IW/Anything Water Related-Warning in OP

BoatMad

Red Pepper wrote: »

You should visit Galway A&E some day to see how our economic recovery is doing. An economic recovery that is in spite of our government rather than as a result of anything they did. You should visit the mental health services up and down the country to see how many vital programs have been cut. You should see how stretched social services are at the moment especially in relation to caring for vulnerable children.
And it isn't because the HSE don't get enough funding, its because they have too much middle management and admin staff and bureaucratic systems wasting all that money. Setting up an IW in the same vein was just too much.

Th main reason we have a current recovery is several fold

(a) Austerity somewhat lowered operating costs, it certainly lowered or stopped pay rises in many parts of private industry

(b) The Tech and Pharma industries have been fairly recession proof.

(C) Ireland is a wealthy country and a lot of cash was waiting for the bottom of the property market.

( D) There is the "ping pong ball" effect


Again , I find this rather bizarre,

You should visit the mental health services up and down the country to see how many vital programs have been cut. You should see how stretched social services are at the moment especially in relation to caring for vulnerable children.
And it isn't because the HSE don't get enough funding, its because they have too much middle management and admin staff and bureaucratic systems wasting all that money. Setting up an IW in the same vein was just too muc

While there is evidence of a "degree" of waste and inefficiency in the HSE, its primarily in the employment of too many staff ( and you think just firing them all in the middle of a recession would be a good thing !)

But the majority of money from the tax receipts goes into SW and Health=

SO if you want better services in this area, you need to stump up bigger USC and PRSI and tax my friend. You do realise we are still running a current budget deficit never mind the legacy effect


This is the rather bizarre aspect of the left wing thinking , more services and less tax !!!!!

gladrags

Plates wrote: »

That's not going to happen. In todays "140 character or less" generation people are won over by soundbites. What matters is momentum going into an election. In the absence of a new political party, the next Government may well be a FF/FG coalition, just in time for the 1916 anniversary.

But the polls are indicating a rise in support,for all parties,other than FF,FG and labour.

And if you include Labour as a left party,there could as easily be a very compfortable alliance,without FG&FF.

This looks increasingly likely.

_Kaiser_

BoatMad wrote: »

While there is evidence of a "degree" of waste and inefficiency in the HSE, its primarily in the employment of too many staff ( and you think just firing them all in the middle of a recession would be a good thing !)

But the majority of money from the tax receipts goes into SW and Health=

SO if you want better services in this area, you need to stump up bigger USC and PRSI and tax my friend. You do realise we are still running a current budget deficit never mind the legacy effect

Bit of a contradiction there no?

You admit on one hand that the HSE is over-staffed and therefore leading to waste and inefficiency (and frankly I don't see any reason to keep paying people for jobs that aren't needed/they aren't doing - either redeploy them or cut them, recession or not.. it's what happens in the private sector)

But then you say we'll have to stump up more in tax to compensate for the reduced numbers?

Personally I think the problem isn't so much what is taken in tax by the Government, but how that money is spent/squandered on staff who aren't needed, stupid pet projects, "handy numbers" for the mates and relatives of TDs etc - not to mention pissing away billions on private debt that our weak "leaders" accepted on our behalf.

Reform the spending, salary/performance/pension and accountability structures of government/semi-states and I think you'd find there'd actually more than enough money to go around as it is.

BoatMad

gladrags wrote: »

But the polls are indicating a rise in support,for all parties,other than FF,FG and labour.

And if you include Labour as a left party,there could as easily be a very compfortable alliance,without FG&FF.

This looks increasingly likely.

actually the polls are showing a massive rise in the no party preference , i.e. a plague on all your houses. Thats now at 31% a massive rise

Of course these people don't typically vote

ThinkAboutIt

The anti water charges leader gets paid quite a large amount

http://www.independent.ie/news/paul-murphy-td-an-apology-30765893.html

listermint

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Bit of a contradiction there no?

You admit on one hand that the HSE is over-staffed and therefore leading to waste and inefficiency (and frankly I don't see any reason to keep paying people for jobs that aren't needed/they aren't doing - either redeploy them or cut them, recession or not.. it's what happens in the private sector)

But then you say we'll have to stump up more in tax to compensate for the reduced numbers?

Personally I think the problem isn't so much what is taken in tax by the Government, but how that money is spent/squandered on staff who aren't needed, stupid pet projects, "handy numbers" for the mates and relatives of TDs etc - not to mention pissing away billions on private debt that our weak "leaders" accepted on our behalf.

Reform the spending, salary/performance/pension and accountability structures of government/semi-states and I think you'd find there'd actually more than enough money to go around as it is.

+400,000

gandalf

BoatMad wrote: »

SO if you want better services in this area, you need to stump up bigger USC and PRSI and tax my friend. You do realise we are still running a current budget deficit never mind the legacy effect

If we want better services then we to ensure the majority of monies being allocated to those services is actually directly delivering them. Without a doubt this is not happening now and a vast majority of those monies is involved in keeping the unnecessary layers of bureaucracy in place.

Before people are asked to dip further into their pockets this should be eliminated. The opportunity was there to start on a comprehensive reform process but this Government squandered the opportunity and instead continued on with business as normal contrary to the FG promises before the last election. Even worse they created a new super quango in IW and highlighted the waste and cronyism even more. Although that now may be a blessing disguise, a catalyst to change that might actually help deliver it.

shinzon

Ervia Chief defending the 107 million euro underestimate. jesus these people are doing a fine job of destroying any credibility they had all by themselves

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/1124/661993-water-charges/

Shin

gladrags

"Th main reason we have a current recovery is several fold.

(a) Austerity somewhat lowered operating costs, it certainly lowered or stopped pay rises in many parts of private industry "

The question you need to answer is,what caused austerity,in the first instance.

This is called accountability.

"( D) There is the "ping pong ball" effect "

What has table tennis got to do with poverty,hardship and despair?

gandalf

ThinkAboutIt wrote: »

The anti water charges leader gets paid quite a large amount

http://www.independent.ie/news/paul-murphy-td-an-apology-30765893.html

I think that article has been linked on this thread three times now :rolleyes:

Also it is quite rude to include a link but not to provide a quote from it or an indication on its actual content.

As for Paul Murphy I wouldn't count him as a leader, like I wouldn't count Mary Lou or Grinny Adams. They are just band wagon jumpers, the grass roots are the real leaders here.

listermint

ThinkAboutIt wrote: »

The anti water charges leader gets paid quite a large amount

http://www.independent.ie/news/paul-murphy-td-an-apology-30765893.html

That was a terrible written article and apology. The Editor has alot to answer for for allowing that slop to go to print or is it just a webpage so they can get rid of it easily.

Red Pepper

BoatMad wrote: »

Th main reason we have a current recovery is several fold

(a) Austerity somewhat lowered operating costs, it certainly lowered or stopped pay rises in many parts of private industry

(b) The Tech and Pharma industries have been fairly recession proof.

(C) Ireland is a wealthy country and a lot of cash was waiting for the bottom of the property market.

( D) There is the "ping pong ball" effect


Again , I find this rather bizarre,


While there is evidence of a "degree" of waste and inefficiency in the HSE, its primarily in the employment of too many staff ( and you think just firing them all in the middle of a recession would be a good thing !)

But the majority of money from the tax receipts goes into SW and Health=

SO if you want better services in this area, you need to stump up bigger USC and PRSI and tax my friend. You do realise we are still running a current budget deficit never mind the legacy effect


This is the rather bizarre aspect of the left wing thinking , more services and less tax !!!!!

You are all over the place, what is your point?

And yes the HSE is overstaffed and completely bureaucratic. Too many "support staff" and not enough front line workers.

But sure lets make all the same mistakes again with Irish Water!!!

BoatMad

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Bit of a contradiction there no?

You admit on one hand that the HSE is over-staffed and therefore leading to waste and inefficiency (and frankly I don't see any reason to keep paying people for jobs that aren't needed/they aren't doing - either redeploy them or cut them, recession or not.. it's what happens in the private sector)

But then you say we'll have to stump up more in tax to compensate for the reduced numbers?

Personally I think the problem isn't so much what is taken in tax by the Government, but how that money is spent/squandered on staff who aren't needed, stupid pet projects, "handy numbers" for the mates and relatives of TDs etc - not to mention pissing away billions on private debt that our weak "leaders" accepted on our behalf.

Reform the spending, salary/performance/pension and accountability structures of government/semi-states and I think you'd find there'd actually more than enough money to go around as it is.

Theres no evidence that " achievable reforms" would produce anything like what is necessary to close the current budget deficit ( note that has nothing to do with the bailout repayments) firing public servants , great , Im a right winger, music to my ears, but not going to happen, hence we have to look at achievable reforms, not pie in the sky

Fundamentally FF destroyed the tax base of this country from the 1980s forwards, "elect me" budgets removed rates, lowed taxes and increased expectations, its was only the once of taxes from a booming property market that papered over the hole. Once that tide went out all was revealed.

whats fundamentally wrong in this country is that we cannot equate tax with services, we keep thinking somehow the Gov has "loads of money" and if only it could get its finger out it could do something

Any rational evaluation of Irelands tax take , shows that we are a "modestly" taxed country. and thats up from a "low taxed", this is especially true when you take dinkies as a comparison.

Red Pepper

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Bit of a contradiction there no?

You admit on one hand that the HSE is over-staffed and therefore leading to waste and inefficiency (and frankly I don't see any reason to keep paying people for jobs that aren't needed/they aren't doing - either redeploy them or cut them, recession or not.. it's what happens in the private sector)

But then you say we'll have to stump up more in tax to compensate for the reduced numbers?

Personally I think the problem isn't so much what is taken in tax by the Government, but how that money is spent/squandered on staff who aren't needed, stupid pet projects, "handy numbers" for the mates and relatives of TDs etc - not to mention pissing away billions on private debt that our weak "leaders" accepted on our behalf.

Reform the spending, salary/performance/pension and accountability structures of government/semi-states and I think you'd find there'd actually more than enough money to go around as it is.

Kaiser has it exactly.
He will be the new minister for public sector reform in the RPPP led government. Big shoes to fill Kaiser...Brendan Howlin

BoatMad

Red Pepper wrote: »

You are all over the place, what is your point?

I was addressing the reasons for the current economic recovery , part is down to austerity measures, part is down to FDI policy and part is a "ping pong effect" ( delayed gratification spending)

My point is, if we want to pay less tax, ( like reducing the 4 billon intake USC) , we better be prepared to accept less effective services.

We can't have it both ways, believing that fakery, is what got us here in the first place. The electorate need to "grow up", buts theres no evidence of that happening, if you look at totally unrealistic pseudo-budgets being bandied about by various left wingers.

listermint

BoatMad wrote: »

Theres no evidence that " achievable reforms" would produce anything like what is necessary to close the current budget deficit ( note that has nothing to do with the bailout repayments) firing public servants , great , Im a right winger, music to my ears, but not going to happen, hence we have to look at achievable reforms, not pie in the sky

Fundamentally FF destroyed the tax base of this country from the 1980s forwards, "elect me" budgets removed rates, lowed taxes and increased expectations, its was only the once of taxes from a booming property market that papered over the hole. Once that tide went out all was revealed.

whats fundamentally wrong in this country is that we cannot equate tax with services, we keep thinking somehow the Gov has "loads of money" and if only it could get its finger out it could do something

Any rational evaluation of Irelands tax take , shows that we are a "modestly" taxed country. and thats up from a "low taxed", this is especially true when you take dinkies as a comparison.

You are telling me that setting individual targets and having people meet them is not achievable, and equally its not something that would save money.

There is 'NO' evidence that making staff hit achievable targets. Insuring that they are not skipping off on sick days and work their allocated time with all the professionalism that is expected from their role would not weed out wasters and save money.

Is this something you are saying would not save any cash at all, and equally increase moral at the same time for the poor unfortunates who have to work along side them.

Im sure you know moral and contempt is persuasive in a working environment if a number of people are slacking off and optically looking like they are getting off scott free, then it spreads.

But sure no you want business as usual.


Right winger. :rolleyes:

listermint

BoatMad wrote: »

I was addressing the reasons for the current economic recovery , part is down to austerity measures, part is down to FDI policy and part is a "ping pong effect" ( delayed gratification spending)

My point is, if we want to pay less tax, ( like reducing the 4 billon intake USC) , we better be prepared to accept less effective services.

We can't have it both ways, believing that fakery, is what go tis here in the first place. The Government need to "grow up", and do EXACTLY what their mandate was buts theres no evidence of that happening, if you look at totally unrealistic pseudo-budgets being bandied about by various left wingers.

Fixed your poorly worded post.

TheChizler

shinzon wrote: »

Ervia Chief defending the 107 million euro underestimate. jesus these people are doing a fine job of destroying any credibility they had all by themselves

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/1124/661993-water-charges/

Shin

Is it different from any other tendering/budgeting process though? Come up with an initial estimate on what you'd like to spend, get a quote, and define your budget based on that. I bought a car recently and had to up my budget by 30% once I figured out the going rate for the spec I wanted.

If they went €100 M over-budget then that would be outrageous, but the news story seems to be that they had to revise an initial guesstimate, essentially.

BoatMad

shinzon wrote: »

Ervia Chief defending the 107 million euro underestimate. jesus these people are doing a fine job of destroying any credibility they had all by themselves

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/1124/661993-water-charges/

Shin

perhaps you might show me a house build for example by a private person , that came in exactly in original estimates.

It was a reasonable explanation, He made the point that until they actually saw the tenders, they couldn't establish the actual costs exactly. He also mentioned that som elf the lowest tenders, then did not accept the risk clauses and the next highest tenders were picked, Ultimately you cannot force a "estimate" onto a private contractor.

personally I like new a new heating system, my consultant " me mate" said it should cost 1200, funnily all the quotes are 1700. Ive tried suggesting the contractors accept "me mates" estimate, the laughter can still be heard .

listermint

BoatMad wrote: »

perhaps you might show me a house build for example by a private person , that came in exactly in original estimates.

It was a reasonable explanation, He made the point that until they actually saw the tenders, they couldn't establish the actual costs exactly. He also mentioned that som elf the lowest tenders, then did not accept the risk clauses and the next highest tenders were picked, Ultimately you cannot force a "estimate" onto a private contractor.

personally I like new a new heating system, my consultant " me mate" said it should cost 1200, funnily all the quotes are 1700. Ive tried suggesting the contractors accept "me mates" estimate, the laughter can still be heard .

This is why you get estimates and you write up contracts.

Are you honestly telling me that if you put out a tendor for your house to be built and out of five private builders you chose one did up the contracts and work commenced.

He then tells you that the contract means nothing and he needs another 20% you would say 'ok'


You cant really believe what you are typing can you ???

:eek:

BoatMad

We can't have it both ways, believing that fakery, is what go tis here in the first place. The Government need to "grow up", and do EXACTLY what their mandate was buts theres no evidence of that happening, if you look at totally unrealistic pseudo-budgets being bandied about by various left wingers.


Fixed your poorly worded post.

Well thanks , not, no government has ever been elected on a promise of tax rises in this country, The electorate for years has got used to listening to electoral nonsense.

But tell me what was the FG/Lab mandate. FG clearly rang on a "well fix the FF mess" and got a big vote. seems to me their carrying out that mandate.

shinzon

well that's grand then whats 100 million or so being pissed up against the wall, so long as everyones happy with 593 million also being pissed up against the wall that's fine

The attitude of itll cost what it will cost stinks and sums up the whole situation nicely

Shin

TheChizler

listermint wrote: »

This is why you get estimates and you write up contracts.

Are you honestly telling me that if you put out a tendor for your house to be built and out of five private builders you chose one did up the contracts and work commenced.

He then tells you that the contract means nothing and he needs another 20% you would say 'ok'


You cant really believe what you are typing can you ???

:eek:

Except that's not what happened...

They haven't gone over the budget set when accepting the tender. To suit your example, what happened was that you put out a tender for your house with a certain amount in mind, and the builders came back with figures in and about 20% over that. You then chose one based on price and risk.

Whether they should have accepted the tender price is another story. Personally I don't know if it's good value or not. But it's a bit disingenuous to deride IR, who indeed do have real shortcomings, for getting a figure wrong which at the end of the day has no real meaning, the final budgeted amount is the important number. Who's to say that if they had put out an initial estimate at the final accepted price of €593 M, that the contractors wouldn't have come back with a figure of €693 M? Or vice versa and put in a lower estimate and the contractors came in under 593? It's a standard budget setting process, offer x% under the actual price and negotiate.

If they were breaking the 593 budget I'd be fuming, but almost uniquely, when it comes to major infrastructural projects, they seem to be sticking to their budget.

BoatMad

listermint wrote: »

This is why you get estimates and you write up contracts.

Are you honestly telling me that if you put out a tendor for your house to be built and out of five private builders you chose one did up the contracts and work commenced.

He then tells you that the contract means nothing and he needs another 20% you would say 'ok'


You cant really believe what you are typing can you ???

:eek:

em, The contract that was written was the one that was higher then the estimate. Its not that the contracted amount is over budget, in fact the IW CEO, confirmed they would deliver the meter contract on time and within the contracted budget. Its seems 50% of meters are installed, the protests are only really affecting a few areas and are not impacting overall installation numbers,

I don't think the issue is the meter budget really.

BoatMad

shinzon wrote: »

well that's grand then whats 100 million or so being pissed up against the wall, so long as everyones happy with 593 million also being pissed up against the wall that's fine

The attitude of itll cost what it will cost stinks and sums up the whole situation nicely

Shin

Long term the metering of water is a necessity. Thats not really the issue here.

shinzon

BoatMad wrote: »

,

I don't think the issue is the meter budget really.

Nope its just the latest in a long line of monumental cockups from this toxic quango

Shin

gandalf

BoatMad wrote: »

perhaps you might show me a house build for example by a private person , that came in exactly in original estimates.

It was a reasonable explanation, He made the point that until they actually saw the tenders, they couldn't establish the actual costs exactly. He also mentioned that som elf the lowest tenders, then did not accept the risk clauses and the next highest tenders were picked, Ultimately you cannot force a "estimate" onto a private contractor.

personally I like new a new heating system, my consultant " me mate" said it should cost 1200, funnily all the quotes are 1700. Ive tried suggesting the contractors accept "me mates" estimate, the laughter can still be heard .

It depends on what preparatory work your "mate" did before coming to that quote. If it was a finger in the air effort then yes you would expect there to be a large play in the actual amount the job costs but given BG had completed over 50% of the surveying work before they submitted the skewed quote then I would have expected them to have quite a clear idea on the level of work involved and the costs associated with it.

The fact they were so far out indicates they either fabricated the costs at a lower level, which indicates fraud or they were completely and utterly incompetent.

shinzon

BoatMad wrote: »

Long term the metering of water is a necessity. Thats not really the issue here.

Are you saying that if the final cost ratcheted upto 800-900 million euro or more youd be happy with that cause its a necessity (that's not going to happen btw), that 593 million euro would go along way in fixing the infrastructure don't ye think, and please don't give me that guff about the meters will locate the leaks thats BS and everyone knows it

Shin

BoatMad

listermint wrote: »

You are telling me that setting individual targets and having people meet them is not achievable, and equally its not something that would save money.

There is 'NO' evidence that making staff hit achievable targets. Insuring that they are not skipping off on sick days and work their allocated time with all the professionalism that is expected from their role would not weed out wasters and save money.

Is this something you are saying would not save any cash at all, and equally increase moral at the same time for the poor unfortunates who have to work along side them.

Im sure you know moral and contempt is persuasive in a working environment if a number of people are slacking off and optically looking like they are getting off scott free, then it spreads.

But sure no you want business as usual.


Right winger. :rolleyes:

Like I said , Im all in favour of smaller public service, teachers, nurses, guards are all paid too much by european or UK norms, The middle management group is too big, pension entitlements are way too generous.

And yes in certain areas, there is a culture of " swinging the lead"
etc etc etc.

But th efact is these people have legally binding contracts. Furthermore they have protection from compulsory redundancy by the fact that the whole Union setup in ireland is almost totally a public service union.

Someone said here, you have to shoot the nearest crocodile, not the largest, dreaming about super-efficient public servants is just dreaming about shooting the largest crocodile, when your leg is being gnawed off by the closest one.

The key is to look for achievable reforms, and then to balance tax take with deliverable services, that requires a "grown up " electorate that seems balance between tax intake and service delivery.

I look at left wingers and I see simply the same old "FF" message dressed up in a new coat. ( ps I see the same thing in all parties )

BoatMad

shinzon wrote: »

Are you saying that if the final cost ratcheted upto 800-900 million euro or more youd be happy with that cause its a necessity (that's not going to happen btw), that 593 million euro would go along way in fixing the infrastructure don't ye think, and please don't give me that guff about the meters will locate the leaks thats BS and everyone knows it

Shin

Ultimately one way or the other , you and I are paying for water, every other utility is metered,I see no reason why water shouldn't be. ( I grew up on a metered group scheme).

in the context of repairing and upgrading the infrastructure the 500-600 million would only make a small dent in that .

The key reason for meters is to change public perception, that water is an unlimited resource that can be consumed without regard to the costs of its provision.