Should we pay for water ?

Lu Tze

cian1500ww wrote: »

How much is it going to put a meter on every single house in the entire country ??

Bad idea, it'll cost us a fortune

Under the water framework directive we have to install meters, UK and Ireland have already had a few years dispensation on this from europe.

Its been shown else where. On strict terms, it isn't an economically viable solution. It is more about changing peoples behaviour to use less, purchase more efficient products (washing machines etc.).

For all those saying they don't want to pay when X% is leaking out of the infrastructure, you are paying for electricity despite a certain amount of that "leaking" from the infrastructure as well.

cian1500ww

bluto63 wrote: »

The wastage of water in this country is insane. Take when it was snowing for example, people were leaving their taps on all night to prevent the freezing which was completely unnecessary! The government has to pay for that to be cleaned and purified and in turn, tax payers have to pay for it. And as it stands, only 40% of the water is making it to the taps. So that's a huge amount wasted, and therefore a huge amount of tax payers money wasted. So yes, I think it's a good idea for water to be regulated. It'll encourage people not to waste so much, those who do will pay for it and those who save water will benefit from it

So we'll be paying in the double for it :mad:

irishh_bob

dsmythy wrote: »

The money raised would help fix this problem.

some of it might , most of it would end up paying public servants , the unions would insist on it

Prof.Badass

On principle I am against governemnt imposing blanket charges like this (regressive taxes i believe they are called). Imo, ideally everything should be payed for by income tax (or at least a combination of income tax and VAT).
And let's be honest, this will do sweet fuck all to curb water consumption. People will think "well we're paying for it already" and help themselves guilt free. This is nothing more than a government trick, designed purely to raise extra money while encountering the minimum possible resistance.

I guess if they installed meters and charged you according to how much you use i wouldn't be so strongly against it, but that would cost millions so it's not going to happen any time soon.

irishh_bob

bonerm wrote: »

Gormley should get cancer quick before he risks becoming even more unpopular.

dont know which is worse , your comment or that you got a thanks for it

questionmark?

BluesBerry wrote: »

No we shouldnt the government screw us enough through stelth taxes :mad:give the public a break and leave our free water alone ffs

Yes they do screw us with all the taxes(so many varities) as quite simply we dont get value for money with all the wastage in all things the public service get their grubby hands on. The water isnt free we already pay for it. Gormless just wants to satisfy his tree hugger friends a bit like the carbon tax.

bluto63

cian1500ww wrote: »

So we'll be paying in the double for it :mad:

How so?

mfceiling

Who's coming into my house to install a water metre - answer - no-one
Don't give a flying fcuk who you say you are...you're not coming in the house or round the side so feck off - that goes for you as well gormley with your little píss holes in the snow for eyes - sneaky looking gobsheen

dvpower

mfceiling wrote: »

Who's coming into my house to install a water metre - answer - no-one
Don't give a flying fcuk who you say you are...you're not coming in the house or round the side so feck off - that goes for you as well gormley with your little píss holes in the snow for eyes - sneaky looking gobsheen

cian1500ww

bluto63 wrote: »

How so?

Our taxes pay for the water at the moment and now they want us to pay for how much we use as well :rolleyes:

Herb Powell

f*ck no, it falls from the sky a lot of days of the year

dvpower

Herb Powell wrote: »

f*ck no, it falls from the sky a lot of days of the year

That will remain free. Only treated, piped water will be charged for.

Herb Powell

dvpower wrote: »

That will remain free. Only treated, piped water will be charged for.

cian1500ww

Could we demand better water ?? Water in some places is an absolute disgrace, barely drinkable at best.

Guy:Incognito

Mister Tickle wrote: »

would you pay for a milkshake from Mcdonalds if 45% of the milk shake was leaking out from the bottom of the cup?? No....but the council want you should pay for water even after admitting that 45% of the water leaks out through their underground pipework. laughable really. paying for water in this country.

Not the same thing. In this case the milkshake is leaking from the machine, you still get a full cup but it costs McDonalds an extra 45% to give it to you.

CianRyan wrote: »

It comes from the fucking sky, fúck the fúck off!!

Why dont you collect the stuff that falls from the sky yourself and drink it so? Or woudl you have to spend money cleaning it like the councils do?

dvpower

cian1500ww wrote: »

Could we demand better water ?? Water in some places is an absolute disgrace, barely drinkable at best.

That's the upside. If people are paying for it, then they're more likely to demand better quality and less waste.

smiley girl

Morlar wrote: »

Water charges could raise €1bn for Govt

No
I am sicking of having to pay for EVERYTHING and get nothing back. Pay a tv licence for crap programming, tax your car and get a puncture from all the potholes, if you want to drive into the town you have to pay for parking, you want to do your shopping you have to pay for the bags to carry your shopping out of the store. Now this water charge when half the country have no water, and those that do, most likely their water is so full of lime you can't drink it.
All the govt are short of is inventing 'fresh air metres'.
Ryanair might aswell be running the country:mad:

cian1500ww

They really need to get rid of the Green's before they start taxing us on farting :rolleyes:

gerrycollins

as a business that uses a fair amount of water I already pay,now i admit i use the same in a week that a private house uses in a year but im finding more and more hotels and business are sinking wells becasue of the charges we face.

my father at home used to collect rain water and store it in an underground tank and we used it for years,it was filtered at a basic level. the only thing was we couldnt drink it and it was free. today add in a proper filter and it even more free.

I think there should be a charge but only if you go above a certain usage every week or month.

CreepingDeath

jay-me wrote: »

It will be the air next!!!!

It's called the carbon tax, to avoid pumping more CO2 into the air.

Overheal

Morlar wrote: »

Well when you get your €420* bill for a water meter next year, and then the €190* bill for supply the first year, and the year 2 supply one of €230* and so on let me know how that works out for you.




*conservative figures out of thin air

I already pay ~$30/mo 360/yr + any overage.

Really, really not the end of the world. Its not like a TV license or something where RTE could just pay for its damn self. Water facilities get money by getting paid. Not from running Commercials. And that dont have to pay whatever slag is hosting a late night talk show.

Almost all service providers in the world charge tariffs to recover part of their costs. According to estimates by the World Bank the average (mean) global water tariff is US$ 0.53 per cubic meter. In developed countries the average tariff is US$ 1.04, while it is only U$ 0.11 in the poorest developing countries. The lowest tariffs in developing countries are found in South Asia (mean of US$ 0.09/m3), while the highest are found in Latin America (US$ 0.41/m3).[3] Few utilities do recover all their costs. According to the same World Bank study only 30% of utilities globally, and only 50% of utilities in developed countries, generate sufficient revenue to cover operation, maintenance and partial capital costs.

Either way you swing it youre already paying for your water. This way however, it wont be a stealth tax.

And considering the number of outages and outbreaks in the Midwest, its clear that you either need a New, High Capacity water treatment system to meet your insatiable demand for the wet stuff [for Free no less] (Recently constructed one, afaik) OR you COULD have just imposed Metering, and Water consumption in the Midwest PROBABLY wouldve fallen back down to Levels that the Existing Treatment Facilities could have tolerated.

edit: These are my monthly rates, (PDF)

So im paying, default, about $31 for 2000 Gallons per month and Sewage Expense. This is plenty. after that its a mere $1.50 for each additional 1000 gallons or part of. As I said: Hardly outrageous. Your Pats' only beef is that - being new to the game - you need to pay for a Meter up front Now. Whereas in just about any other Developed country, these programs have been around for decades or longer and the meters are simply an expense on constructing a new home.

dsmythy

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Add 1 billion to the government coffers.....hmm. Somebody forgot to mention that this 1 billion will have to come out of the economy.
That's 1 billion less being spent on goods & services in the country. That reduces VAT income quite a bit, slows down recovery and will likely result in more job losses. The job losses mean less income tax and more social welfare payments.

So, they will then have to raise income tax or something else to make up for lost income tax/vat tax and increased social welfare payments.

Ahhh but they won't have to hammer public service pay as much next time as a result!

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

dsmythy wrote: »

The money raised would help fix this problem.

The thing is, will it? I wouldn't be surprised if the government just left it the way it is now...

bonerm wrote: »

Gormley should get cancer quick before he risks becoming even more unpopular.

What a stupid and ignorant post to make...

Herb Powell wrote: »

f*ck no, it falls from the sky a lot of days of the year

For people who keep stating this annoying line, get some fcuking buckets and collect it then...

cian1500ww wrote: »

Could we demand better water ?? Water in some most places is an absolute disgrace, barely drinkable at best.

Fixed that for ya

Would we be in a position? No... We would be told to fcuk right off. Or if we wanted good quality water it would cost 2 or 3 times the amount. I doubt the water will improve at all. It's not drinkable, it's outright disgusting.

Mal-Adjusted

Overheal wrote: »

You know, theres places in Africa where they'd gladly pay for water.

we're not in Africa. come back when you have something relevant to say

Overheal

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

come back when you have something relevant to say

ditto

Boston

Is this not what we pay taxes for?

congo_90

No
No
No
No
No
No f*cking way am I paying a cent for contaminated leaky water supplies barely safe to flush my sh*t away with.

that 16% saving is because I'd imagine people started taking dumps in pubs etc to save their own cost so it outweighs the benefit.

The government should gurantee a proper '1st world' water supply.
Here's an idea. They wanna save money?
Well, the e.u. Bless their cotton socks. They FINE us because of our leaking water supply. Thanks to the gov they try blame joe soap and tax us for again another failure on their part Why not just cause mass riots? Protests don't work. Look at when the Love Ulster parade came to Dublin. Did they come back? Hell no. The same should be done to charge for something before christmas most of cork was 3 feet under

( I would like to ad I don't condone anti ulster riots etc etc).

Overheal

Mister Tickle wrote: »

would you pay for a milkshake from Mcdonalds if 45% of the milk shake was leaking out from the bottom of the cup?? No....but the council want you should pay for water even after admitting that 45% of the water leaks out through their underground pipework. laughable really. paying for water in this country.

Actually, by Metering the system, it makes it infinitely easier to Track these leaks. The Councils know its leaking. They dont know where. But if they can show that X litres are getting to Clarecastle and only Y litres are being Metered in Clarecastle, there's your leak. You can do this to track down leaks to junction points, roads, and even right down to the driveway the leak is likely to be in front of - before any digging.

dsmythy wrote: »

The money raised would help fix [that] problem.

It would contribute to repair costs, but the true ability to fix the problem will come from the meters themselves and the data they provide, as explained above.

Herb Powell wrote: »

f*ck no, it falls from the sky a lot of days of the year

Probably the most ill conceived and ignorant comment of the entire debate. And thats not aimed at you. Youre hardly the first person to spew this nonsense.

I guess anybody agreeing with that sentiment though doesn't need indoor plumbing or Treatment. Have you bothered to run any tests on rainwater? Done a pH level or contaminant check on it?

It doesnt just rain from the sky find its way into your kitchen sink and purify itself you know.

No f*cking way am I paying a cent for contaminated leaky water supplies barely safe to flush my sh*t away with.

I understand that frustration. But heres a thought: Treatment Capacity. Would you be willing to Suppose that currently, the Water Consumption trend of the Irish Consumer is unsustainable, and this is contributing to the accelerated decay of the Water and Sewage system? Say a treatment plant can purify 10k litres an hour, and the households it supplies are consistently drawing anywhere from 9k to 11k litres an hour. This puts a considerable strain on the treatment process. things break down quicker, etc. etc.

The goal is [if youve ever played a simcity game] to keep your available capacity above consumption with a Healthy Overhead. Facilities under strain will always break down faster. Like your BMW built for 160mph even though it will [most likely] never know the pleasure; versus a Yaris trying to pull a Trailer. which would be comical.

So if we introduced metering tomorrow, would you agree, the Consumer trend would end up in many fewer litres/gallons being consumed when people arent just flushing money quite literally down the sink. Would this Not, do you agree, greatly ease the strain on the existing, overstressed, overworked Treatment and Sewage systems? Would THAT not in turn reduce the need to build new and additional treatment and sewage systems at a cost of millions to the Irish Taxpayer Anyway? Would it not inevitably improve the quality of the entire system?

Think about it.

whatdoicare

Ah, man, I'm just about scraping money together to pay bills as it is- how the heck am I going to pay this?? I just want to cry now....:( .

congo_90

Overheal,
I understand your points but maybe a services charge. The idea of paying per litre just seems a bit odd ball. I can see what you mean by a lot of water being wasted though. I have played sim city but have lost the cd a long time ago

On the flipside. I would pay the water charge if I knew every cent (within reason) was going to fix leaking or contaminated supplies. Naturally some people don't care about waste. I tend to be cautious about conservation but thats mainly down to having water conserving toilets and taps fitted.

Overheal

congo_90 wrote: »

Overheal,
I understand your points but maybe a services charge. The idea of paying per litre just seems a bit odd ball. I can see what you mean by a lot of water being wasted though. I have played sim city but have lost the cd a long time ago

On the flipside. I would pay the water charge if I knew every cent (within reason) was going to fix leaking or contaminated supplies. Naturally some people don't care about waste. I tend to be cautious about conservation but thats mainly down to having water conserving toilets and taps fitted.

Its hard to nickel and dime everything but I understand Frustration, especially against the Irish Government, to account for all the Money. But from everything I've read in the OP article it does sound a lot like the Government is Very Clearly addressing people's concerns about the Water and Sewage System. I think they're owed at least a little credit.

MisterTickle wrote:

the council want you should pay for water even after admitting that 45% of the water leaks out through their underground pipework. laughable really. paying for water in this country.

Some €300m has already been earmarked to fix the country’s creaking water supplies over the next three years.

Mr Gormley said the record repair bill will see burst pipes and old mains systems replaced as some regions are losing about half of water supplies through leaks.

“This is completely unacceptable and must be urgently addressed,” he said.

MisterTickle is just one case and point: Many and Irish denizen has been blinded by grievance and is evidently quite blind to the attempts of the current government to clean up some of its bad acts - like the Water problem. Here Gormley clearly acknowledges Mistertickle's complaint.

When you spend so long hating something its hard to notice when it tries to do something good.

I'd say a lot if not all of the money will go to the repairs. Like I mentioned earlier, its not unusual for a water utility to be unable to retain all of its expenses [according to wikipedia: Water Supply]

Zombienosh

hmm, for poor quality flouride filled water? no

if they gave fresh clean water to everyone without added chemicals? maybe

starbelgrade

Overheal wrote: »

Think about it.

Thought about it. Still don't wanna pay for it.

congo_90

The sad thing is we'll bitch and moan till the cows come home (for some water) :rolleyes:
In the end. No matter what we do this will come in. I don't wan't it to come in. I'd rather my income 'levy' be put into fixing up the water supply. That's for another thread. I'm aware of it's reasons etc etc.

I've already had to buy a bleeding water meter! if they want any more for fitting one they can **** off, I'm not too keen on paying a water tax either!

Don't forget!!! that after May this year we are also expect to pay a "carbon tax" on our heating fuel as well, where does it end!

Zombienosh

Deleted User wrote: »

I've already had to buy a bleeding water meter! if they want any more for fitting one they can **** off, I'm not too keen on paying a water tax either!

Don't forget!!! that after May this year we are also expect to pay a "carbon tax" on our heating fuel as well, where does it end!

life tax

Overheal

starbelgrade wrote: »

Thought about it. Still don't wanna pay for it.

Meh. /shrug

The only 'good' reason not to introduce metering is people are whingers and dont want to pay for something they've been getting for free.

You'll get over it.

cleremy jarkson

I think if you found yourself having to pay for water, you'd give up every other necessity in order to do so, in order that your blood pressure could remain physiologically normal and your organs could remain hydrated


i know i would


and im fcuked

DonkeyStyle \o/

Overheal wrote: »

The only 'good' reason not to introduce metering is people are whingers and dont want to pay for something they've been getting for free.

Right, because the whole system has been run by unpaid volunteers working by candle-light who receive no money what so ever from our taxes.

Joey the lips

You got to love the greens and the govt. The govt promised no new taxes "Oh but i didnt do it sir it was him, i just held his hand"

I reckon we should lump all our tax together in one pot that way the govt can decide what to give us instead of just slowly takeing it away.

I know this seems to be an anti dublin thing but does all the lovely students and workers from outside the pale understand that this just gets added onto their rent.

Evolute

I don't believe we should have to pay for the meters or for the installation the government wants to put them in they should pay for it.

Is it just me or does anyone else think that it is F***ING stupid that the government want people to pay for meters so they can pay more tax??????

That and your poll is missing the choice of yes we should pay for water but not for the meters.

The_Conductor

Whats with the 'The World does not revolve around Dublin' option?
At present in Ireland we loose 46% of our drinking water to leaking pipes. This rises to 59% in Cork and 57-58% in Leitrim and Roscommon.
We need to invest 13 billion in our water infrastructure over the next 6 years.
If you don't want to have your water metered and paid for by usage- you have to accept that you're just going to have to pay for it through some other sort of taxation.

The bulk of the revenues raised would presumably be spent in the places which loose most water- which are not Dublin (South Dublin- where most of the water rationing is at the moment- only looses around 20%). The current shortage is as a result of fools insisting on running taps in order to prevent pipes from freezing during the cold snap. Far from consuming water- as was requested- our national usage went up to almost 700m ltr a day- a vast amount, and far more than we are equipped to treat.

I hate paying taxes as much as the next person- but why should I subsidise the fools next door who use 6 times more water than I do?

wes

I already pay enough taxes as it is. Perhaps the government should use the money they already have more efficently, and not give billions away to help dodgy bankers and there mates.

freewheeler

what a surprise..the 'government' finds YET another way of screwing more money out of us...perhaps those who claim we live in a low-tax economy should wake up to all the indirect taxes we pay...ridiculous rates of VAT,PAYE,PRSI(for what?)fuel duty,car tax the list is endless! and the polls show that this shower of planks approval rating has actually INCREASED???? my faith in the Irish electorate decreases by the day...:(

kowloon

Knowing the gob$hites in charge they'll hire a load of new staff to administer the new system, monitor installation complete with their own IT department, in office councillor, and a subsidised canteen. Then they'll have two guys in a van to install all the meters in the country .

Not having a go at the public service in general, just the idiots at the top.

There's always the possibility of a flat rate water tax, everyone would have to pay it ragardless of usage, or connection to mains water.

ART6

kowloon wrote: »

Knowing the gob$hites in charge they'll hire a load of new staff to administer the new system, monitor installation complete with their own IT department, in office councillor, and a subsidised canteen. Then they'll have two guys in a van to install all the meters in the country .

They will probably set up Quango number 1022 to run the introduction, and Gormley will appoint one of his mates to run it on a salary of €300k a year plus unlimited expenses. A contract to install meters will be placed with a Romanian company that is only vaguely aware of where Ireland is. It's installers will not understand a word of English, and given the Irish propensity for naming every plot of land in Anglicised Irish instead of using post codes, they will have no idea how to find where they are supposed to put the meters. They will be issued with satnavs that only have maps for the Six Counties.

The cost of the exercise will be budgeted a €X millions and will turn out to cost €X billions. It will be planned to take two years but half the current population will be dead before every property is equipped. In the meantime, metering not being available, a flat charge will be introduced for every household irrespective of their usage. Gormley will insist that this causes people to be more conservative with their water demand. By the time all of the meters are installed they will be obselete and won't work anymore. They will then be removed and stored for twenty five years at a cost of €5 millions a year.

I wish I was joking, but I am afraid I might not be. The alternative of course is to continue as we are and pay for water supplies out of the general taxation. I can't see how metering and charging is going to guarantee upgrading and improvement of supplies when the current system doesn't. The cost is finite wherever the money comes from, and if it simply flows into the public purse along with all the other taxes, why should we expect it to be spent any differently? The excuse that most other countries in Europe impose water charges doesn't mean we have to slavishly follow, does it?

* Edit -- of course it means just that if there is a tax opportunity involved*

Joey the lips

ART6 wrote: »

They will probably set up Quango number 1022 . They will be issued with satnavs that only have maps for the Six Counties.

The excuse that most other countries in Europe impose water charges doesn't mean we have to slavishly follow, does it?

* Edit -- of course it means just that if there is a tax opportunity involved*

post of the day i reckon and scary because its true....

homerjay2005

of course people are going to vote now here when it means them paying for something. our water supply is a joke, outdated and in serious need of upgrading. if us paying for it means we never again have a repeat of last few weeks farcical events, then i am all for paying for it. the amount of wastage is unbelieveable and it would cop people on once they started getting bills for it.

i would structure it in such a way that maybe everybody had an allowance and once they went over that, they paid. a huge amount of water, which costs alot to treat, goes on flushing toilets. i would be all in favour of the proposal to have 2 water supplies for new housing estates in the future where one is the treated water for drinking/washing etc and the 2nd is untreated rain water gathered in each individual house for toilet flushing only.

Min

Most people in the countryside pay for their own water via having their own private well for their water supply - set up costs, maintenance, electric bills...

I don't think the reservoirs for public water supplies would be as low if people had to pay for keeping their taps running.

amacachi

There should be no water charges, I want it for free, I want everything for free. I want new things and I want things repaired but I don't want to pay for it.