Water charges for excessive usage

K.Flyer

astrofool wrote: »

Benedict pretty much has it, you can measure at the estate/apartment block/part of estate level using standard flow meters, narrow it down to a few houses, then monitor the few houses that have excessive flow for a few days, once the likely culprit is identified, they can be informed and further action taken (including proving that it wasn't them, but this can all be done using temporary flow meters). It's more work than just using an installed meter, but not really that hard to do or implement.

Digging up roads and footpaths to install some temporary water meters around the estate??
Have you any notion for a minute the Cost involved in doing that for just one road, one estate, never mind country wide vs. the return in revenue?
Then add in the wasted hours having to deal with protesters again.

Nope, that's not going to work, your plan is seriously flawed and it's certainly the stupidest way of doing it.

You are talking through your hat.

astrofool

K.Flyer wrote: »

Digging up roads and footpaths to install some temporary water meters around the estate??
Have you any notion for a minute the Cost involved in doing that for just one road, one estate, never mind country wide vs. the return in revenue?
Then add in the wasted hours having to deal with protesters again.

Nope, that's not going to work, your plan is seriously flawed and it's certainly the stupidest way of doing it.

You are talking through your hat.

It's not my plan, it's what will happen, most houses already have a stopcock outside providing pipe access, and estates have numerous access points to the pipes for maintenance that can be monitored. Most of this can happen as part of routine maintenance, so the protesters/jobless will need to be following around the IW vans to check when they might be monitoring water flows.

It's beggars belief that people don't believe it's possible for a pipe to be monitored for flow rates, I mean, how do they think IW figure out where and when leaks occur?

One things for certain, the replies indicate how little people understand about how their water works, and probably explains their gullibility to be taken in by Paul Murphy, Mary-Lou and friends.

odyssey06

astrofool wrote: »

It's beggars belief that people don't believe it's possible for a pipe to be monitored for flow rates, I mean, how do they think IW figure out where and when leaks occur?

What beggars belief is to propose as a technical solution IW can rollout country-wide to underpin the charges for excessive use, which are based on exceeding 1.7 times the average household use on an annual basis.

Does it comply with the legislation? No, because it measures daily use.
Does it catch excess (eg twice the annual average) use as opposed to leaks? No.
Is it scale-able given that there are hundreds of thousands of un-metered properties? No.
Is it applicable to apartments and houses where there is a single external pipe feeding into private properties and multiple customers? No.

Is it practicable as a solution? No.

K.Flyer

astrofool wrote: »

It's not my plan, it's what will happen.

Have you got a reference to where I.W. state that they are going to be digging up roads and footpaths to install "temporary meters"

It's beggars belief that people don't believe it's possible for a pipe to be monitored for flow rates, I mean, how do they think IW figure out where and when leaks occur?

They have a much more simplified way of doing it, and it doesn't involve digging up footpaths and roads to install "temporary meters".

One things for certain, the replies indicate how little people understand about how their water works, and probably explains their gullibility to be taken in by Paul Murphy, Mary-Lou and friends.

On the other hand, there are some of us who know and understand perfectly well the processes involved in how water makes it to our tap.

astrofool

K.Flyer wrote: »

Have you got a reference to where I.W. state that they are going to be digging up roads and footpaths to install "temporary meters"

They have a much more simplified way of doing it, and it doesn't involve digging up footpaths and roads to install "temporary meters".

On the other hand, there are some of us who know and understand perfectly well the processes involved in how water makes it to our tap.

Have you got a reference to say how they won't do it? Of course not, it's a stupid question.

It's spinning, I'm not particularly saying how IW will do it, I'm saying that measuring flow through a pipe is possible using numerous methods, any of which IW can use, they may use many or one way of doing it, but they can do it, is the point, whether it's worth their while, or whether magic fairies will stop them from doing so is beside the point, pipe, flow, many ways of measuring.

Boggles

astrofool wrote: »

Benedict pretty much has it, you can measure at the estate/apartment block/part of estate level using standard flow meters, narrow it down to a few houses, then monitor the few houses that have excessive flow for a few days, once the likely culprit is identified, they can be informed and further action taken (including proving that it wasn't them, but this can all be done using temporary flow meters). It's more work than just using an installed meter, but not really that hard to do or implement.

You seem to imply that there is some magic spell that has happened because some people didn't get meter's installed, and they've beaten the system because they get to waste a valuable resource, without getting too far off topic, it's the same kind of circular arguments being used around anti-vax and other debates "Oh, but if they can do that, why did they have to install meters?!" "They all loved Denis O'Brien, he caused the mess" "How dare they charge me money for something that falls from the sky, sure isn't it free, all taxpayers should pay it, and let the non-taxpayers get it for free" "Why don't we not charge anyone until there is no leaks in the system, but we won't raise money to fix the leaks until they've fixed the leaks".

I mean, people know these things, but they're so entrenched in a "gubberment is bad" mindset, that they can't understand that measuring water flow is a pretty easy thing to do, if a bit labour intensive.

Absolute nonsense.

astrofool

Boggles wrote: »

Absolute nonsense.

Outrageously preposterous.

Snow Garden

Sure didn't Irish Water contractors cause loads more leaks putting in the damn meters.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/cork-county-council-fix-375-leaks-at-new-water-meters-and-replace-80-faulty-meter-boxes-442858.html

Cork County Council had to fix 375 leaks at newly installed water meters last year and get an additional 80 meter boxes replaced, because they were faulty.

The news has led to claims some Irish Water contractors installing the meters and connections to them were guilty of “shoddy” workmanship.

https://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/water-meter-installation-damages-1-in-50-pipes-621776.html

Dublin City Council has reportedly spent €136,000 fixing leaks caused by the installation of water meters.
According to a report in the Irish Times, contractors working for Irish Water have damaged pipes outside one in every 50 homes.

Irish Water is a money pit.

Snow Garden

Snow Garden

Denis O’Brien, Ireland’s second most famous tax exile, bought Siteserv, a company that specialises in installing water meters, from the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation (a state-owned zombie bank) shortly before winning three separate contracts – each worth €62m – to install water meters on behalf of the state. Before the deal, Siteserv owed the IBRC (i.e. the Irish citizenry) €144m. O’Brien purchased the company for a mere €45m, while the state writing off the €100m difference – even though his offer wasn’t the highest bid received.

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2014/01/30/thicker-than-uisce/

Snow Garden

Let's not forget the cronyism....

John Tierney, managing director of Irish Water, caused outrage when he let slip the bonus scheme for the semi-state company’s employees, which could see them earning up to 14% extra on top of their salaries even if their performance is under par. Tierney himself was once the Dublin City Manager, and he was responsible for wasting €96m on the Poolbeg incinerator project, before being promoted into his current position.

Both Jerry Grant, Irish Water’s head of asset management, and Elizabeth Arnett, head of communications and corporate services, previously worked for RPS Group, a consultancy firm that had advised the state in the setting up of Irish Water – part of a consultancy package that has so far cost the state €85m. RPS also made some €30m out of its consultancy contract on the Poolbeg project, a contract the European Commission described as “an illegal situation.”

Tierney got 570,000 severance package when he walked away from the superquango disaster that is Irish Water

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Jaysus Bren. You're like a Twink TV special. Old gags from long ago, canned laughter and nobody knows why she persists.

'spent docket' 'middle ireland'

A bit harsh there Matthew, a bit harsh.......is there someone smoking turf here tonight.

I see the single issue lad is back......

Snow Garden

https://www.thejournal.ie/fergus-odowd-irish-water-agendas-privatisation-1825719-Dec2014/

FORMER JUNIOR MINISTER Fergus O’Dowd, one the people involved in setting up Irish Water, said last night that he felt that there were “forces at work” with “agendas” to privatise the utility company.
He said he remains “deeply concerned at other agendas, they may be European… I don’t know where they are coming from…” and said we have “real reason to be concerned” about the possibility of Irish Water being privatised.

Fine Gael had grand plans.

The Bishop Basher

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Everybody pays, or nobody pays......its that simple.

You mean everyone pays again surely. We’re already paying through taxation. That the government chooses to misspend that cash isn’t good enough reason to come back asking us for more.

astrofool wrote: »

One things for certain, the replies indicate how little people understand about how their water works, and probably explains their gullibility to be taken in by Paul Murphy, Mary-Lou and friends.

The only gullible ones are those that bought the bull**** on this and handed over their hard earned cash in what was nothing more then just another tax imposed on us by FG / EU. I bet you believed them when they said it was about water conservation too.

Brendan Bendar

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

You mean everyone pays again surely. We’re already paying through taxation. That the government chooses to misspend that cash isn’t good enough reason to come back asking us for more.



The only gullible ones are those that bought the bull**** on this and handed over their hard earned cash in what was nothing more then just another tax imposed on us by FG / EU. I bet you believed them when they said it was about water conservation too.

So if you don’t pay income tax you don’t pay for water ?

That’s like the group going into the pub and “Right” says one lad “we’ll throw 20 each into the pot and pay for the drinks is out of that”

One guy is spaffing back brandy and port while another lad is just drinking light beer!!!

Who gets value there dude?

Gowan outa dat...

The Bishop Basher

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

So if you don’t pay income tax you don’t pay for water ?

If you don't pay VAT, Motor Tax or LPT then you're not paying for water but we all pay VAT and most of us will paying Motor Tax and / or LPT so it's pretty well covered.

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

That’s like the group going into the pub and “Right” says one lad “we’ll throw 20 each into the pot and pay for the drinks is out of that”

One guy is spaffing back brandy and port while another lad is just drinking light beer!!!

Kinda like the dole or forever homes then..

We all pay towards lots of things we don't ever benefit from. That's just a fact of life.

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Who gets value there dude?

Well the scroungers and takers obviously but were drifting off topic here..

Benedict

Astrofool is just winding everyone up. He hasn't even given a hint about how IW will go about finding "suspects" for excessive use. Perhaps they will see who has the cleanest car on the estate (and the best-watered lawn) and go on from there? Then you get IW vans and disguise them as Post Office delivery vans (because protestors will not allow IW anywhere near their outlets). Then they disguise the IW workers as postmen who are looking for letters they think they've dropped down the manhole (which is why they're on their hands and knees staring into it). Then they tell the neighbours that the meter is really a clock because they have to be back at the PO by a certain time. Then they come back two days later and tell the neighbours they forgot the clock but they're getting it now. so the clock tells them a lot was used - but they still can't fine the house because they only know about the usage over a short time.

Yeah! That's probably how they'll work it.

Ingenious or what!

odyssey06

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

So if you don’t pay income tax you don’t pay for water ?
That’s like the group going into the pub and “Right” says one lad “we’ll throw 20 each into the pot and pay for the drinks is out of that”
One guy is spaffing back brandy and port while another lad is just drinking light beer!!!
Who gets value there dude?
Gowan outa dat...

They should go to a different pub where the barman isn't dropping a tray of drinks every round and getting them to pay for it.

astrofool

Benedict wrote: »

Astrofool is just winding everyone up. He hasn't even given a hint about how IW will go about finding "suspects" for excessive use. Perhaps they will see who has the cleanest car on the estate (and the best-watered lawn) and go on from there? Then you get IW vans and disguise them as Post Office delivery vans (because protestors will not allow IW anywhere near their outlets). Then they disguise the IW workers as postmen who are looking for letters they think they've dropped down the manhole (which is why they're on their hands and knees staring into it). Then they tell the neighbours that the meter is really a clock because they have to be back at the PO by a certain time. Then they come back two days later and tell the neighbours they forgot the clock but they're getting it now. so the clock tells them a lot was used - but they still can't fine the house because they only know about the usage over a short time.

Yeah! That's probably how they'll work it.

Ingenious or what!

You're arguing that we can't find ways to measure water through a pipe, yes a meter is the easiest way, and required when billing everyone, however, there are numerous ways to make this measurement when you are only after heavy users, post #15 has one way, I've given other ways it can be done, we don't know how IW will do it, but to pretend that it can't be done is utterly preposterous.

But that doesn't fit the "we won" narrative, and backslapping going on between certain people, so yes, fingers ears, hands eyes, get back to congratulating each other.

Not sure where the troll comment comes from, the reality distortion field is strong here.

Benedict

astrofool wrote: »

You're arguing that we can't find ways to measure water through a pipe, yes a meter is the easiest way, and required when billing everyone, however, there are numerous ways to make this measurement when you are only after heavy users, post #15 has one way, I've given other ways it can be done, we don't know how IW will do it, but to pretend that it can't be done is utterly preposterous.

But that doesn't fit the "we won" narrative, and backslapping going on between certain people, so yes, fingers ears, hands eyes, get back to congratulating each other.

Not sure where the troll comment comes from, the reality distortion field is strong here.

As Judge Judy would say "Put on your listening ears".
Ready? Okay here we go. We'll start with question 1 and take one at a time.
Question.
In an estate of, let's say, 500 houses, how does IW pick out a suspect?

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

A bit harsh there Matthew, a bit harsh.......is there someone smoking turf here tonight.

I see the single issue lad is back......

Calling it as it is Bren lad. Middle Ireland and so on.
****ty government polices on numerous issues? Sure.
I'll enjoy your second ...I dunno, rehashing aul' one liners and not contributing?

Boggles

astrofool wrote: »

You're arguing that we can't find ways to measure water through a pipe, yes a meter is the easiest way, and required when billing everyone, however, there are numerous ways to make this measurement when you are only after heavy users, post #15 has one way, I've given other ways it can be done, we don't know how IW will do it, but to pretend that it can't be done is utterly preposterous.

You are badly explaining a half cocked method of leak detection and trying to apply that to accurately measuring 100s of 1000s of homes and their annual water use, 7 days a week, 365 a year, forever.

The only pipe you are familiar with, is the one you are talking out of.

The Bishop Basher

astrofool wrote: »

But that doesn't fit the "we won" narrative, and backslapping going on between certain people, so yes, fingers ears, hands eyes, get back to congratulating each other.

We did win. Why wouldn't we celebrate ?

I got up at 5am every morning to man the lines in local estates and make sure no meters were installed. I've never been a day out of work or taken a cent in social welfare. I own my house and I pay my way in life. I managed to work throughout that time while using my free time to protest. The only other time I had protested was against the invasion of Iraq so all your stereotypes are out the window i'm afraid. There were many more like me but you wouldn't know that as you were too busy calling us all jobless.

We fought hard and sacrificed our personal time to make sure we, you and our children, weren't saddled with yet another euro tax.

We won. We're celebrating. We'll win again.

And I'll bet you took the refund. You're welcome

K.Flyer

astrofool wrote: »

Have you got a reference to say how they won't do it? Of course not, it's a stupid question.

Yes I have, it's someone in I.W. and my dealings with them.
I know their methods.
And digging holes to expose a section of pipe to attach a temporary meter isn't one of them due to the cost involved versus the monetary value of any fines or penalties.

It's spinning, I'm not particularly saying how IW will do it, I'm saying that measuring flow through a pipe is possible using numerous methods, any of which IW can use, they may use many or one way of doing it, but they can do it, is the point, whether it's worth their while, or whether magic fairies will stop them from doing so is beside the point, pipe, flow, many ways of measuring.

There are many ways of Detecting, but in order to Measure to optain an accurate assessment of usage over the allowance can only be obtained using a meter attached to pipework over a long period of time. Detecting and Measuring are two different things.
The methods are easier on individual houses, but they still cannot account for how they propose to evaluate apartment buildings. Hence the huge disparity and unfairness in their proposal.
It's typical again of I.W. and gov trying to reinvent the wheel when there are perfect examples of how to do these things.

Benedict

I would just ignore Astrafool, he just insults people and does not address the argument. Waste of time.


It has been clearly shown in this thread that IW intend to introduce a totally unfair system. They intend to saddle some with a quota and fine them if they exceed it while allowing half the IW customers to use as much as they like without sanction.


IW is pretending they can nail non-metered houses for excessive usage but from this thread, we know that they are bluffing. And IW have already admitted that apartments can use what they want - no matter how much that is - without paying a fine.


From this thread, we know that the new system is a farce and anyone who pays the fine for excessive use is a fool.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Calling it as it is Bren lad. Middle Ireland and so on.
****ty government polices on numerous issues? Sure.
I'll enjoy your second ...I dunno, rehashing aul' one liners and not contributing?

Fair enough Matthew, another lad who seems to bridle up when confronted by harsh facts.

You seem to take the hump when someone as erudite and incisive as myself drives a coach and four through your flyblown ideals.

To be expected, I suppose, to be expected, nothing personal.

Everybody pays or no-one pays, dude.

Nobody will hide under the slate in round 2.

Make no mistake there, my friend.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Fair enough Matthew, another lad who seems to bridle up when confronted by harsh facts.

You seem to take the hump when someone as erudite and incisive as myself drives a coach and four through your flyblown ideals.

To be expected, I suppose, to be expected, nothing personal.

Everybody pays or no-one pays, dude.

Nobody will hide under the slate in round 2.

Make no mistake there, my friend.

Your posts just repeat themselves Bren. My favourite ones are when you get annoyed and post out of character.
IW and metering was a con, seen as a con and treated as such.
Anyone genuinely behind the concept of paying for water should be rightly annoyed with how FG used the issue to look after their own.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Your posts just repeat themselves Bren. My favourite ones are when you get annoyed and post out of character.
IW and metering was a con, seen as a con and treated as such.
Anyone genuinely behind the concept of paying for water should be rightly annoyed with how FG used the issue to look after their own.

That’s the opinion of some Matthew, but strangely enough, most folk who understand the big picture were not against the concept of paying for water.

The main opposition were those who used the campaign to further their own political careers and they were aided by those who saw any attempt to put them ‘on the books’ as they saw it as a threat to their ‘ ducking and diving on the edge of the envelope’ whilst harvesting all the benefits accruing to the most destitute and vulnerable.

Thems what panned out Matthew, but rest assured middle Ireland won’t be blindsided the next time, my friend.

Make no mistake about thaaaaaat.

Plumbthedepths

Brendan Bendar wrote:

Make no mistake about thaaaaaat.

No offense lad but you do spout some self important nonsense.Less than 1 million households out if the 1.7 million households liable engaged with IW at the timeo f the threats FG were making at every turn. Are you claiming that a figure of 700k households are all basically scroungers. Rubbish like what you have spouted here makes me laugh. Time of change the record.You were at this same whinging on the pervious IW threads.

Brendan Bendar

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

No offense lad but you do spout some self important nonsense.Less than 1 million households out if the 1.7 million households liable engaged with IW at the timeo f the threats FG were making at every turn. Are you claiming that a figure of 700k households are all basically scroungers. Rubbish like what you have spouted here makes me laugh. Time of change the record.You were at this same whinging on the pervious IW threads.

No offense taken, but a dude is entitled to put forward his point of view on the issue.

The fact that the issue was not pursued in the end was not because there wasn’t a good (silent)majority in favor,but because a bunch of ‘activists’ decided they were on a roll and had the support of those who were anxious not to be ‘ on the books’.

Guys were driving from Dublin down to Tipp. Standing in holes to prevent the installation of meters, taking pictures of themselves.

Can’t understand why it’s whinging,bro, that’s the way is see it.

That’s how it rolls, padre.

Benedict

This thread is like a tutorial on how some contributors just cannot seem to listen and to focus on the point.


This is not about getting free water. I would be happy to pay - if the playing field was level. But IW are saying to me "You're getting an allowance and if you exceed it, we'll fine you" while allowing about half their customers to use what they like with no charge?

And don't forget that those who have to pay will be paying the costs of those who don't!

And bear in mind that new residential properties being built now, don't have a meter so the percentage of those who won't have to pay continues to rise.


Sorry, not acceptable and not going to happen.

Brendan Bendar

Benedict wrote: »

This thread is like a tutorial on how some contributors just cannot seem to listen and to focus on the point.


This is not about getting free water. I would be happy to pay - if the playing field was level. But IW are saying to me "You're getting an allowance and if you exceed it, we'll fine you" while allowing about half their customers to use what they like with no charge?

And don't forget that those who have to pay will be paying the costs of those who don't!

And bear in mind that new residential properties being built now, don't have a meter so the percentage of those who won't have to pay continues to rise.


Sorry, not acceptable and not going to happen.

Correct....+1

That’s what we are saying......not a runner, and the politicos in my constituency have been advised.

Will not be hoodwinked again.

zimmermania

I can see what is coming something like a flat charge as is about to be proposed for the tv licence whether you have one or not.

K.Flyer

zimmermania wrote: »

I can see what is coming something like a flat charge as is about to be proposed for the tv licence whether you have one or not.

They tried to introduce a flat charge back in the mid ninties of 75 irish pounds (approx 95 euro) per houshold and even back then, without the aid of social media, the public rose up against it.
Flat fees are a lazy answer to this problem.

Benedict

IW is backing a 3-legged horse if they think that the Irish people will accept such a daft plan.
The plan is that about half the IW customers will be saddled with a quota and the other half won't. This is because about half have meters and the other half don't.
IW is aware that people who have a meter are beginning to realise that they are the ones who will have to cover all the costs so they are saying they will be "going after" those without a meter who are "suspected" of using more than the quota but we have shown in this blog that that is simply not feasible and cannot happen.
You can't have one law for the metered and another for the non-metered.
So IW? It's back to the drawing board I'm afraid.

James Brown

It's another misguided misread by FG/IW. The 'looking after our own' crony appointments, metering and sweet metering deal, (still under investigation) were big and easy issues to point to but they weren't all there was to it. If they think bypassing the metering con will help this slip in, they're in for another rude awakening.

Benedict

The real urgency will be to get some cash flowing - even if it is only for so called "excessive usage". Once that happens, it's "game on". The quota will be lowered bit by bit and the fines will be increased. Once there's a cash flow, it will be seen as a going concern and can be sold off. Then there'll be no going back and the circus will begin in earnest.

Right now, IW's big worry is "How do we get folk to start writing cheques?"

facehugger99

Very difficult to see the point of any of this TBH.

The original purpose of IW, at least the main purpose, was to set up a utility that could raise half it's funds from non-Government sources (i.e. charges). This would have enabled it to pass the Eurostat test and borrow the billions needed to fix the infrastructure, off the State's balance sheet.

Instead the whole thing was politically mis-managed and the lunatic-left allowed to destroy the whole enterprise.

Without the ability to borrow, IW is next to useless. The billions required cannot be raised through taxation and cannot be borrowed by the State. We will continue to apply a sticking plaster when major surgery is required. The Government will continue to kick the can down the road for the next generation to sort out for us - we can add it to the list of things we didn't have the balls to sort out for ourselves such as pensions and climate change - we will be rightly despised for our selfishness and narrow self-interest by our grandchildren.



In the long run, this will cost 10's of billions extra to sort out. Meanwhile the likes of Paul Murphy and the cowards in Government will retire on a king's ransom of a pension paid for by the people who's best interest they are supposed to be protecting - what a joke.

Benedict

People like Paul Murphy and the "Left" are perfectly entitled to highlight flaws - that's part of their function. Remember it was the Government who decided to cease meter installations - and to allow new builds not to have them.


A child of five could tell you that bringing in a law for one half of the IW customers while giving the other half a waiver is bound to fail - so don't blame Paul Murphy.

By the way, what is a "TBH"?

branie2

Benedict wrote: »

People like Paul Murphy and the "Left" are perfectly entitled to highlight flaws - that's part of their function. Remember it was the Government who decided to cease meter installations - and to allow new builds not to have them.


A child of five could tell you that bringing in a law for one half of the IW customers while giving the other half a waiver is bound to fail - so don't blame Paul Murphy.

By the way, what is a "TBH"?

TBH stands for to be honest

James Brown

facehugger99 wrote: »

Very difficult to see the point of any of this TBH.

The original purpose of IW, at least the main purpose, was to set up a utility that could raise half it's funds from non-Government sources (i.e. charges). This would have enabled it to pass the Eurostat test and borrow the billions needed to fix the infrastructure, off the State's balance sheet.

Instead the whole thing was politically mis-managed and the lunatic-left allowed to destroy the whole enterprise.

Without the ability to borrow, IW is next to useless. The billions required cannot be raised through taxation and cannot be borrowed by the State. We will continue to apply a sticking plaster when major surgery is required. The Government will continue to kick the can down the road for the next generation to sort out for us - we can add it to the list of things we didn't have the balls to sort out for ourselves such as pensions and climate change - we will be rightly despised for our selfishness and narrow self-interest by our grandchildren.



In the long run, this will cost 10's of billions extra to sort out. Meanwhile the likes of Paul Murphy and the cowards in Government will retire on a king's ransom of a pension paid for by the people who's best interest they are supposed to be protecting - what a joke.

This is a mistake people make. They'll continue to support one party, that actually has power, while blaming incidental less than one percent politicians on any poorly planned moves by the governing party.
The sweet metering deal, crony appointments and arseways administration of IW is what doomed IW. Not to mention the anti-Irish public rhetoric from Fine Gael and Labour. They soon found it wasn't smart to ridicule every day folk out protesting so they honed in on Murphy and the like.
IW was mostly about 'looking after our own'. Any talk of environment was smoke and mirrors.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

This is a mistake people make. They'll continue to support one party, that actually has power, while blaming incidental less than one percent politicians on any poorly planned moves by the governing party.
The sweet metering deal, crony appointments and arseways administration of IW is what doomed IW. Not to mention the anti-Irish public rhetoric from Fine Gael and Labour. They soon found it wasn't smart to ridicule every day folk out protesting so they honed in on Murphy and the like.
IW was mostly about 'looking after our own'. Any talk of environment was smoke and mirrors.

It’s no mistake Matt, and unfortunately no amount of rhetoric will change the fact that the warter(sic) charges were scuppered because a certain coterie were scared s*itless that they would end up ‘on the books’ and a light would be shone on their activities and claims.

That’s the plain reason Matt, and the generations coming after us will pay the price of those actions.

Red herrings about “looking after our own” and the rest are just a pure smokescreen to deflect from the real problem.....they wanted to stay ‘under the radar’ and tip around doing this and that paying for nothing and claiming everything.

Go figure.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

It’s no mistake Matt, and unfortunately no amount of rhetoric will change the fact that the warter(sic) charges were scuppered because a certain coterie were scared s*itless that they would end up ‘on the books’ and a light would be shone on their activities and claims.

That’s the plain reason Matt, and the generations coming after us will pay the price of those actions.

Red herrings about “looking after our own” and the rest are just a pure smokescreen to deflect from the real problem.....they wanted to stay ‘under the radar’ and tip around doing this and that paying for nothing and claiming everything.

Go figure.

There is a mistake Bren. We'd every day folk protesting.
Even if people believed Paul Murphy made FG quit metering, what does that say about Fine Gael? A nobody politician with a megaphone changes national policy?
No red herring in the still under investigation sitserv deal. No red herring in 'there's nothing wrong in looking after your own'. That's a direct quote Bren. The crony driver appointed to the IW board, no red herring there Bren lad. You're just pretending you don't know this stuff already and trying to use an already spent docket as currency, well middle Ireland didn't buy it then and it won't buy it now lad.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

There is a mistake Bren. We'd every day folk protesting.
Even if people believed Paul Murphy made FG quit metering, what does that say about Fine Gael? A nobody politician with a megaphone changes national policy?
No red herring in the still under investigation sitserv deal. No red herring in 'there's nothing wrong in looking after your own'. That's a direct quote Bren. The crony driver appointed to the IW board, no red herring there Bren lad. You're just pretending you don't know this stuff already and trying to use an already spent docket as currency, well middle Ireland didn't buy it then and it won't buy it now lad.

Some good points there Matthew, however the “everyday folk” were no doubt folk who saw let’s say’ a gap in the market’ We’ll ride this wave and see where it takes us dudes’

Lookit what happened here was Jockser suddenly realised he’d have to actually pay for something and while before the lad wouldn’t leave the crib before opening time, he was now prepared to rise a 0600hrs to protect his manor.

You are perfectly correct in your assertion that Middle Ireland won’t buy into it now and unless Jockser is pulled into the net and made stump up, this is a beaten docket.

The folk who get up early won’t be conned twice...... make no mistake about thaaaaaat.
“

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Some good points there Matthew, however the “everyday folk” were no doubt folk who saw let’s say’ a gap in the market’ We’ll ride this wave and see where it takes us dudes’

Lookit what happened here was Jockser suddenly realised he’d have to actually pay for something and while before the lad wouldn’t leave the crib before opening time, he was now prepared to rise a 0600hrs to protect his manor.

You are perfectly correct in your assertion that Middle Ireland won’t buy into it now and unless Jockser is pulled into the net and made stump up, this is a beaten docket.

The folk who get up early won’t be conned twice...... make no mistake about thaaaaaat.
“

Everyday folk means non-party aligned tax payers Bren.

If jockser is on the dole he still wasn't going to be paying for anything.

Folk that get up early need look at FF/FG Bren.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Everyday folk means non-party aligned tax payers Bren.

If jockser is on the dole he still wasn't going to be paying for anything.

Folk that get up early need look at FF/FG Bren.

Bit cryptic there Matthew, could you flesh that out a bit.


Now Jockser being on the dole is a different kettle of fish, if you don’t mind me saying.

You see, Jockser is a clever lad,Matthew, likes to, as we say in certain circles, operate around the edges.

Jockser likes to operate on the cash in hand stuff, y’know, this and that, can be be very skilled lads in fairness, but have twigged that to be’ on the books’ and paying the proper taxes can be somewhat ..... what’s the word....hmm. ..fettering.

Better to gunter around and hey, a bit here a bit there, y’ know yourself, claim everything.

Don’t want those pesky water meters about, don’t want the feds sniffing around, we are good the way we are.

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Bit cryptic there Matthew, could you flesh that out a bit.


Now Jockser being on the dole is a different kettle of fish, if you don’t mind me saying.

You see, Jockser is a clever lad,Matthew, likes to, as we say in certain circles, operate around the edges.

Jockser likes to operate on the cash in hand stuff, y’know, this and that, can be be very skilled lads in fairness, but have twigged that to be’ on the books’ and paying the proper taxes can be somewhat ..... what’s the word....hmm. ..fettering.

Better to gunter around and hey, a bit here a bit there, y’ know yourself, claim everything.

Don’t want those pesky water meters about, don’t want the feds sniffing around, we are good the way we are.

Indeed I can. Anyone with issues about their lot need look to the government makes the policies not some bogeyman on less than 1% in the polls.

Anyone on low/no income was never going to have to pay, so why would they bother getting involved at all? Make sense lad.
Is 'jockser' code for Maria Bailey, Alan Farrell, Michael Noonan, Denis Naughten?

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Indeed I can. Anyone with issues about their lot need look to the government makes the policies not some bogeyman on less than 1% in the polls.

Anyone on low/no income was never going to have to pay, so why would they bother getting involved at all? Make sense lad.
Is 'jockser' code for Maria Bailey, Alan Farrell, Michael Noonan, Denis Naughten?

Hmm ..so as I understand it anyone who has issues blame the Gubbermint.

Nice one.

Of course anyone with low/no income won’t have to pay..... what the fuhherke about the gunterrer..... clipping along.... this and that..odds and ends....cash in hand dudes..... Jaysus..... are you living in sheltered accommodations Matthew.

:eek:

James Brown

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Hmm ..so as I understand it anyone who has issues blame the Gubbermint.

Nice one.

Of course anyone with low/no income won’t have to pay..... what the fuhherke about the gunterrer..... clipping along.... this and that..odds and ends....cash in hand dudes..... Jaysus..... are you living in sheltered accommodations Matthew.

:eek:

Do you call Paul Murphy by megaphone if you've issue with taxation or the children's hospital over run? Do you get much satisfaction from that?

You are speaking in tongues Bren.

Brendan Bendar

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Do you call Paul Murphy by megaphone if you've issue with taxation or the children's hospital over run? Do you get much satisfaction from that?

You are speaking in tongues Bren.

Matthew, cannot make Head nor Tail of that post.

Apologies amigo.