Water charges revisited?

McMurphy

bladespin wrote: »

Doubt charges or not would have changed anything, motor tax has been here for decades and the roads still melted.

Capped charges were the opposite of paying for what you use anyway, but you're right because even if the charges had been collected in full, IWs overheads meant there was no surplus to actually go on water provisions anyway.

FreudianSlippers

Hitman3000 wrote: »

So you wish to ignore the report published in the last few days that claims over 50% is lost through leakage before the tap? IW claims that full capacity is 610 million litres, demand is touching on 608 million in Dublin. One can safely assume over 600 million is leaking into the ground.

I presume this is directed at me and I'm not sure where you're getting that idea?

Is there or is there not a water shortage?

FreudianSlippers

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Capped charges were the opposite of paying for what you use anyway, but you're right because even if the charges had been collected in full, IWs overheads meant there was no surplus to actually go on water provisions anyway.

As I said on this forum in the Irish Water thread many times, the capped charges rollback was idiotic; the initial idea (and where we're back to) is a fair usage amount subsidized by taxation with usage charged at a regulated rate over that amount.

The. Original. Charging. Regime.

Hitman3000

FreudianSlippers wrote:

Is there or is there not a water shortage?

Do you think fixing the leaks before embarking on an expensive metering plan would have been a better use of funds? I know it's also a moot point but FG promised just that before they said they would charge for water. I just highlighted the loss of processed water versus demand. If you lose over 50% capacity of course you will have a shortage if demand exceeds deliverable capacity.

McMurphy

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Now I think you need to re-read Blanch's post.

I have reread it.

There were plenty of them on here telling us that Ireland would never have a water shortage,

and it reads as it was written, a claim that people were posting predictions that Ireland would never face water shortages. Why anyone would make such a prediction would be bizarre tbh.

I could say that Ireland doesn't get 40c summers, but I'd certainly not predict we'd never get them.

They don't claim that SF/PBP politicians were on Boards.ie saying that there would never be shortages...

I didn't say that. I was asking why you were making that claim.

people supporting the SF/PBP nonsense position saying that there would not be water shortages?

bladespin

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Don't disagree with this - arguably, allowing Irish Water to operate as a semi-private utility would potentially have resulted in better investment in infrastructure. Your point exactly, the government has had a fairly awful track record of using the money they raise to fund roads, hospitals, infrastructure; surely attempting a better way is worth it?

Well kind of, what I'm really saying it this is a pretty exceptional set of circumstances, how often do we get a prolonged run of 25deg or more? Like the snows it's once a decade type thing (if not longer), I doubt IW,even if it was a model of working efficiency,could have coped with a sustained hotspell without some sort of restriction.

BTW most roads are fine but still gave way under such strain, hardly council/govt's fault.

Hitman3000

The Story.ie carrying a FOI story that Eoghan Murphy signed off on ex IW chief's pension deal 473,000 euro. How long was J Tierney at the helm? 3 years? Seems a large pension pot for such a short time.

FreudianSlippers

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

I have reread it.
and it reads as it was written, a claim that people were posting predictions that Ireland would never face water shortages. Why anyone would make such a prediction would be bizarre tbh.

I could say that Ireland doesn't get 40c summers, but I'd certainly not predict we'd never get them.


I didn't say that. I was asking why you were making that claim.

I'm not here to defend other people's posts, but there were posters (who seemingly supported SF/PBP's position on water charges) who made the claim that there are/were no water shortages in Ireland. That's all I'm saying and I provided quotes - you can find more if you search the archive.

FreudianSlippers

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Do you think fixing the leaks before embarking on an expensive metering plan would have been a better use of funds? I know it's also a moot point but FG promised just that before they said they would charge for water. I just highlighted the loss of processed water versus demand. If you lose over 50% capacity of course you will have a shortage if demand exceeds deliverable capacity.

Water meter installation nationwide cost approximately €30m; the cost of repairing 8,000km of defective pipes in Dublin alone will cost €5bn. To make a comparison of the two expenses is tenuous at best.

I do believe that encouraging people to conserve water at home by providing a free allowance over which a metered charge is applied would (i) impact use (ii) conserve water (iii) assist in revenue collection for the utility which could be used to repair pipes.

Irish Water's business plan was sound initially; the current model we're left with is bogus and wasteful (unless you either waste shedloads of water or work in the local authority - or probably both)

Hitman3000

FreudianSlippers wrote:

I do believe that encouraging people to conserve water at home by providing a free allowance over which a metered charge is applied would (i) impact use (ii) conserve water (iii) assist in revenue collection for the utility which could be used to repair pipes.

In its early days IW through the wonderful Miss Arnette informed us that if we conserved water the u it price would increase. A flat levy per every household added to the property tax would have achieved a revenue stream for repair of the system. In time a proper agency could have been set up along the lines of the NRA. In my opinion FG went for the most expensive option for the citizen and the most beneficial for a selection of there friends and supporters .

FreudianSlippers

Hitman3000 wrote: »

The Story.ie carrying a FOI story that Eoghan Murphy signed off on ex IW chief's pension deal 473,000 euro. How long was J Tierney at the helm? 3 years? Seems a large pension pot for such a short time.

I see where the minister signed off on the severance pay, but I don't see the pension arising in any manner other than his statutory entitlements under the various Acts?

It could be that I just briefly scanned through the pages (there are 160) and I skipped some of the "please see attached" -type emails.

FreudianSlippers

Hitman3000 wrote: »

In its early days IW through the wonderful Miss Arnette informed us that if we conserved water the u it price would increase.

Source required.

A flat levy per every household added to the property tax would have achieved a revenue stream for repair of the system.

Inherently unfair.

In time a proper agency could have been set up along the lines of the NRA. In my opinion FG went for the most expensive option for the citizen and the most beneficial for a selection of there friends and supporters .

The NRA is hardly a great example of anything.

Hitman3000

FreudianSlippers wrote:

The NRA is hardly a great example of anything.

Personally I think the NRA deals better with the roads than a disparate collection of LA's ever did.

Hitman3000

FreudianSlippers wrote:

Source required.

You can ignore it so if you wish I can't provide links off my phone.

Hitman3000

FreudianSlippers wrote:

Inherently unfair.

Explain please? I pay the same property tax as my friend who lives in a town. I live in the countryside . No paths/parks/public lighting.

FreudianSlippers

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Personally I think the NRA deals better with the roads than a disparate collection of LA's ever did.

Agreed, but they suffer the same fundamental flaws as all of the other state bodies and our roads are in a state.

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Explain please? I pay the same property tax as my friend who lives in a town. I live in the countryside . No paths/parks/public lighting.

It's more than likely that your house is less expensive than your friend in the town, so you pay less probably. The allocation of funds by your local authority has very little to do with the fundamental concept of the tax itself; a perfect analogy for Irish Water actually - a national utility is inherently more "fair" than the local authority model.

BarryD2

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

As I always said, I'd have no problem in principle with paying for water charges, but I was manifestly opposed to the manner of its introduction. What's done is done, and FG need to appropriate more of the general tax take towards water infrastructure across their coming budgets.

That's a limp handed response. The concept of modestly priced metered water charges as previously proposed was entirely reasonable. And would have done wonders in terms of encouraging public water users to only use what is reasonable. Whatever about fixing leaks and improving supplies, conservation should also be a key message - Reduce and Reuse.

Certain political opportunists aided and abetted by the media looking for stories drove that anti IW campaign and put the idea in the public mind, that the setup was inherently corrupt when it manifestly was and is not.

Furthermore FG or whoever is in power should NOT appropriate more of the general tax take towards water infrastructure across their coming budgets. Like many rural dwellers we've been paying for our water for many years and we also pay general tax.

If people on public water supplies want their systems improved, let them put their hands in their OWN pockets and take responsibility. If you 'have no problem in principle with paying for water charges' - then do as you say and offer to pay them.

I predict that this will come to a head when the public water systems to greater Dublin and the larger towns start collapsing. That's what will bring people to their senses.

Fann Linn

Hitman3000 wrote: »

The Story.ie carrying a FOI story that Eoghan Murphy signed off on ex IW chief's pension deal 473,000 euro. How long was J Tierney at the helm? 3 years? Seems a large pension pot for such a short time.

'Because I'm worth it', is probably the only justification required.

BarryD2

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Do you think fixing the leaks before embarking on an expensive metering plan would have been a better use of funds?

Of course 'fixing leaks' is a good idea but that simple phrase covers a multitude of solutions from simple repairs to major engineering projects.

The point about metered water charging is to both to encourage reasonable use AND provide resources to pay for 'fixing leaks'.

The opposition to the reasonable schemes proposed was idiotic and self inflicted damage to peoples own best interests.

When your water runs dry in Dublin & Limerick , I hope you get onto Murphy, O Cuiv et al and burn their ears.

Hitman3000

FreudianSlippers wrote:

It's more than likely that your house is less expensive than your friend in the town, so you pay less probably.

I said I pay the same property tax as my town dwelling friend. I thought my post was simple to understand. Apparently not.

Hitman3000

BarryD2 wrote:

Certain political opportunists aided and abetted by the media looking for stories drove that anti IW campaign and put the idea in the public mind, that the setup was inherently corrupt when it manifestly was and is not.

So the placing of a junior ministers driver on the board of IW was normal ? The media just decided to put a nasty spin on it?

FreudianSlippers

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I said I pay the same property tax as my town dwelling friend. I thought my post was simple to understand. Apparently not.

You said you pay the same property tax, not the same amount of property tax. Again, take it up with your Local Authority.

Hitman3000

BarryD2 wrote:

When your water runs dry in Dublin & Limerick , I hope you get onto Murphy, O Cuiv et al and burn their ears.

I don't live in Dublin or Limerick but thanks for the suggestion. However it would be best to start with FG it was their incompetence that caused the mess that is IW.

blanch152

Rennaws wrote: »

Why do you use the term "mob" ?

I was on many marches with tens of thousands of people and I picketed numerous estates locally to stop the meter vans getting in. I never saw the slightest hint of trouble. Even at the large march in Dublin there was a carnival like atmosphere and plenty of young children about.

You wouldn't know cause you weren't there but if you doubt me you can go check the stats. There were zero arrests.

The last time I got involved in anything and marched in opposition was also with 10000 people around the streets of Dublin against the illegal invasion of Iraq. It had a similar carnival type atmosphere. We even brought our young children in buggies.

Were we also a mob then or does it depend on whether you agree or not

Do you not believe in democratic principals

How do you suggest people should protest

The protests were shortsighted and idiotic as the current water shortage is clearly demonstrating.

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/mob

Definition 1.3

That is what I mean by a mob. It is exactly as you describe. A group of people protesting led by ignorance and irrationality. That describes the water charges protests perfectly.

This day was always coming once we departed from the original water charges scheme. In the water shortages of today, the people or the mob have got what they asked for.

Your other example of the mob is an even better one. 10,000 people protesting in Dublin about the illegal invasion of Iraq???? Ireland didn't invade Iraq, so why were they protesting in Dublin??? It was bizarre.

If we had the original scheme which I have continually supported of a free allowance with charges above that, Irish Water would now have demand control as well as supply restriction options to deal with water shortages. If there was a temporary 100% increase in the cost of water above the free allowance, people would think twice before washing their cars or filling paddling pools.

Hitman3000

FreudianSlippers wrote:

You said you pay the same property tax, not the same amount of property tax. Again, take it up with your Local Authority.

You are keen on fairness, that's why I referenced how my friend and I pay the same amount of property tax but one rural /one urban.

Hitman3000

blanch152 wrote:

The protests were shortsighted and idiotic as the current water shortage is clearly demonstrating.

50% of processed water leaking into the ground before the tap.

blanch152

Hitman3000 wrote: »

I don't live in Dublin or Limerick but thanks for the suggestion. However it would be best to start with FG it was their incompetence that caused the mess that is IW.

What a silly example of revisionist history.

The people to blame are those who went on water protests, who blocked installation of water meters, who refused to accept the democratically imposed water charges.

We are in this situation because of them.

Hitman3000

blanch152 wrote:

What a silly example of revisionist history.

Really? FG set up IW where's the revisionism?

blanch152

Hitman3000 wrote: »

50% of processed water leaking into the ground before the tap.

I really think nothing has been learned in the last few years.

It will cost billions to fix the water infrastructure and will take years. The system was messed up by a century of being looked after by local authorities who always found better ways to spend their money. There is absolutely no way that issue can be fixed for twenty years or more because the State has other priorities in health, education and public transport.

A game-changer was water charges because if gave Irish Water independent income, allowed it to borrow and centralised the provision of water and decisions in relation to infrastructure. An absolute no-brainer, yet there were really stupid protests led by opportunistic populist politicians that caused the whole thing to be compromised.

Another clear example of the immaturity of the Irish people.

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

50% of processed water leaking into the ground before the tap.

And money needed to rectify this situation. There is no magic money tree.

Hitman3000

blanch152 wrote:

The people to blame are those who went on water protests, who blocked installation of water meters, who refused to accept the democratically imposed water charges.

Protest is also a democratic right.

FreudianSlippers

Hitman3000 wrote: »

You are keen on fairness, that's why I referenced how my friend and I pay the same amount of property tax but one rural /one urban.

I'm like the least keen person on fairness.

blanch152

Hitman3000 wrote: »

So the placing of a junior ministers driver on the board of IW was normal ? The media just decided to put a nasty spin on it?

I was small beer, of little or no importance in the scheme of things. If the price of no water shortages this summer was one junior minister's driver on a board, then that is a small price to pay.

And what is wrong with a driver being put on a board? Was he unqualified for the job? Are you saying that you need to be a company law expert to be put on a board? It is snobbery to suggest that someone who drives for a living isn't able to serve on a board.

blanch152

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Protest is also a democratic right.

Of course protest is a democratic right.

But that doesn't mean that a particular protest isn't stupid, misguided, ignorant, dangerously populist, crazy or wrong. And the Irish Water protests were all of those.

Hitman3000

blanch152 wrote:

A game-changer was water charges because if gave Irish Water independent income, allowed it to borrow and centralised the provision of water and decisions in relation to infrastructure. An absolute no-brainer, yet there were really stupid protests led by opportunistic populist politicians that caused the whole thing to be compromised.

You constantly seek to blame everyone other than the incompetence of FG or Labour for the debacle that they alone created. As soon as Hogan mentioned consultants receiving circa 80 million euro at a time of severe cut backs( disabled children loosing their medical card one example) that was the start of the end. The nonsense only got worse, D O Briens good luck in winning several contracts, but yeah it's everyone else's fault.

blanch152

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Now I think you need to re-read Blanch's post. They don't claim that SF/PBP politicians were on Boards.ie saying that there would never be shortages...

It is like the water charges threads all over again, where those who oppose water charges are parsing sentences, misquoting and misinterpreting in order to make a superficial point.

At the end of the day, those who supported water charges predicted a day like this would come if uncapped water charges were not imposed as a demand control measure. They were right, those who opposed water charges were wrong.

"We don't need water charges because Ireland is full of water" - how often did we hear that said.

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

And money needed to rectify this situation. There is no magic money tree.

Plenty of money on the money tree for grants, some even paid their motor tax out of said grant.

Hitman3000

FreudianSlippers wrote:

Inherently unfair.

Ok so.

blanch152

Hitman3000 wrote: »

You constantly seek to blame everyone other than the incompetence of FG or Labour for the debacle that they alone created. As soon as Hogan mentioned consultants receiving circa 80 million euro at a time of severe cut backs( disabled children loosing their medical card one example) that was the start of the end. The nonsense only got worse, D O Briens good luck in winning several contracts, but yeah it's everyone else's fault.

You really don't get it. For all you know, the 80 million was actually needed to be spent and was a more cost-effective way than hiring hundreds of people who would have jobs for life.

You just saw 80 million on consultants and went off on a protest. Here is a story for you:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/health/hospital-consultants-to-get-payrises-of-up-to-72k-in-windfall-37013652.html

€200m in back-money and €60m a year every year going forward for a couple of hundred medical consultants, and not a single improvement in services. Where are the protests about that? You would fix a lot of leaks with that money.

The €80m one-off spend on Irish Water was going to save the State an awful lot of money in the longer-term and help fix the water supply problem that we are now facing. The stupidity of the water protests is really coming home now.

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Plenty of money on the money tree for grants, some even paid their motor tax out of said grant.

At least it went back into the countries coffers.

Hitman3000

blanch152 wrote:

The €80m one-off spend on Irish Water was going to save the State an awful lot of money in the longer-term and help fix the water supply problem that we are now facing. The stupidity of the water protests is really coming home now.

It wasn't just a one off 80 million cost as you well know. A nice expensive call centre has to be paid along with performance bonuses etc etc. Now again, FG and their incompetence is what has caused the present mess despite you seeking to apportion blame everywhere except where it belings

Hitman3000

blanch152 wrote:

€200m in back-money and €60m a year every year going forward for a couple of hundred medical consultants, and not a single improvement in services. Where are the protests about that? You would fix a lot of leaks with that money.

Pay rises in the public sector would in my opinion be a topic for a different thread. Didn't TD's get an extra 5 k last year? Not huge money but would fix a few leaks too.

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

At least it went back into the countries coffers.

It was a conservation grant, seems incredibly dishonest to claim a Grant and use it for a purpose other than what it was intended.

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

It wasn't just a one off 80 million cost as you well know. A nice expensive call centre has to be paid along with performance bonuses etc etc. Now again, FG and their incompetence is what has caused the present mess despite you seeking to apportion blame everywhere except where it belings

I think it’s people using more water than can safely be replaced that’s causing the current shortage. But, why let facts get in the way of a bit of government bashing.

Hitman3000

Deleted User wrote:

I think it’s people using more water than can safely be replaced that’s causing the current shortage. But, why let facts get in the way of a bit of government bashing.

The 50% leakage rate is what's causing the real problem. Government bashing? Stating incompetence of two government parties in the manner in which they set up a utility is not bashing but stating the obvious.

FreudianSlippers

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Plenty of money on the money tree for grants, some even paid their motor tax out of said grant.

Motor tax is a ridiculous tax in fairness.

thomas 123

Deleted User wrote: »

And money needed to rectify this situation. There is no magic money tree.

"Face palm"

Yes, Lets just sign everything over to the government im sure it will be fine.

What are they doing with all the USC(Temporary tax) money, Property tax, Road Tax, PRSI, PAYE, CGT??

Lets ask how did it get so bad in the first place? (50% leakage in the system).

FreudianSlippers

thomas 123 wrote: »

"Face palm"

Yes, Lets just sign everything over to the government im sure it will be fine.

What are they doing with all the USC(Temporary tax) money, Property tax, Road Tax, PRSI, PAYE, CGT??

Lets ask how did it get so bad in the first place? (50% leakage in the system).

So are you arguing for a fully private system of water infrastructure?

thomas 123

Absolutely not & I'm sure you know that.

Our Government have kindly sold off enough of our natural resources.

How long would it take before Irish Water is "unsustainable" and gets sold off to the highest bidder.

And of course they have enough of our money at this point to work on the water infrastructure.

FreudianSlippers

So we can't give money to the government, we can't give it to private companies... who do you suggest we have manage our water? Just nobody and see how it goes?