus I agree with water charges? I disagree with the government on a number of things and how they set up IW is one of them but im realistic to know we need to paying water charges right now.

Also im gonna guess they wont be passing on the PPS numbers which is where data protection comes in. If the tenants want to obtain their allowances they will need to send the PPS numbers themselves

You are aware Data Protection doesnt just cover PPS numbers.

I think which ever 'tool' and i use that term lightly, there are quite more apt terms. Thought it is kosher to hand over this information to a semi state that has no rights to the information really needs to speak to their own data protection manager in house. Because its not kosher at all.

A credit union was fined 23,000 per incident recently i think it was august 2014 for obtaining such information falsely from the social office. Information they had no rights or access to.

Limerick City Council are heading for hot water.

Perhaps they are listening to the poorly informed PR within Irish Water thinking this is ok. Which is the reason IW are seeking a Data Protection Audit controller, because every single facet of information they have given to date about landlord or public entities handing them over customer lists, is both illegal and highly dangerous under existing data protection legislation.