Water charges revisited?

McMurphy

blanch152 wrote: »

And how has that €2bn been wasted?

After all, you have been supplied with water, that water has been treated, and there has been investment in repairing leaks.

I was supplied with water long before Irish water was dreamt up by FG.

There was no need for the logos, laughing yoga, the conservation grant and all the other bells and whistles.

The expert committee killed the dream blanch.

As I stated lots of times already.


The emperors got no clothes on.

blanch152

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I was supplied with water long before Irish water was dreamt up by FG.

There was no need for the logos, laughing yoga, the conservation grant and all the other bells and whistles.

The expert committee killed the dream blanch.

As I stated lots of times already.


The emperors got no clothes on.

So, tell me how much it cost before Irish Water. For all you know, supplying and treating water may now cost a fraction of what it cost before.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Why would anyone be prosecuted?

Water charges have been suspended, the law has not been repealed.

So what are you saying here, that water charges will be reintroduced with the same metered charges for domestic consumption over the same allowances of "free water" and that we are going to bury more good money after that already wasted on meters ?

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

So what are you saying here, that water charges will be reintroduced with the same metered charges for domestic consumption over the same allowances of "free water" and that we are going to bury more good money after that already wasted on meters ?

No, all I am simply saying is that the legal framework that permits water charges has not been repealed. It is therefore an administrative matter rather than a legal one for a future government to reintroduce water charges.

GreeBo

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Sooner being decades ago. They weren't my peaceful protests they were the individuals attending.
Meters may have off set the cost of the meters and IW administration.

I get that. It's not a new problem just discovered. They underfunded it for generations. It was not suddenly discovered in 2011.

I'm against being conned. People on welfare would have it paid for them. You don't seem to know what you're arguing for.

Seriously, despite the poor judgement of people who certainly know better going over well covered ground, I suggest you look into things before you comment further.

Doesnt matter if it was decades ago, years ago or months ago.
The point is the exact same.

This "they" you are talking about is the government & local authorities.

So if you dont want IW looking after water and you dont want government/local authorities.....who exactly do you want?

Or is it just a moan and a way of avoiding paying for your utilities like pretty much everyone else on the planet?

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

And how has that €2bn been wasted?

After all, you have been supplied with water, that water has been treated, and there has been investment in repairing leaks.

A good chunk of change spent on water meters now rotting away underground as well.


I don`t know about you, but I have been turning on a tap and water has been coming out long long before the Irish Water quango.

GreeBo

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I was supplied with water long before Irish water was dreamt up by FG.

There was no need for the logos, laughing yoga, the conservation grant and all the other bells and whistles.

Yep you had water before IW was setup.
We all did.
Except no one was paying what was required to maintain/improve it.

Guess where that leads to....right where we are now.
Serious infrastructure problems, not enough time or money to fix it and a water shortage due to historic high temperatures & lack of precipitation.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

The expert committee killed the dream blanch.

As I stated lots of times already.


The emperors got no clothes on.

You are "arguing" like a 12 year old here. It does nothing to help you make or backup your point.

Simple question.
Taking the fact that we currently dont have enough tax take to fix our water infrastructure. How, other than IW do you propose we get out of the mess we are in now?

btw, "Peaceful protests" aren't going to achieve anything, but I'm sure its a great day out for you and the lads.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

No, all I am simply saying is that the legal framework that permits water charges has not been repealed. It is therefore an administrative matter rather than a legal one for a future government to reintroduce water charges.

So when do see the political toxic cloud of water charges dispersing to bring this about ?

One generation, two,.....?

charlie14

GreeBo wrote: »

btw, "Peaceful protests" aren't going to achieve anything, but I'm sure its a great day out for you and the lads.

Don`t mention "Peaceful protests" to any FG or Labour backbenchers.



They still have a touch of the hebejebes from the last ones.

GreeBo

charlie14 wrote: »

A good chunk of change spent on water meters now rotting away underground as well.


I don`t know about you, but I have been turning on a tap and water has been coming out long long before the Irish Water quango.

How are the rotting away underground?
They are in *exactly* the place they should be.

Its clearly also escaped you, but no one was able to maintain the water system so now half of it leaks out.

I'm sure you want to blame IW for that, anything to avoid paying your fair share, but the reality is that you not paying for it is what has it in the heap its in now.
But fire away and keep protesting the charges, see where that gets you.

charlie14

GreeBo wrote: »

How are the rotting away underground?
They are in *exactly* the place they should be.

Its clearly also escaped you, but no one was able to maintain the water system so now half of it leaks out.

I'm sure you want to blame IW for that, anything to avoid paying your fair share, but the reality is that you not paying for it is what has it in the heap its in now.
But fire away and keep protesting the charges, see where that gets you.

Water meters are underground doing nothing and never likely to. A waste of money that could and should have been used to repair leaks.


I do not remember if you were on the mega threads discussion on this subject, but as someone who was, I can assure you nothing about leaks escaped me. Especially that water meters are as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike when it comes to detecting where 50% of treated water leaks are, the mains.



I have always paid for water through general taxation, but you seem to be under the misconception that water charges were contributing anything to water or waste water services.

dense

oscarBravo wrote: »

Right, but it's also incongruous to claim that the government liberalised the provision of water services in order to comply with a policy that permits the liberalisation of water services. They were already in compliance with that policy.

So, I'm still waiting for an answer to the question.

I didn't say the government has liberalised water services.

It hasn't, yet.

Eurostat made that abundantly clear.

But liberalisation and competition is certainly coming down the track if today's news is anything to go by.

http://www.thejournal.ie/irish-water-ervia-split-4129859-Jul2018/

Irish Water to split from Ervia within five years
The water body is to become a standalone utility by the year 2023.

We are currently being denied the advantages that the European Commission sees in liberalisation:

Some essential services — energy, telecommunications, transport, water and post — are still controlled by public authorities rather than private companies in some countries.

What are the advantages of liberalisation?

Consumers can choose from among different service providers and products. For example, in the railway, electricity and gas industries, network operators are now required to give competitors fair access to their networks. In these industries, monitoring fair network access by all suppliers is essential, so that:

consumers can choose the supplier offering the best conditions;
consumers benefit from lower prices and new services which are usually more efficient and consumer-friendly than before;
national economies become more competitive.

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/general/liberalisation_en.html


I'm confident its only a matter of time before the EC (working closely with Ireland) will find a remedy to enable us to enjoy the fruits of privatisation and the advantages it offers.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

So when do see the political toxic cloud of water charges dispersing to bring this about ?

One generation, two,.....?

Shifting of goalposts going on now.

Some were saying that water charges had been abolished and/or repealed.

I was just pointing out that the full legal framework for water charges remains in place, and can be activated at any time. If you accept that, then we can move on.

McMurphy

GreeBo wrote: »

Yep you had water before IW was setup.
We all did.
Except no one was paying what was required to maintain/improve it.

I think there's a great argument to be had here, and it would mainly boil down to whether anyone was paying enough tax/whether that tax has been mismanaged by successive govts including the last one who blew 2billion on Irish water. But whatever.

Guess where that leads to....right where we are now.
Serious infrastructure problems, not enough time or money to fix it and a water shortage due to historic high temperatures & lack of precipitation.

See my post about project Ireland 2040. Plenty of money, plenty of time.

You are "arguing" like a 12 year old here. It does nothing to help you make or backup your point.

The 'arguing' with some of the IW/FG heads is laborious, I know reminding them that blaming anyone and everyone else for the Irish water debacle is a hard one to swallow, but in light of the expert committee's recommendations, it stops the roundabout dead. Every thing else is dancing on the head of a pin.

Simple question.
Taking the fact that we currently dont have enough tax take to fix our water infrastructure. How, other than IW do you propose we get out of the mess we are in now?

Been answered in the numerous threads by myself and others.

I'll give you a hint..... the 2 billion and counting would have gotten it underway.

btw, "Peaceful protests" aren't going to achieve anything, but I'm sure its a great day out for you and the lads.

Did you just type the above after typing this

You are "arguing" like a 12 year old here. It does nothing to help you make or backup your point.

The Bishop Basher

GreeBo wrote: »

But fire away and keep protesting the charges, see where that gets you.

We did.

We won.

There are no charges.

Edward M

Rennaws wrote: »

We did.

We won.

There are no charges.

And that is the victory really.
We had so much about the IW situation itself, the amount of people who said they weren't against charges in principle, but it was the set up of the utility, the chance of privatisation, the perks, the waste, the cronyism.
Anyway cross party support for this latest move it seems, though with caution.
A referendum pending on public ownership of water infrastructure?
I think they're gearing up for eventual reintroduction of charges, but without the possible hidden agenda of privatisation being able to be used as a weapon against them and with cross party for support for the utility now, two major stumbling blocks covered.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-water-independence-given-cautious-cross-party-backing-1.3567110?mode=amp

Hitman3000

Edward M wrote:

I think they're gearing up for eventual reintroduction of charges, but without the possible hidden agenda of privatisation being able to be used as a weapon against them and with cross party for support for the utility now, two major stumbling blocks covered.

Just the public now to convince........

dense

Edward M wrote: »

And that is the victory really.
We had so much about the IW situation itself, the amount of people who said they weren't againxst charges in principle, but it was the set up of the utility, the chance of privatisation, the perks, the waste, the cronyism.
Anyway cross party support for this latest move it seems, though with caution.
A referendum pending on public ownership of water infrastructure?
I think they're gearing up for eventual reintroduction of charges, but without the possible hidden agenda of privatisation being able to be used as a weapon against them and with cross party for support for the utility now, two major stumbling blocks covered.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/irish-water-independence-given-cautious-cross-party-backing-1.3567110?mode=amp

A referendum/plebiscite is a trojan horse.

It just serves to cement the existence of IW into Irish life for the future thereby requiring the introduction of fake "competition" from other private water utilities who pretend to have customers interests as their primary motivation eager to operate in the Irish market to offer choice to the consumer and to prevent a situation where IW operates as a state aided monopoly.

The next move for any water activists, instead of seeking a referendum, should be the seeking of a complete winding down of Irish Water as an election issue to prevent all of that stupidity.

We know what fake competition and fake consumer choice and service has done for electricity prices here and we should know what keeping Irish Water will do for water charges.

http://www.thejournal.ie/irish-water-ervia-split-4129859-Jul2018/

The Bishop Basher

Edward M wrote: »

I think they're gearing up for eventual reintroduction of charges, but without the possible hidden agenda of privatisation being able to be used as a weapon against them and with cross party for support for the utility now, two major stumbling blocks covered.

And ignore Section 2.4 a and b of the Oireachtais report on domestic charges ?

That figures..

dense wrote: »

We know what fake competition and fake consumer choice and service has done for electricity prices here and we should know what keeping Irish Water will do for water charges.

Within a couple of years we'll have the most expensive water charges in the EU and just as they have with mortgage interest rates and and motor insurance, the government will scratch their heads, make all the right noises and do nothing.

Sheep breeder

The one major issue than has not been tackled is increasing storage capacity and new sources of water, the lakes in roundwood and blessington have not increased in size since they were made and demand has gone crazy for water. In Dublin no well drilling is taking place to add extra supply to the mains like what is being by local authorities through out ireland. Cities in Ireland need extra supplies and the longer it’s left the cost goes up and needs forward thinking.

Edward M

Sheep breeder wrote: »

The one major issue than has not been tackled is increasing storage capacity and new sources of water, the lakes in roundwood and blessington have not increased in size since they were made and demand has gone crazy for water. In Dublin no well drilling is taking place to add extra supply to the mains like what is being by local authorities through out ireland. Cities in Ireland need extra supplies and the longer it’s left the cost goes up and needs forward thinking.

Absolutely agree.
We heard so much about the abundance of fresh water here at the time of the protests that you'd think we were living in a rainforest.
The harvesting and storage is an immense issue and needs to be sorted as soon as possible.
The Shannon pipeline of course is being mooted as the big saviour now, but even it is not a definitive answer.
So much needed and with a dry spell as we have now, if it became frequent then even that might not fulfill all the needs.
The effect that a low level Shannon could have on the tourism industry in areas like athlone, carrick on Shannon and the towns and counties around the river could have, might well be devastating if prolonged pumping were to take place.
There are major issues with water supply that haven't been thought out thoroughly at all.

FreudianSlippers

dense wrote: »

So we don't actually have a handle on what the average daily supply figure is, nor the average consumption figure, because all households are not metered and because business users usage is unknown.



Which demonstrates that claims about householders using 10% less would have prevented the current scarcity is based on the stuff of fantasy.

This is like beating your head against a wall. I think I'm done with this - it's either purposive deflection and evasion or it's just a pointless conversation because you don't seem to understand even some basics of water supply.

I'm honestly not sure at this point.

FreudianSlippers

blanch152 wrote: »

The law allowing water charges has never been repealed to my knowledge.

Correct, it has just been amended. As it stands, charges for excessive use automatically kick in starting January 2019.

FreudianSlippers

charlie14 wrote: »

Any idea how many have been prosecuted under that law ?:D

I'm sorry - what section allows for prosecution again?

I'm not saying there is or isn't such a section, I'm just wondering if you have any clue what you're talking about or whether this is some kind of idk what?

FreudianSlippers

charlie14 wrote: »

So what are you saying here, that water charges will be reintroduced with the same metered charges for domestic consumption over the same allowances of "free water" and that we are going to bury more good money after that already wasted on meters ?

The rates have not yet been set, but the consumption is in excess of 213,000lpa. Honestly, this is information that you could have found on a brief google search or by simply reading this thread.

The Bishop Basher

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Correct, it has just been amended. As it stands, charges for excessive use automatically kick in starting January 2019.

So a third of us are automatically exempt as we can't be metered.

Sweet..

FreudianSlippers

Rennaws wrote: »

So a third of us are automatically exempt as we can't be metered.

Sweet..

If you think wasting a valuable resource is "sweet" then I guess?

The Bishop Basher

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

If you think wasting a valuable resource is "sweet" then I guess?

Along with the vast majority of people in this country, I don’t waste water..

I’m more thinking along the lines that it makes it even more unpalatable and difficult to sell to an already skeptical public..

Seth Brundle

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Rennaws wrote: »

So a third of us are automatically exempt as we can't be metered.

Sweet..

If you think wasting a valuable finite resource is "sweet" then I guess?

FYP

McMurphy

I see we've gone full circle, and the wasting water accusations are in full flight again

Yawn.

FreudianSlippers

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I see we've gone full circle, and the wasting water accusations are in full flight again

Yawn.

Anyone rejoicing that they are free to use water in excess of 213klpa is wasting water. Pure and simple.

EdgeCase

There shouldn't be any issue here with water. We have plenty of water resources. We have a luscious situation, mostly in the greater Dublin area, where no reservoirs were built over a period when the population more than doubled. The area is still working from pretty much the same supply infrastructure it had in the mid 20th century.

Loads of houses were built, loads of industries were connected up and no new water storage infrastructure was put in place to connect them to.

It all comes down to *bad planning* and dysfunctional local government structures that have no power, autonomy or accountability.

If we don't get real about these things we will cause economic damage to the country. Our competitors get these things right. We have no excuses.

charlie14

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I'm sorry - what section allows for prosecution again?

I'm not saying there is or isn't such a section, I'm just wondering if you have any clue what you're talking about or whether this is some kind of idk what?

I really could not be bothered reading back through some of the scribblings here on what is essentially the flogging of a dead horse by pro water charges supporters, but was it not you who made such a big issue of these new proposed excessive use charges being backed by law ?
If it was, then to me a law without penalties or prosecution for flouting such proposed penalties hardly seems credible, so perhaps you could inform us as to what these are or do you not know.
Back to the water to domestic households being reduced to a trickle perhaps ?


As to that figure of 213,000 and January 1st. 2019, I was well aware of it, but were you not being somewhat disingenuous on both.



On the 213,000 liters. That figure represents 600 liter daily for the average household, (well in excess of the previous Irish Water allowance), with an addition of 25,000 liters per annum for each person in households over the average occupancy.
On January 1st. 2019. Excessive use charges will not begin until January 1st. 2019 "at the earliest" while bills for excess use charges will not be issued until July 1st. 2019 "at the earliest"

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Shifting of goalposts going on now.

Some were saying that water charges had been abolished and/or repealed.

I was just pointing out that the full legal framework for water charges remains in place, and can be activated at any time. If you accept that, then we can move on.

Not shifting any goalposts.


You appear to believe that water charges will be re-introduced in all their past glories with this full legal framework to back them up.


My question is quite simple but one you appear unwilling to answer.


With the political toxic cloud hanging over water charges, when do you see this glorious day coming about ?
For myself, at least a generation if ever tbh.

charlie14

Edward M wrote: »

Absolutely agree.
We heard so much about the abundance of fresh water here at the time of the protests that you'd think we were living in a rainforest.
The harvesting and storage is an immense issue and needs to be sorted as soon as possible.
The Shannon pipeline of course is being mooted as the big saviour now, but even it is not a definitive answer.
So much needed and with a dry spell as we have now, if it became frequent then even that might not fulfill all the needs.
The effect that a low level Shannon could have on the tourism industry in areas like athlone, carrick on Shannon and the towns and counties around the river could have, might well be devastating if prolonged pumping were to take place.
There are major issues with water supply that haven't been thought out thoroughly at all.

There is also the small matter of spending 1.3 Billion Euro, (initial budgeted price and we all know what that means), to pump water from the Shannon to have 50% of it leaking through mains in Dublin.


Here`s an off the wall idea.
Take that 1.3 Billion Euro and use it to fix the leaks.
Have we not wasted enough money already by burying it underground.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

Not shifting any goalposts.


You appear to believe that water charges will be re-introduced in all their past glories with this full legal framework to back them up.


My question is quite simple but one you appear unwilling to answer.


With the political toxic cloud hanging over water charges, when do you see this glorious day coming about ?
For myself, at least a generation if ever tbh.

The current water crisis will, if it gets worse, reignite the debate.

With any debate, hard to tell how it goes then.

A generation in political terms is also getting shorter.

blanch152

charlie14 wrote: »

There is also the small matter of spending 1.3 Billion Euro, (initial budgeted price and we all know what that means), to pump water from the Shannon to have 50% of it leaking through mains in Dublin.


Here`s an off the wall idea.
Take that 1.3 Billion Euro and use it to fix the leaks.
Have we not wasted enough money already by burying it underground.

Rennaws wrote: »

Let's not forget that while this may have some impact, it's largely negated by the fact that a third of households can't be metered and therefore will aparrently have no incentive to conserve water.



http://www.dublincity.ie/main-menu-services-water-waste-and-environment-your-drinking-water-managing-our-water-supplies/how

And yet in Dublin alone we managed to reduce water leakage from 43% down to 29% through investment in the infrastructure from 97 to 09.

I don't know about the rest of the country but we also have significant investment going into our own supply despite not paying charges.

I thought none of this was possible without Dinny's meters and a bloated quango for Enda's cronies..

Rennaws has the leakage down to 29%, not your 50%.

That means water from the Shannon or demand management through metering are the only way forward.

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

The current water crisis will, if it gets worse, reignite the debate.

With any debate, hard to tell how it goes then.

A generation in political terms is also getting shorter.

It was a simple question that you refuse to answer.



What I have found absolutely hilarious is pro water charges exponents attempting to go back over all the old ground with the same arguements they found barren originally, on nothing but an event we last experienced in 1976 as the reason.
A few days rain and, if there ever was a debate, it`s dead.



If anything the debate should be why is there a proposal to waste a further fortune after meters draining the Shannon simply to dump 50% of it under Dublin via mains leaks when it should be used to fix those leaks.

GreeBo

charlie14 wrote: »

Water meters are underground doing nothing and never likely to. A waste of money that could and should have been used to repair leaks.

They are measuring water used actually....which is what they were designed to do.

charlie14 wrote: »

I do not remember if you were on the mega threads discussion on this subject, but as someone who was, I can assure you nothing about leaks escaped me. Especially that water meters are as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike when it comes to detecting where 50% of treated water leaks are, the mains.

Even taking your figures, which I dont agree with, doesnt that, by definition, mean that 50% of the leaks are on the customers side?
You are ok that we dont fix them I take it?

charlie14 wrote: »

I have always paid for water through general taxation, but you seem to be under the misconception that water charges were contributing anything to water or waste water services.

No, your tax has merely *contributed* to keeping the lights on for our water system. Neither you nor anyone else were or indeed are contributing enough tax to cover the costs of delivering water.
How do I know this? Because if you were we wouldnt be leaking 50% of all water.

McMurphy

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Anyone rejoicing that they are free to use water in excess of 213klpa is wasting water. Pure and simple.

My point, that you have missed - is according to Irish waters data, and of which Kate.Gannon was using, is that we are amongst the lowest water consumers in the EC. Lower than those of nations who are charging via meters.

Even the plan to penalise these folk deemed to be wasting water (by exceeding a more.than generous allowance) is deeply flawed.

Seeing as how they can't meter almost 33% of homes on the public supply.

Yet another hairbrained half baked (66% if were to be pedantic)plan.

GreeBo

Rennaws wrote: »

We did.

We won.

There are no charges.

No, you derailed the only vehicle we had in place to solve the problem.
At best you have just forced the government to either increase taxes or divert money away from health or education.
Congratulations.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I think there's a great argument to be had here, and it would mainly boil down to whether anyone was paying enough tax/whether that tax has been mismanaged by successive govts including the last one who blew 2billion on Irish water. But whatever.

Divide your 2Bn by each local authority and see how much actual improvement you get. You need a single authority to oversee projects of this magnatude.
Look at ESB or bord gais as examples.

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

See my post about project Ireland 2040. Plenty of money, plenty of time.

2040 is plenty of time to wait to get the water system fixed?

charlie14

blanch152 wrote: »

Rennaws has the leakage down to 29%, not your 50%.

That means water from the Shannon or demand management through metering are the only way forward.

That I believe was in 2009 according to Dublin Corporation. I do not pass much regards on Irish Water nowadays tbh, but as someone who appears too maybe you could give us their figure. Last I recall it was near enough 50%, but then they may have produced a miracle in the last year or so.



What that means is stop wasting another fortune burying things underground for no discernible benefit and use the money to fix the problem.
Mains leakage.

McMurphy

GreeBo wrote: »

They are measuring water used actually....which is what they were designed to do.

Half the job actually. The other half was to bring in cash.

Even taking your figures, which I dont agree with, doesnt that, by definition, mean that 50% of the leaks are on the customers side?
You are ok that we dont fix them I take it?

Oh please... they're Irish waters figures...... is this even still up for debate at this point?

source

“Leakage of water from supply networks is a serious problem on a national scale,” it says. “Unaccounted for Water (UFW), both in Irish Water’s networks and within customer properties, is estimated nationally at approximately 49 per cent of the water produced for supply.

See this bit in particular from the article

Almost half the water supply around the State is lost through leaks in the water network, Irish Water has said.

No, your tax has merely *contributed* to keeping the lights on for our water system. Neither you nor anyone else were or indeed are contributing enough tax to cover the costs of delivering water.
How do I know this? Because if you were we wouldnt be leaking 50% of all water.

Isn't this contradicting yourself?

molloyjh

Rennaws wrote: »

We did.

We won.

There are no charges.

Yep. Now water supply is paid for by magical money that's provided by magical money trees while the Irish Water organisation is being paid for by magical money beans.

We have to pay for this stuff one way or another. The idea that we aren't paying now is nonsense. We've just tied the Governments hands that bit tighter by ensuring they had less money (income tax was reduced prior to the introduction of the charges) to pay for more things (Irish Water on top of the existing expenses).

You cut off your nose to spite your face. And if it wasn't something that was impacting me and mine I'd laugh at the idea that you somehow "won".

McMurphy

GreeBo wrote: »

2040 is plenty of time to wait to get the water system fixed?

It must be..... have they not prioritized other projects in the 2040 grand plan despite the sky falling in on water infrastructure being imminent

James Brown

GreeBo wrote: »

Doesnt matter if it was decades ago, years ago or months ago.
The point is the exact same.

This "they" you are talking about is the government & local authorities.

So if you dont want IW looking after water and you dont want government/local authorities.....who exactly do you want?

Or is it just a moan and a way of avoiding paying for your utilities like pretty much everyone else on the planet?

No, it isn't. I was mentioning how it wasn't a new problem only discovered in 2011. I also mentioned how it was bad housekeeping not to have tackled it decades ago, as it got worse and became a bigger problem. So it does indeed matter.
You carry on with more inaccuracies. We didn't need IW to oversee a combined multi LA overhaul of water infrastructure using contractors. We had/have the Dept. of the Environment and already LA's using contractors for water supply issues before the IW con was dreamt up.
On paying, I always did and continue to do so. Round and round we go...

charlie14

GreeBo wrote: »

They are measuring water used actually....which is what they were designed to do.


Even taking your figures, which I dont agree with, doesnt that, by definition, mean that 50% of the leaks are on the customers side?
You are ok that we dont fix them I take it?


No, your tax has merely *contributed* to keeping the lights on for our water system. Neither you nor anyone else were or indeed are contributing enough tax to cover the costs of delivering water.
How do I know this? Because if you were we wouldnt be leaking 50% of all water.

Domestic water meters were not designed to measure water. They were designed to charge for water. Area metering will measure water usage at a fraction of the cost.


Have you actually even read anything on the percentage of mains leakage compared domestic household side leakage ?
If not then please do so before asking such a silly question again.
It is all well documented here in a previous thread.



I have contributed, as has ever citizen, to the provision of water and waste water services through general taxation, and still do Same as all other State services.
What is it you do not get about that?

James Brown

charlie14 wrote: »

There is also the small matter of spending 1.3 Billion Euro, (initial budgeted price and we all know what that means), to pump water from the Shannon to have 50% of it leaking through mains in Dublin.


Here`s an off the wall idea.
Take that 1.3 Billion Euro and use it to fix the leaks.
Have we not wasted enough money already by burying it underground.

No money in that for 'looking after our own'.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

The current water crisis will, if it gets worse, reignite the debate.

With any debate, hard to tell how it goes then.

A generation in political terms is also getting shorter.

To be fair, the state is an old hand at ignoring crises.
If ever, for the first time, a government wish to tackle water supply infrastructure in a genuine manner, it's possible and I'm sure many would support it.

What we got was a wasteful money grab and the criteria changing based on the level of public uproar that week. So I'm not sure what model we'll get but likely any new idea will be different from the quango, if the government bringing it forward are genuine and expecting public support.

dense

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

This is like beating your head against a wall. I think I'm done with this - it's either purposive deflection and evasion or it's just a pointless conversation because you don't seem to understand even some basics of water supply.

I'm honestly not sure at this point.

I'm not evading or deflecting from anything, I'm just trying to get a legitimate fix on the average figures.


We have no idea about the average daily demand.


Why is that such a secret!

It's all up in the air, and I certainly couldn't lend my support to water charges with it being such a poorly thought out strategy that it has more holes in it than the network.


There's an ulterior motive afoot and its got nothing to do with conserving water.