# irish water



## Attica (5 Oct 2014)

Just curious - when the Govt of the day sets about privatising Irish Water Ltd., how will AAM contributors view that?

As a good thing, because now prices may fall and privatisation always brings reduced prices?

As a bad thing, because a country's water shouldn't belong to any group of people no matter how rich they are, in detriment to those who will not be able to pay?


----------



## mandelbrot (5 Oct 2014)

Attica said:


> Just curious - when the Govt of the day sets about privatising Irish Water Ltd., how will AAM contributors view that?
> 
> As a good thing, because now prices may fall and privatisation always brings reduced prices?
> 
> As a bad thing, because a country's water shouldn't belong to any group of people no matter how rich they are, in detriment to those who will not be able to pay?


 
Electricity supply has been opened up, with the infrastructure still owned by the State.

Same with telephones - remember Telecom Eireann?!

There's no reason why water supply should be any different in the long term, electricity is pretty much as essential as water these days - if the country had no electricity for a week more people would probably die, than if there was no running water for a week.

No matter who the operator is it will always be a regulated market.


----------



## delgirl (6 Oct 2014)

There's a protest this coming Saturday at 2pm if anyone's interested in attending - not sure who Right2Water are and not sure if what they are saying on this website is correct.

_Irish Water has sent you an ‘application pack’ and they want you to fill in details about your household, including your PPS number. Don't engage. People power can beat them.

There are two purposes to these packs:

1) It is an information gathering exercise so they can charge you for using water.

2) They want you to accept water charges. You will be asked to *declare that you are a customer of Irish Water. In other words, to give up your right as a citizen to water – and start paying.*

*The average per household charge will be €278 a year. But the charges will rise after that. One former ESRI economist from has estimated that it will eventually be €600 a year.*

We can stop these charges if we come together and resist. In the 1990s, the government tried to impose water charges on domestic users. They were met with mass protests and were forced to retreat. People power defeated the water charges then. We can do the same today.

We would urge you, therefore, not to fill in the form. You could send it back to Irish Water unopened or place it in your bin or simply ignore it. At the very least, hold off signing for the moment to see if a major campaign gets going.

Don’t let Irish Water or the government scare or bully you.

* *You cannot be jailed or fined for refusing to co-operate with Irish Water*.

* They cannot automatically take the water charge out of your wage packet or your social welfare because it is not a tax that the Revenue Commissioners control.

Resistance to Irish Water has taken in hold in many estates that have been protesting._


----------



## werner (6 Oct 2014)

once again Irish Water charges  are set as a vicious regressive tax. Irish people already pay for their water and distribution network via general taxation. Even a die hard neo-con can easily see the entire configuration of Irish Water is a mess and utterly over staffed and over priced.If more money is required for water let it collected via fair and equitable progressive taxation. FG and labour will lose the next election over this stealth tax alone never mind all of the recent nauseous revelations about how they govern!


----------



## mandelbrot (6 Oct 2014)

werner said:


> once again Irish Water charges  are set as a vicious regressive tax. Irish people already pay for their water and distribution network via general taxation. Even a die hard neo-con can easily see the entire configuration of Irish Water is a mess and utterly over staffed and over priced.If more money is required for water let it collected via fair and equitable progressive taxation. FG and labour will lose the next election over this stealth tax alone never mind all of the recent nauseous revelations about how they govern!



What a load of populist nonsense.

Water is a utility, and paying for it is not a tax, any more than paying for your electricity, phone or gas. 

Or do you want "the rich" to pay for electricity, gas and TV for the rest of the population as well..? 

Try living Uzbekistan or North Korea if you want free water, and see how those Utopian societies float your boat.

Oh, and if memory serves me correctly, you weren't paying the LPT - how's that worked out for you?


----------



## Leo (6 Oct 2014)

werner said:


> FG and labour will lose the next election over this stealth tax alone never mind all of the recent nauseous revelations about how they govern!



Do you really think anyone who will likely replace them will repeal this legislation?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (7 Oct 2014)

What actually seems really weird is the idea that a resource which costs money to produce should be totally free at point of delivery with no rationing at all by the price mechanism.

This is completely separate from the question as to whether certain sections of society should have their water supply subsidised.

As to whether private companies are more efficient than public companies, they do seem to have one big advantage in that they are not held to ransom by the unions.

Mind you, IW seem to be making a complete haims of it.


----------



## blueband (7 Oct 2014)

Leo said:


> Do you really think anyone who will likely replace them will repeal this legislation?


probably be a huge vote winner for any party that promises to do so..


----------



## Sumatra (7 Oct 2014)

When people start receiving high water bills Irish Water will no doubt want to show us how we can save money by purchasing water efficient products which their agents can install.

No doubt the Irish Government will want to encourage people to conserve this most precious resource by incentivising the cost of such upgrades? On second thoughts perhaps not.


----------



## Leo (7 Oct 2014)

blueband said:


> probably be a huge vote winner for any party that promises to do so..



I can't see any party promising that. If you think that party might be Sinn Fein, then just look at their track record of increased taxation and reduced social welfare in the north.


----------



## so-crates (7 Oct 2014)

mandelbrot said:


> What a load of populist nonsense.
> 
> Water is a utility, and paying for it is not a tax, any more than paying for your electricity, phone or gas.
> 
> ...



+1

Some of the rubbish being spouted by the anti-water charges brigade is just aggravating.

It is fundamentally wrong that we have up until now hidden from the cost of provision of water services in this country. It costs to collect, make potable and distribute clean drinking water. It is also costs to collect and treat waste. We are utterly out of line in not charging for the services and as for the cost of water services, [broken link removed] The proposed charge is not excessive when compared to other jurisdictions.


----------



## blueband (7 Oct 2014)

can we apply for a rebate from revenue for the amount we pay irish water each year?
otherwise its seems we are paying for it twice!


----------



## Firefly (7 Oct 2014)

I've heard that IW won't have it charge VAT which is fair enough. If this is the case then I presume VAT will be removed for bottled water, to ensure some form of fairness?


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (7 Oct 2014)

Firefly said:


> I've heard that IW won't have it charge VAT which is fair enough. If this is the case then I presume VAT will be removed for bottled water, to ensure some form of fairness?


Makes me think, should there not be several water products. Think of the water we use in flushing the loo and in car washes. Unthinkable that this would be bottled water. 

I suppose it must not be economic to treat the water to varying standards, though it seems very strange that now that we are paying for it loo water will be as expensive as drinking water.


----------



## mandelbrot (7 Oct 2014)

Firefly said:


> I've heard that IW won't have it charge VAT which is fair enough. If this is the case then I presume VAT will be removed for bottled water, to ensure some form of fairness?



How so? One is a utility, the other a relative luxury item.


----------



## Leo (8 Oct 2014)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> Makes me think, should there not be several water products. Think of the water we use in flushing the loo and in car washes. Unthinkable that this would be bottled water.
> 
> I suppose it must not be economic to treat the water to varying standards, though it seems very strange that now that we are paying for it loo water will be as expensive as drinking water.



We were all (well, net contributors to the tax take at least) paying anyway. Just now it's moving to a pay as you use model.

Building regs will start to require rainwater harvesting for all new builds, it'd be extortionately expensive to retro-fit multiple water supply networks.


----------



## Betsy Og (8 Oct 2014)

Rainwater harvesting and grey water collection, both for toilet flushing, is definitely the way to go.

Multiple water delivery sounds totally unpractical - considering they cant properly manage the leaks on the original system.

I wonder how many of the "we're paying for it already" crowd actually pay tax?? There's a certain character abounding in Irish society that clogs up our hospitals on a Saturday night, is "known to Gardai", and has never contributed anything to society - yet we pay them for the privilege of having then live among us. I'm very in favour of linking everything up, a la the LPT, so we dont have to put up with people giving the State the two figures while taking its cash - like fines and hospital charges (drunk idiot stuff) coming off dole. Once there are consequences then behaviour changes, until then....

And all this whining about the PPS numbers, if you dont want the allowance dont give your number....simples. When I take power in the 'Attila the Hun was a Pinko Leftie' party I'd introduce an information tax credit, you give us all this info (for proper government planning, removal of duplication across departments etc.) and we give you a significant tax credit. If you want to be paranoid and not give it then fine, your choice, pay me more tax for forcing me to operate inefficiently. 

Rant over, ...feeling very right wing today.


----------



## Delboy (8 Oct 2014)

Apparently, in some countries with water charges it is illegal to harvest rain water! It was interfering with the profits of private water companies.

Could you imagine the scenes if that was tried here!


----------



## Betsy Og (8 Oct 2014)

Delboy said:


> Apparently, in some countries with water charges it is illegal to harvest rain water! It was interfering with the profits of private water companies.
> 
> Could you imagine the scenes if that was tried here!



In fairness that would give the lie to the view that its all about conservation. Which it partly is (I think, or at least it should be), the other part being about recouping cost.

As regards IW & how it is being introduced, have they really made that bad a job of it???, of course its madness the level of staffing they have and the overall cost of the 'project' - but in terms of what they have done on the ground and how they have communicated, I wouldnt have thought it is that disastrous or that someone else might have done it oh so much better??? (Note, IMHO I think the PPS thing is a bit overhyped, and isnt it fair to say that with any dealing with the government you need to use your PPSN, so why take it out on IW that they have to ask for it??).


----------



## blueband (8 Oct 2014)

Betsy Og said:


> In fairness that would give the lie to the view that its all about conservation.
> how did you come to think it was ever about conservation????  wake up!


----------



## Betsy Og (8 Oct 2014)

blueband said:


> Betsy Og said:
> 
> 
> > In fairness that would give the lie to the view that its all about conservation.
> ...


----------



## blueband (8 Oct 2014)

Betsy Og said:


> blueband said:
> 
> 
> > So the metering is just all a ruse and your bill wont depend on how much water you use?
> ...


----------



## delgirl (8 Oct 2014)

And now we have the 'bonus that is not a bonus' debacle with IW staff being paid a 'performance related award', but don't call it a bonus, just to do their jobs!


----------



## blueband (8 Oct 2014)

why don't the government at least call it what it is....another tax, and a jobs for the boys club!


----------



## Delboy (8 Oct 2014)

blueband said:


> why don't the government at least call it what it is....another tax, and a jobs for the boys club!



Because some highly paid Consultants have told them all not to mention the 'tax' word or the 'bonus' word.


----------



## Leo (8 Oct 2014)

blueband said:


> so those with no meter can use as much as they like but still only pay a set charge...im sure there will be quite a few hoses being passed over garden walls!



Might need to be a long hose! The likelihood of occasional houses being without a meter while their neighbours have them installed is slim.


----------



## Betsy Og (9 Oct 2014)

Leo, you managed to make the waterhose passing comment look like a quote from me. If I was asked for a waterhose in such circumstances I'd tell the scrounger where you might place his hose.....

As regards the general point about unmetered houses, if we had to wait until every single house was metered to start, I guess it would delay everything by about 2 years, and you'll recall that our overlords (as they then were) were insisting on it.

p.s. bewildered by the level of support for SF, think the current government not getting enough credit. Steady hand on the tiller boys for the next few years.


----------



## michaelm (9 Oct 2014)

I've finally decided that the course of least resistance is to engage with Irish Water, otherwise I'd be facing a €1200 yearly bill.  By completing the form my bill will be €440 yearly (for two adults + children).  The bill will be almost 60% above the €278 assessed/estimated charge because the free child allowance is insufficient.  

I only intend to pay the €278.16 (€69.54 per quarter) that I'd have to pay if I didn't have a meter.  This will be fine for the first three quarters as the charge is capped.  If Irish Water have not adjusted the free allowance for children back towards a realistic level by the end of the capped period then I intend to just pay €69.54 per quarter and see what happens.


----------



## Purple (9 Oct 2014)

michaelm said:


> I've finally decided that the course of least resistance is to engage with Irish Water, otherwise I'd be facing a €1200 yearly bill.  By completing the form my bill will be €440 yearly (for two adults + children).  The bill will be almost 60% above the €278 assessed/estimated charge because the free child allowance is insufficient.



You are lucky to get anything for your child. I have 4 children who spend around half their time in my house and I get no allowance for them.


----------



## Leo (9 Oct 2014)

Betsy Og said:


> Leo, you managed to make the waterhose passing comment look like a quote from me.



Apologies, I didn't spot the error Blueband had in their quote. Fixed now.


----------



## NOAH (9 Oct 2014)

"p.s. bewildered by the level of support for SF, think the current government not getting enough credit. Steady hand on the tiller boys for the next few years. "

Is this a joke!  Can you name one decent thing this government has done since it got into power?   I cant but I can detail loads of instances where they have reneged on every single promise they made before the election.  And if we had such fine leadership why is the leader hidden away ala North Korea.


----------



## Betsy Og (9 Oct 2014)

NOAH said:


> Is this a joke!  Can you name one decent thing this government has done since it got into power?   I cant but I can detail loads of instances where they have reneged on every single promise they made before the election.  And if we had such fine leadership why is the leader hidden away ala North Korea.



I can vividly recall a time (vividly, because its not long ago at all) under the previous government when we couldnt borrow, we had the IMF, the economy was in a bad way. 

Now unemployment is falling (& employment is increasing - so its not just emigration), the economy is growing, we can borrow at rates as low as nil, we're replacing the most expensive of our debt, we're nearing the end of austerity. Plenty of reasons to be cheerful.

If Irish people insist on punishing the current government for the hardship we had to endure then they are very short sighted indeed. Maybe you'll say the IMF dictated all that was done, there's certainly something in that, but I dont think Ml Noonan has put a foot wrong - whether we get our 'special deal' or not wont be his fault.

Look at the alternatives, do you want FF back? - its only yesterday they were in a bunker with Cowen ignoring the EU & yer wan from Donegal Mary.... floundering around. SF??, leave it out!, that's right lads, a 3rd rate of tax will fix everything - "the rich" should pay for everything, no need people to pay for services they consume .... and you're not allowed to mention to bodies people are still digging out of bogs....we're now sanctimonious and bearing the high moral ground. Wake up SF voters, you've had your protest, you dont really want to throw away the progress do you?, you're only hurting yourself.....


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (9 Oct 2014)

betsy og said:


> i can vividly recall a time (vividly, because its not long ago at all) under the previous government when we couldnt borrow, we had the imf, the economy was in a bad way.
> 
> Now unemployment is falling (& employment is increasing - so its not just emigration), the economy is growing, we can borrow at rates as low as nil, we're replacing the most expensive of our debt, we're nearing the end of austerity. Plenty of reasons to be cheerful.
> 
> ...


+1


----------



## Sunny (9 Oct 2014)

I would never vote for SF but what exactly has FG done that they deserve praise for 'saving' Ireland? People give out about Sinn Fein but then we all sit back while the Government raids the pension funds of private individuals. If SF had even suggested that, there would have been riots.


----------



## flowerman (9 Oct 2014)

NOAH said:


> "p.s. bewildered by the level of support for SF, think the current government not getting enough credit. Steady hand on the tiller boys for the next few years. "
> 
> Is this a joke! *Can you name one decent thing this government has done since it got into power?* I cant but I can detail loads of instances where they have reneged on every single promise they made before the election. And if we had such fine leadership why is the leader hidden away ala North Korea.


 
Packing Phil Hogan off over to the EU....(thank the lord hes gone from this country)







FG are the party of we will do "whatever the hell we feel like doing".

Labour are no more than the pandering lapdog to FG.

We now have Labour finally admitting in the dail today that no one will have their water turned off or pressure reduced if they dont pay their water bill.
They were pressed on the matter of IW,FG and Labour scaremongering the public and threatening to cut off water supply or reduce pressure to people who couldnt pay or wont pay.

Id like to see IW try to have everyone up in court who may decide to not pay (for one reason or another) their water charge.


Do you really think judges are going to start slapping 5000 euro fines on people who dont even have a cent left at the end of each month (Credit Union research) to pay a water bill.

Are judges going to lock desperate people up in jail because they cant pay but yet they have a human right to water in order to live and survive.Are judges going to do that??

I can see this water charge carry on bringing down Labour and quite possibly the goverment when the "real water charge bills" are sent out next year.


----------



## flowerman (9 Oct 2014)

It will be interesting to see how many people tun up in Dublin on Saturday at 2pm for the IW/Water Meter protests due to be held outside the garden of rememberence.Ive no affiliation to this protest but Id be curious to see how many people turn up and what sort of message they get out.

www.right2water.ie

I wonder will RTE News give it any coverage??
TV3 probably will though and so too will Vincent Browne.


----------



## Betsy Og (10 Oct 2014)

Is more or less every developed country in the world run by Dick Turpin??, with the audacity to charge for something that costs money to source, clean & deliver? Or are the Irish people uniquely blessed that God has ordained that they, uniquely, dont need to pay?

I agree that hardship cases have to be taken into account, and I've no problem with realigning Social Welfare to take account of new costs, but I absolutely believe in the principle that user/polluter pays. 

The unavoidable reality of protests is that if the government caves to them then *ALL* the burden will fall on the tax payers. I'm sure the distributors of Dutch Gold would rejoice, I wouldn't.


----------



## Ceist Beag (10 Oct 2014)

Betsy Og said:


> I can vividly recall a time (vividly, because its not long ago at all) under the previous government when we couldnt borrow, we had the IMF, the economy was in a bad way.
> 
> Now unemployment is falling (& employment is increasing - so its not just emigration), the economy is growing, we can borrow at rates as low as nil, we're replacing the most expensive of our debt, we're nearing the end of austerity. Plenty of reasons to be cheerful.
> 
> ...



Massive +1

I really don't get some of these posters who moan about everything as if somehow the country is in a worse state now than it was under FF. SF policies are just populist and completely impractical but so long as they remain unlikely to have to back up such statements with actual action they'll continue with this.
A lot of people tend to brush over the fact we are still borrowing to pay our bills. Would those complaining about water charges live their own life by borrowing money every day to pay their bills? I don't think so.


----------



## michaelm (10 Oct 2014)

FG have lost the run of themselves in under three years in power (it took FF almost three terms to become as arrogant).  I've lent my vote to FG since 2002 however that facility has been withdrawn this year, and forever more.  Unfortunately that leaves me with no one to vote for . . do I spoil my vote and be counted as an idiot or not vote and be counted as apathetic?  Hopefully another political option emerges.


----------



## gianni (10 Oct 2014)

NOAH said:


> Is this a joke!  Can you name one decent thing this government has done since it got into power?   I cant but I can detail loads of instances where they have reneged on every single promise they made before the election.  And if we had such fine leadership why is the leader hidden away ala North Korea.



As mentioned before; unemployment is dropping and the economy is growing. Would this have happened with a different govt at the helm ? I don't believe so. Our current minister(s) of finance have done a relatively good job in the most dire of situations. Personally I've been directly affected through increased taxes and reduced services. I'm no fan of austerity.

I'm also amused about the criticisms of Enda Kenny. I don't care about how hidden or otherwise he is. Do we really need to see a Taoiseach in every news report? (That's what we have a President for!). I don't care how many gaffes he makes. I don't care about how stupid he might look in photographs. I don't care about his cringeworthy soundbytes. ("I'm signing the contract" etc). The end product is what counts. 

In the past we've had very charismatic leaders who were all things to all men (thinking specifically of Haughey & Aherne) and that didn't work all that well for us...


----------



## Purple (10 Oct 2014)

Betsy Og said:


> I can vividly recall a time (vividly, because its not long ago at all) under the previous government when we couldnt borrow, we had the IMF, the economy was in a bad way.
> 
> Now unemployment is falling (& employment is increasing - so its not just emigration), the economy is growing, we can borrow at rates as low as nil, we're replacing the most expensive of our debt, we're nearing the end of austerity. Plenty of reasons to be cheerful.
> 
> ...



+1 from me as well.
SF are populist, isolationist and have an outdated ideology based on begrudgery and pettiness.

I find the conversation about Irish water interesting and depressing. It typifies much of what’s wrong with the Irish psyche. Basically the  discussion is around how people won’t pay the charges and how they won’t be fined etc when they don’t. There is no discussion around civic responsibility and the fact that the people who don’t pay are effectively making their neighbours and fellow citizens pay instead. There is no discussion about doing the right thing because it’s the right thing to do. We are like children in a classroom “getting away with it” when the teacher is outside the door. We need to grow up.


----------



## Sunny (10 Oct 2014)

I don't agree at all. The vast vast majority have no problem paying water charges. The problem I have and what many people have is the Irish Water was set up. Set up costs were huge when we were initially told that the basic system and billing infrastructure was in place from other utility companies. Yet we still spend 50m on consultants. The majority of properties are not metered and a sizeable number never will. How is that fair? Irish water was set by taking a huge number of staff from local authorities that they didn't need and then announce that the numbers will drop naturally over the next couple of years. Heard that one before. Next we hear about a politicians driver being put on the board. And then finally we hear that the overstaffed organisation are in line for bonuses. Sorry, performance related pay. 

It's all very saying the country needs to grow up but maybe we need to start standing up for ourselves more when we see the HSE mark II being created or when we allow a government raid private pension funds just because they can. It's all very well jumping up and down when people talk about supporting SF but you can blame people when you see how FF and FG have acted since they got into power. Maybe instead of insulting people's intelligence we need to look at why parties like SF and the UKIP in the UK are attracting huge support. Not everyone who votes for these parties are simpletons or don't understand the nature and business of politics.


----------



## Betsy Og (10 Oct 2014)

Sunny, there's no denying that the set up is flawed, but bottom line is that not paying the charge isnt going to fix that. I'd say the conscientious objectors about the set-up costs are vastly outnumbered by the wont pay/reclaim the street type nonsense.


----------



## blueband (10 Oct 2014)

Sunny said:


> I don't agree at all. The vast vast majority have no problem paying water charges. The problem I have and what many people have is the Irish Water was set up. Set up costs were huge when we were initially told that the basic system and billing infrastructure was in place from other utility companies. Yet we still spend 50m on consultants. The majority of properties are not metered and a sizeable number never will. How is that fair? Irish water was set by taking a huge number of staff from local authorities that they didn't need and then announce that the numbers will drop naturally over the next couple of years. Heard that one before. Next we hear about a politicians driver being put on the board. And then finally we hear that the overstaffed organisation are in line for bonuses. Sorry, performance related pay.
> 
> It's all very saying the country needs to grow up but maybe we need to start standing up for ourselves more when we see the HSE mark II being created or when we allow a government raid private pension funds just because they can. It's all very well jumping up and down when people talk about supporting SF but you can blame people when you see how FF and FG have acted since they got into power. Maybe instead of insulting people's intelligence we need to look at why parties like SF and the UKIP in the UK are attracting huge support. Not everyone who votes for these parties are simpletons or don't understand the nature and business of politics.


+1 great post sunny, you have said as it as a huge amount of people in this country see it.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (10 Oct 2014)

_Sunny_  you nearly had me convinced there, you had me seething at the paddywhackery of it all and then you go and blow your argument by implying it is the exact same in the UK.  I suppose same in France, Germany, US etc.


----------



## Betsy Og (10 Oct 2014)

blueband said:


> +1 great post sunny, you have said as it as a huge amount of people in this country see it.



One suspects that that same huge amount of people would not be..ahem..unduly exercised about the issue (insert any vernacular phrase you'd like) were it not for the fact that they are being asked to part with some money. Methinks the giving out about the set-up is just a convenient hook. Are we to understand that if IW was set up as a model of minimalist efficiency that the queues to sign up would stretch back the street??, I have to say I fear not...


----------



## Purple (10 Oct 2014)

Hi Sunny, Everything you say about Irish Water is correct. That doesn’t change the fact that there is a charge in place and the people who do pay will be subsidising those who don’t. It doesn’t change the fact that people will not pay because nothing will happen to them and notions of social and moral duty just don’t occur to most Irish people. We still have a post-colonial mind-set when it comes to the state and the government. I hear very few people talk about their responsibility as citizens.
The fact that the structures in Irish Water as  so bad, that there is so much over-staffing and that bonuses are paid out in an obtuse and unaccountable fashion just means that Irish Water is the same as just about every other state body. 
If people think that a far left isolationist party like SF are going to change that in any positive or constructive way then they are stupid. That’s not insulting their intelligence; it’s just the way it is.


----------



## Sunny (10 Oct 2014)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> _Sunny_  you nearly had me convinced there, you had me seething at the paddywhackery of it all and then you go and blow your argument by implying it is the exact same in the UK.  I suppose same in France, Germany, US etc.



It is the same. Look at European politics. Do you think Ireland is unique on seeing a shift away from centre politics? People


----------



## Sunny (10 Oct 2014)

Purple said:


> Hi Sunny, Everything you say about Irish Water is correct. That doesn’t change the fact that there is a charge in place and the people who do pay will be subsidising those who don’t. It doesn’t change the fact that people will not pay because nothing will happen to them and notions of social and moral duty just don’t occur to most Irish people. We still have a post-colonial mind-set when it comes to the state and the government. I hear very few people talk about their responsibility as citizens.
> The fact that the structures in Irish Water as  so bad, that there is so much over-staffing and that bonuses are paid out in an obtuse and unaccountable fashion just means that Irish Water is the same as just about every other state body.
> If people think that a far left isolationist party like SF are going to change that in any positive or constructive way then they are stupid. That’s not insulting their intelligence; it’s just the way it is.



Is it any more stupid than believing that FG would introduce a new way of doing politics? Is it more stupid than supporting a party that would remove medical cards from a small nimber of sick and dying children because they think it is the best political option? Is it as stupid as allowing a Government raid private pension funds and steal people's savings? 

I voted FG last election. I don't feel particularly clever these days.


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (10 Oct 2014)

Sunny said:


> It is the same. Look at European politics. Do you think Ireland is unique on seeing a shift away from centre politics? People


Well yeah, I thought you were kinda arguing that this was paddywhackery.

But are you arguing that across the Western world we should give SF, UKIP, Le Penn etc. a chance to do it better?


----------



## Betsy Og (10 Oct 2014)

Sunny said:


> Is it more stupid than supporting a party that would remove medical cards from a small nimber of sick and dying children because they think it is the best political option?



I think they're a bit all over the shop on that one. In the same breath they want (or at least did want) free GP care for all u6 and universal health insurance. I have some faint hope that Leo will chose the right path - I find him to be very straight talking - that said he's in "Angola" so O'Connell & Parnell wont be patch on him if he fixes that mess.


----------



## Betsy Og (10 Oct 2014)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> But are you arguing that across the Western world we should give SF, UKIP, Le Penn etc. a chance to do it better?



When you list them it just shows there's no consistency to the message, we've got the 'reds under the bed' and they've got the 'flog 'em and send 'em home brigade'. The only thing in common is anti-establishment, its relatively easy be anti, its when the ball is delivered to your feet, what are you going to do with it? From what I can see the Shinners are not covering themselves in glory in the North, and this is on day to day stuff, the stuff many voters in the south seem happy to put them in control of.

There may be many deep flaws in the current government, but they're lucky the opposition seems fractured and less credible.


----------



## michaelm (10 Oct 2014)

It's a pity that they didn't continue funding water through general taxation and issue water bonds (which would ultimately be self-financing) to raise the money to fix the water infrastructure.


----------



## blueband (10 Oct 2014)

michaelm said:


> It's a pity that they didn't continue funding water through general taxation and issue water bonds (which would ultimately be self-financing) to raise the money to fix the water infrastructure.


not as much of a 'stroke' to be pulled there though.
whats the betting that in few years down the road we will be spending millions on a tribunal into how irish water was set up?.....but of course Enda will be well out of the frame by then!


----------



## Deiseblue (11 Oct 2014)

The unfortunate corollary to the introduction of water charges is that SF by adopting an ill judged , populist opposition to such a charge will undoubtedly increase their already burgeoning popularity.
The key word in SF's canon is populist - reasoning that nobody ever lost votes by vowing to abolish an unpopular charge allied to a pledge to tax the rich & introduce a wealth tax if elected , the fact that their financial strategies were created in Noddyland matters not a whit to them !
On the upside , from my point of view , it does appear as per Mr. Howlin's comment in recent days it does appear that the negotiations on ameliorating public sector pay cuts will take place next year & hopefully the question of a living wage will be tackled in the short term - the continuing rise in SF's popularity adds to the pressure in tackling such measures as we head towards the next election.


----------



## Delboy (11 Oct 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> The key word in SF's canon is populist - reasoning that nobody ever lost votes by vowing to abolish an unpopular charge allied to a pledge to tax the rich & introduce a wealth tax if elected , the fact that their financial strategies were created in Noddyland matters not a whit to them !



That sounds like all of the left wing parties to me....PbP/AAA/Judean People's Front (how many names do this crowd operate under?)and most of the Independents


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (11 Oct 2014)

SF beaten at their own game in Tallaght

That is great news - the electorate want to protest, fair enough, but are getting nervous that by exercising that protest through SF, they might get what they wish for


----------



## Purple (13 Oct 2014)

Sunny said:


> Is it any more stupid than believing that FG would introduce a new way of doing politics? Is it more stupid than supporting a party that would remove medical cards from a small nimber of sick and dying children because they think it is the best political option? Is it as stupid as allowing a Government raid private pension funds and steal people's savings?
> 
> I voted FG last election. I don't feel particularly clever these days.



In fairness to the Shinners they are open about wanting to raid people's savings and pensions; they want a wealth tax.
Taking medical cards from "a small number of sick and dying children" (a bit emotive there Sunny, not like you) was not a populist option; they were seeking to make sure that only those that needed them received medical cards. It was ham-fisted and ill though out and easy ammunition for the "will someone please think of the children" brigade but the idea of limiting welfare payments to those who actually need them is a good idea. Joan Burton has done a good job of it in the Department of Big Brother will Protect You.
I know a guy with a severely disabled child. That child has a medical card and they will receive a grant to upgrade their house to allow their child to move around. That all sounds well and good but the household income is north of €300'000 per year. They don't need the money; they can afford to pay for it themselves.


----------



## Purple (13 Oct 2014)

I see that people on low incomes will not be paying water charges. I thought that this would actually be a tax everyone paid but it seems that the small percent of citizens who pay the lion’s share of all the other taxes will have to pay this one as well. That explains why the allowances are so low.


----------



## Purple (13 Oct 2014)

There has been a massive amount of energy, money, column inches and public debate expended around the issue of Water Charges. The government and the public servants who actually run things must be delighted about the direction and nature of that debate. The battle has been fought along pay or don’t pay lines. The side discussion has been around the size and pay levels of the new Irish Water company. 
The first battle, pay or don’t pay, was always going to be lost; the state will always get their money.
The second issue is as intractable and complex as general pay levels in public bodies and state salaries. There are far too many people with a vested interest in not opening that Pandora’s Box for it to ever be tackled properly so that was a hiding to nowhere as well.

The discussion should have been around infrastructure, water quality levels, service delivery and targets, accountability of board members and, crucially, accountability of senior managers etc. so that the customer had a real sanction if this new body didn’t do its job properly. If the same energy was expended on those issues we may have ended up with a service most of us were happy to pay for.


----------



## so-crates (13 Oct 2014)

There are no votes to be gained by band-waggon-jumpers in discussing the nitty-gritty of implementing Irish Water. Lost of votes to be gained by jumping up and down and demanding free water. They might as well go the whole hog and say "I have a right to sustenance so give me food for free as well".


----------



## so-crates (13 Oct 2014)

I have no particular issue with supports being put in place for those that genuinely cannot afford water charges - it is inevitable that there will be people who cannot. Implementing a support for them is expensive but they are, in effect, being supported at the moment. They difference is they will now have to actively seek such support but that again does not rankle with me - better to seek on the basis of need instead of expect on the basis of entitlement.


----------



## blueband (13 Oct 2014)

so-crates said:


> There are no votes to be gained by band-waggon-jumpers in discussing the nitty-gritty of implementing Irish Water. Lost of votes to be gained by jumping up and down and demanding free water. They might as well go the whole hog and say "I have a right to sustenance so give me food for free as well".


but we never had free water in the first place!  it just now we are paying for it twice,  how can that be fair?


----------



## werner (13 Oct 2014)

Very few are saying they do not want to pay for water. What the government is being told by the electorate is that tax payers already pay for water through the general taxation system, which for water charges is currently  progressive and fair. There is also a genuine fear that the new HSE style quango of Irish Water is being prepared for future privatisation. The government ignore this at their peril as can be seen at the righteous seething anger at the protest march and the wipe out of Fine Gael and Labour in the local and the by-elections.
The parts of the taxation system that are fair and equitable takes into account the ability to pay and it is the best way to ensure the most vulnerable are protected. The new water charges are neither fair nor equitable; they are the worst form of taxation, highly regressive in nature and in their application. Fine Gael and Labour's new water tax is regressive and it targets the sick, the unemployed, the elderly and the disabled who spend more time in their homes and will use more water incurring higher charges. Needless to say volks on the lowest means will pay a much higher proportion of their income on them. Is that the type of regressive government taxes that people want? Not on any evidence that I can see.
I would expect a tribunal in the future to examine how Irish Water was formed. There are serious questions to be asked of how tax payer’s funds poured into Irish Water have been mis- spent. Millions of tax payer’s money has been squandered on PR consultants and propaganda campaigns instead of repairing the leaks that lose 40% of potable water. The water taxes and government spin cannot hide the fact that these regressive water charges are unethical, immoral and unfair and the majority of the population believe that water should be paid for through fair progressive general taxation. I fully support withholding payment until the government reforms the tax and actually listens to the majority of tax payers.


----------



## Ceist Beag (13 Oct 2014)

werner said:


> Very few are saying they do not want to pay for water. What the government is being told by the electorate is that tax payers already pay for water through the general taxation system, which for water charges is currently  progressive and fair. There is also a genuine fear that the new HSE style quango of Irish Water is being prepared for future privatisation. The government ignore this at their peril as can be seen at the righteous seething anger at the protest march and the wipe out of Fine Gael and Labour in the local and the by-elections.
> The parts of the taxation system that are fair and equitable takes into account the ability to pay and it is the best way to ensure the most vulnerable are protected. The new water charges are neither fair nor equitable; they are the worst form of taxation, highly regressive in nature and in their application. Fine Gael and Labour's new water tax is regressive and it targets the sick, the unemployed, the elderly and the disabled who spend more time in their homes and will use more water incurring higher charges. Needless to say volks on the lowest means will pay a much higher proportion of their income on them. Is that the type of regressive government taxes that people want? Not on any evidence that I can see.
> I would expect a tribunal in the future to examine how Irish Water was formed. There are serious questions to be asked of how tax payer’s funds poured into Irish Water have been mis- spent. Millions of tax payer’s money has been squandered on PR consultants and propaganda campaigns instead of repairing the leaks that lose 40% of potable water. The water taxes and government spin cannot hide the fact that these regressive water charges are unethical, immoral and unfair and the majority of the population believe that water should be paid for through fair progressive general taxation. I fully support withholding payment until the government reforms the tax and actually listens to the majority of tax payers.



What a load of cliched hyperbole! Look here are some facts before you continue ranting.
1. We are still spending more than we take in so further inroads are needed to either reduce spending or increase the tax take.
2. As per the recommendations from the troika, we need to make changes to how we collect tax, to be less transaction based and more predictable/regular.
3. The property tax and the water charges are two steps in this direction.

Absolutely I agree that how Irish Water has been set up is an issue with the electorate. I don't agree with it either (as I said right back when it was formed on this site) and there are serious questions to be asked about this and the millions wasted since. I fully support this stance.
However there is so much hot air being spouted which are distracting from this and other important points as Purple has pointed out. 
Talk of it being "unfair, unethical, immoral", give me a break! Water costs money to supply, we can no longer afford to pay for this out of the current tax take, therefore we need to pay for it directly. Perfectly fair as far as I'm concerned. The sooner we move on from this and the sooner we focus on the actual operation of Irish Water and how this revenue is spent the better as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## The_Banker (13 Oct 2014)

I know other countries have water charges and property taxes...
But where these taxes are implemented, is the marginal rate of taxation 52% for anyone who is earning in excess of €32,000?


----------



## blueband (14 Oct 2014)

Ceist Beag said:


> What a load of cliched hyperbole! Look here are some facts before you continue ranting.
> 1. We are still spending more than we take in so further inroads are needed to either reduce spending or increase the tax take.
> 2. As per the recommendations from the troika, we need to make changes to how we collect tax, to be less transaction based and more predictable/regular.
> 3. The property tax and the water charges are two steps in this direction.
> ...


for the love of god, how many more times, we are all paying for our water usage as it is! what part of your brain is not picking up that! ???


----------



## Leo (14 Oct 2014)

blueband said:


> but we never had free water in the first place!  it just now we are paying for it twice,  how can that be fair?



Everyone who was on a private supply was paying for it twice, effectively subsidising those who could avail of a public supply, now everyone is only paying for it once.


----------



## blueband (14 Oct 2014)

Leo said:


> Everyone who was on a private supply was paying for it twice, effectively subsidising those who could avail of a public supply, now everyone is only paying for it once.


eh...no, everyone is now paying paying for it twice..


----------



## Conan (14 Oct 2014)

Why do some people continue with this idea that we are "paying for water twice". On that basis are we not also paying twice for :
- car tax
- TV licence
- NCT
- airport taxes
- taxes on alcohol
etc, etc.....

The very same people who want to abolish the water charge want the delivery system overhauled (the pipes). But they want someone else to pay (they always wants someone else to pay for everything). 
I fully agree that the Govt have made a mess of the implementation of the charge (and just complicated it today with tax reliefs), but the principle of charging for such a utility (to pay for the delivery overhaul and to encourage conservation) is just common sense. The problem is that a certain part of the electorate, encouraged by populist politicians, expect the State (other taxpayers) to pay for everything.
Four years ago this little country was bust (thanks to FF) and a host of celebrity economist appearing nightly on Vincent Browne postulated that it was inevitable that the country would have to seek a second bailout. I don't hear much from Professors Lucey and Gurdiev more recently now that our reputation was been much enhanced, our borrowing capability much improved (and we are still borrowing to fund our spending- even if it is at a much reduced level). 
I can fully understand that SF, FF and the looney left brigade don't want to see the economy improving. Their populist strategy is based on being critical of every effort to bridge the gap between what we spend and what we take in. In the financial world of SF, People who never made any Profit, the Anti Everything Alliance etc etc it is the "rich" who should pay for everything. Disneyworld economics.


----------



## Ceist Beag (15 Oct 2014)

blueband said:


> for the love of god, how many more times, we are all paying for our water usage as it is! what part of your brain is not picking up that! ???



for the love of God how many more times, we are moving to a broader tax base as the current tax base was not enough to pay for everything. Therefore water charges are no longer being paid for from the current tax take. What part of your brain in not picking up that! It is exactly the same concept as the property tax. Previously local services were paid for from the state coffers (i.e. the taxes we paid). Now they are paid for from the property tax. Is it really that hard to get your head around this?


----------



## Leo (15 Oct 2014)

blueband said:


> eh...no, everyone is now paying paying for it twice..



As others have pointed out, just because you pay other forms of tax does not mean you pay for any state service twice. Do you pay refuse charges twice? How about electricity?

The public water supply will now be majority funded directly by the water charge, the gap between the revenue collected in water charges and the true cost of providing the service will come from the exchequer, and so the tax paying public will pay this shortfall. So again, those who pay for and maintain private water supplies and treatment facilities will continue to pay more than their share to subsidise those who are in a position to avail of public services.

No doubt a time will come when Irish Water is self-financing, then by very definition, people who avail of this service will pay for it, and pay for it once. Those who do not avail of it, will not pay for it. All seems fair to me, but I'm a logical sort.

At this point, I can only assume you do not want to accept that, or the arguments for a wider tax base, and are in the band of people who think every public service should be free to the end user because the so called rich can pay for everything.


----------



## Purple (15 Oct 2014)

Leo said:


> At this point, I can only assume you do not want to accept that, or the arguments for a wider tax base, and are in the band of people who think every public service should be free to the end user because the so called rich can pay for everything.



The irony is that in this country, more than any other in the developed world, the so called rich do pay for almost everything. We should be grateful to them that they do, not resentful of them because they are smarter and/or work harder than the rest of us.


----------



## flowerman (16 Oct 2014)

I wonder how many people will turn out for the big Irish Water Protest on 1st November.

100,000 turned out last Saturday and that rattled both FG and Labour,so lets see what the 1st November Protest does to all those backbenchers who so far keep on propping up Enda and Joan


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (1 Nov 2014)

flowerman said:


> I wonder how many people will turn out for the big Irish Water Protest on 1st November.


The ones in Dublin certainly got more free water than they bargained for.


----------



## sisterjoan (1 Nov 2014)

The way Irish water introduced water charges was wrong as was the way they were awarding themselves a bonus so soon. No wonder people are angry. I also think it should have been left a year or two as people were only getting used to property tax.   I think there should be a tax on water ok and it should be based on the number of adults in the house. I do think there should be an allowance for adult children who are in college but not adult children who are working and still at home. It has to be based on how much a house uses otherwise there is no incentive to conserve water. I am not looking forward to another bill at all but feel it is needed as long as it's done fairly and everyone has to pay.
I'm fed up of people who want to pay for nothing, who object to everything and yet are the first to shout when a service isn't there for them or isn't good enough for them.


----------



## NOAH (1 Nov 2014)

what is fair about setting up a quango that has wasted millions from the outset?  I am sick and tired about this talk to conserve water,  that applies to california or australia et al. The government could have easily explained to the troika that infrastructure is not in place to introduce water charges. This is a shambles from the start.  Its the same old carry on jobs for the boys and forget about realism ie build a proper water system.  I could go on but wont.

I am extremely proud of the people who demonstated today and the polls tomorrow will have a stronger message.


----------



## Firefly (20 Nov 2014)

Now that there is (and will be) a cap on the cost to households we can finally see that water preservation was never really the motive and it's just a tax by another name. Rather than setting up a whole new quango why not just add 160 euro per year onto the Household Charge and be done with it?


----------



## michaelm (20 Nov 2014)

The whole IW saga has been a shambles.  They should have scrapped direct charges and insisted that a unified state water utility was required to overhaul our water infrastructure.  I guess that they didn't drop the charges as heads would have had to roll and the Government would likely have fallen . . this way they'll probably manage to bump along till early next year.  

This folly should spell the end for Kenny (personally) and the Labour Party (in general) which, for me, is the silver lining in all of this.  I can't be bothered to return my form.


----------



## blueband (20 Nov 2014)

michaelm said:


> The whole IW saga has been a shambles. They should have scrapped direct charges and insisted that a unified state water utility was required to overhaul our water infrastructure. I guess that they didn't drop the charges as heads would have had to roll and the Government would likely have fallen . . this way they'll probably manage to bump along till early next year.
> 
> This folly should spell the end for Kenny (personally) and the Labour Party (in general) which, for me, is the silver lining in all of this. I can't be bothered to return my form.


+1 if it brings down Kenny and Co then at least some good has come out of it..


----------



## Duke of Marmalade (20 Nov 2014)

michaelm said:


> I can't be bothered to return my form.


The fact that you "can't be bothered" claiming your €100 rebate says a lot.

Watched the debate yesterday. The looneys are staking an awful lot on a monster rally on December 10th. That is high risk for them. If they get their wish then it will be a very black day, a demonstration that mob rule is where we are at.


----------



## Firefly (20 Nov 2014)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> The looneys are staking an awful lot on a monster rally on December 10th. That is high risk for them. If they get their wish then it will be a very black day, a demonstration that mob rule is where we are at.



It'll be a washout. Since the cap has been put on it, most people won't have the bottle for another strike. Regarding the charges, I think these will be drip-fed to us over a number a years. IW will be a barren of a place to work and there'll be plenty more water under the bridge before this whole fiasco is sorted. Anyone for a cuppa?


----------



## Purple (20 Nov 2014)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> The fact that you "can't be bothered" claiming your €100 rebate says a lot.
> 
> Watched the debate yesterday. The looneys are staking an awful lot on a monster rally on December 10th. That is high risk for them. If they get their wish then it will be a very black day, a demonstration that mob rule is where we are at.



What's remarkable is that the leadership of the whiskered brotherhood is both organising the populist campaign against water charges and saying that their members in Irish Water will go on strike if their bonuses are not paid.
Running with the hare and hunting with the hound... or just hypocritical populists desperate to garner members to pay their €150'000 salaries.


----------



## Firefly (20 Nov 2014)

Purple said:


> What's remarkable is that the leadership of the whiskered brotherhood is both organising the populist campaign against water charges and saying that their members in Irish Water will go on strike if their bonuses are not paid.
> Running with the hare and hunting with the hound



So true



Purple said:


> ... or just hypocritical populists desperate to garner members to pay their €150'000 salaries.



So true


----------



## michaelm (20 Nov 2014)

Duke of Marmalade said:


> The fact that you "can't be bothered" claiming your €100 rebate says a lot.


Really?  Does it say anything specific?  I'm not bothered returning it for various reasons not least of which being that I'm not going to pay it.  I'm opposed to direct water charges, though not ideologically opposed; I was open to persuasion but they failed on every level.  I'll now take my chances as a holdout and expect that the Government's last throw of the dice will prove futile.  Even those who will ultimately register, for whatever reason, should hold off until the new February deadline to give the Government a sweat over Christmas.


----------



## Sunny (20 Nov 2014)

Purple said:


> What's remarkable is that the leadership of the whiskered brotherhood is both organising the populist campaign against water charges and saying that their members in Irish Water will go on strike if their bonuses are not paid.
> Running with the hare and hunting with the hound... or just hypocritical populists desperate to garner members to pay their €150'000 salaries.



I never supported the bonus thing but I have to say I find it odd that Irish water can unilaterally change people's contracts but every time we hear about senior executives and large pay packets with excessive pensions, we get told about the legal sanctity of employment contracts that must be respected. Odd how ordinary people can be treated different to senior bankers and senior civil servants.


----------



## Deiseblue (20 Nov 2014)

Sunny said:


> I never supported the bonus thing but I have to say I find it odd that Irish water can unilaterally change people's contracts but every time we hear about senior executives and large pay packets with excessive pensions, we get told about the legal sanctity of employment contracts that must be respected. Odd how ordinary people can be treated different to senior bankers and senior civil servants.



From chatting to a number of Union members prior to last Tuesday's game it was obvious that there was a huge amount of disquiet surrounding this unilateral changing of contract terms in a semi - state body , there was an amount of confidence however that raising this matter with the industrial mechanisms of the State would remedy this alarming state of affairs.


----------



## Purple (20 Nov 2014)

Sunny said:


> I never supported the bonus thing but I have to say I find it odd that Irish water can unilaterally change people's contracts but every time we hear about senior executives and large pay packets with excessive pensions, we get told about the legal sanctity of employment contracts that must be respected. Odd how ordinary people can be treated different to senior bankers and senior civil servants.



I agree.
What's really alarming is that the bonuses were negotiated in order to replace increments so in reality the pay levels Irish Water are a better deal for the state than the county councils or most of the other semi-state's.


----------



## Delboy (20 Nov 2014)

The Unions will be delighted to go back to the old system of annual increments, no questions asked.
The current system required a 'review' as to whether you merited your 'bonus' or not.

So a return to the old system will cost more money....but hey, at least people won't be shocked now, ringing Joe Duffy about bonuses being paid out! 
Populism and short-termism win out as usual

Deise
Do you know if the workers in IW who came in from the Councils got:
a/ Disturbance money
b/ Some sort of recompense for the change in contracts from increments to bonus


----------



## Deiseblue (20 Nov 2014)

Delboy , the local authority workers under service level agreements will continue to work for & be managed by the 34 Local Authorities to which they report to & work for - I believe that such agreement expires in 2025 , apparently the average age of such workers is 49 !

Their terms & conditions remain unchanged - such workers are Irish Water employees but are effectively seconded back to the local authorities , the bonus system applies only to the 400 staff directly employed by Irish Water.

An absolute dog's dinner !


----------



## Marion (20 Nov 2014)

I really can't fathom people's difficulty with providing a Pps number.

I collect these from every one of my students - approx 180 of them every single year. In total my colleagues and I will collect close to 400 PPS numbers each year. 

Some people do not want to pay for anything. They have a huge sense of entitlement. So be it. But I don't wish to reduce my standards as a consequence.

There are many of us who have signed up to pay  800,000 out of 1.3 m and I have no regrets. 


I would like  to see an equal sharing of the expenses incurred in running the country.

There are those who will never contribute to anything but I will not stoop to their level.

Marion


----------



## blueband (20 Nov 2014)

Marion said:


> I really can't fathom people's difficulty with providing a Pps number.
> 
> I collect these from every one of my students - approx 180 of them every single year. In total my colleagues and I will collect close to 400 PPS numbers each year.
> 
> ...


yeah but you no longer have provide your PPS number now....turns out its not really important anymore!   you couldn't make this stuff up


----------



## Marion (20 Nov 2014)

Whatever! PPS  or no PPS

The fact still remains that some people will always ride on the backs of others.

Marion


----------



## Delboy (20 Nov 2014)

blueband said:


> yeah but you no longer have provide your PPS number now....turns out its not really important anymore!   you couldn't make this stuff up



The PPS was important when they were basing the free water allowance on the numbers per house. But that reasonable approach has been chucked because of pressure from a small minority who shouted loudest


----------



## Ceist Beag (21 Nov 2014)

Marion said:


> I really can't fathom people's difficulty with providing a Pps number.
> 
> I collect these from every one of my students - approx 180 of them every single year. In total my colleagues and I will collect close to 400 PPS numbers each year.
> 
> ...



Well said Marion. I think those still protesting will be more easily categorised from this point on, primarily I would imagine as the "won't pay because water is a human right" type group. Personally I'm still not happy with the quango that is Irish Water and would prefer we weren't carrying such a bloated burden on our public finances but unfortunately the conversation has not focussed on this enough yet due to all the furore over the rates. I certainly feel that everyone should pay for (and as a result should appreciate) the water they use, not just tax payers.


----------



## Purple (21 Nov 2014)

Marion said:


> I really can't fathom people's difficulty with providing a Pps number.
> 
> I collect these from every one of my students - approx 180 of them every single year. In total my colleagues and I will collect close to 400 PPS numbers each year.
> 
> ...



I agree completely.


----------



## Purple (21 Nov 2014)

Duplicate post


----------



## Purple (21 Nov 2014)

Deiseblue said:


> Delboy , the local authority workers under service level agreements will continue to work for & be managed by the 34 Local Authorities to which they report to & work for - I believe that such agreement expires in 2025 , apparently the average age of such workers is 49 !
> 
> Their terms & conditions remain unchanged - such workers are Irish Water employees but are effectively seconded back to the local authorities , the bonus system applies only to the 400 staff directly employed by Irish Water.
> 
> An absolute dog's dinner !


When you say worker do you mean employee?
I presume there are contractors working for the Co. Councils who are "workers" but not employees.


----------



## blueband (21 Nov 2014)

Delboy said:


> The PPS was important when they were basing the free water allowance on the numbers per house. But that reasonable approach has been chucked because of pressure from a small minority who shouted loudest


but the free water allowance is hardly relevant anymore given the amount of properties that wont have water meters and therefore wont have to conserve water! also if the small minority you speak of is actually so small, then how come the government caved so much?


----------



## Delboy (21 Nov 2014)

blueband said:


> but the free water allowance is hardly relevant anymore given the amount of properties that wont have water meters and therefore wont have to conserve water! also if the small minority you speak of is actually so small, then how come the government caved so much?



No back bone


----------



## Leo (21 Nov 2014)

blueband said:


> but the free water allowance is hardly relevant anymore given the amount of properties that wont have water meters and therefore wont have to conserve water!



The free allowances weren't dependent on the installation of meters.


----------



## Imperator (21 Nov 2014)

Marion said:


> I really can't fathom people's difficulty with providing a Pps number.
> 
> I collect these from every one of my students - approx 180 of them every single year. In total my colleagues and I will collect close to 400 PPS numbers each year.......
> ........
> ...



Hi Marion,

One good reason not to hand in a PPS number is if the organisation is incompetent. In the last couple of years a number of organisations contacted me to say that my personal data had been compromised. I was one of the Bord Gais customers who received a letter stating that my data was on a laptop that had been stolen. I seem to recall getting a similar letter from the IBTS. If there is no solid argument to hand over private data then why do so?


----------



## michaelm (21 Nov 2014)

sahd said:


> The free household allowance has been removed - that's why PPS numbers no longer needed. All along they said the PPS was needed to apply for the free allowance.
> The removal of the free allowance was hardly mentioned by anyone as far as I can see. The Govt say they have cut the unit  rate - but didn't mention that the first 30k litres is no longer free.
> Before these changes it would have been possible to get no bill for water if you used less than 30k  ... now that isn't possible.


I hadn't realised that they dropped the 30k household allowance.  It would have been unlikely that many would have used less than the 30k (82 litres/day) allowance, therefore avoiding a bill, given that the average usage in Germany is 122 litres/day and in the UK it's 150 litres/day.


----------



## flowerman (21 Nov 2014)

Anyone remember all the personal medical records that were found in the landfill site in Wicklow some years ago.

Things like that dont sit well with people when it comes to personal information and people will allways remember screw ups like that.

I think IW are allready sunk,excuse the pun there.


----------



## cork (20 Aug 2015)

Why are meters being installed that may not be used for 10 years?


----------



## Conan (20 Aug 2015)

They will at least help to identify where some water leaks exist.


----------



## Leo (20 Aug 2015)

Any meter being installed will be used immediately. I wish I had one as I think I'd come in under the cap, and so pay less.

They've also helped a lot of people, including users on here identify massive leaks within their properties. Left unchecked, those could result in very significant structural issues.


----------



## demoivre (21 Aug 2015)

Leo said:


> Any meter being installed will be used immediately.



My meter was installed last October but my bills have been at the flat rate. I also registered last January which was acknowledged. On the first bill they thanked me for registering and billed me at the flat rate. No "thank you for registering" on the second bill and I was billed at the flat rate. Irish Water surpasses Eircom and Vodafone for incompetence, and that's saying something.


----------



## Leo (21 Aug 2015)

demoivre said:


> Irish Water surpasses Eircom and Vodafone for incompetence, and that's saying something.



It is pretty depressing how badly they seem to be taking every opportunity to mess up.


----------



## blueband (22 Aug 2015)

look at it this way, the more they mess up the quicker they go belly up,  ....let them at it.


----------



## Leo (24 Aug 2015)

blueband said:


> look at it this way, the more they mess up the quicker they go belly up,  ....let them at it.



Personally can't see that happening.


----------



## blueband (25 Aug 2015)

Leo said:


> Personally can't see that happening.


you may be right....but the only way now irish water can stay afloat, excuse the pun, is for it to receive huge subsities from the government every year so just like throwing good money after bad really. They are massively overstaffed and less than 50% of people are paying the charge, even in the unlikely event of that reaching 60 or even 70% it will still be a operating at a very substantial loss year on year. how long more can they keep it on life support?


----------



## Firefly (25 Aug 2015)

I was amused at the level of public outcry regarding water charges. Surely, I thought, property tax, the USC and bin charges (which are all higher) would have been resisted to a greater degree. We recently had our IW meter installed. I was chatting to the installer who said that the areas where they were encountering the greatest resistence where those areas in which a lot of people were used to getting everything for nothing....no bin charges, no property taxes, no USC, welfare and medical cards. 

For what it's worth, I think IW is here to stay whether, fully funded by those paying the charges or by state subsidy. I also believe that over time, more & more people will start paying, especially when the bills start including ever-growing arrears.


----------



## Leo (25 Aug 2015)

Firefly said:


> I was chatting to the installer who said that the areas where they were encountering the greatest resistence where those areas in which a lot of people were used to getting everything for nothing....no bin charges, no property taxes, no USC, welfare and medical cards.



The 'I already pay my taxes' brigade!


----------



## Firefly (25 Aug 2015)

Leo said:


> The 'I already pay my taxes' brigade!



Except they don't (apart from VAT and excise duties)!


----------



## blueband (25 Aug 2015)

Firefly said:


> I was amused at the level of public outcry regarding water charges. Surely, I thought, property tax, the USC and bin charges (which are all higher) would have been resisted to a greater degree. We recently had our IW meter installed. I was chatting to the installer who said that the areas where they were encountering the greatest resistence where those areas in which a lot of people were used to getting everything for nothing....no bin charges, no property taxes, no USC, welfare and medical cards.
> 
> For what it's worth, I think IW is here to stay whether, fully funded by those paying the charges or by state subsidy. I also believe that over time, more & more people will start paying, especially when the bills start including ever-growing arrears.


Well you can be almost be sure it will be mainly by state subsidy, whether its here to stay or not only time will tell. we do have an election coming up!.. interesting time ahead for sure.


----------



## so-crates (31 Aug 2015)

Ah yes, we have an election due before May next year and plenty of people who think that their chosen political representatives will give them what they want. Won't happen.


----------



## Purple (31 Aug 2015)

so-crates said:


> Ah yes, we have an election due before May next year and plenty of people who think that their chosen political representatives will give them what they want. Won't happen.


The people who want to pay for nothing will continue to pay for nothing. That's what they want and that's what they will get.


----------



## Leper (1 Sep 2015)

Purple said:


> The people who want to pay for nothing will continue to pay for nothing. That's what they want and that's what they will get.



Great Stuff! That's always the way it has been; ask anybody working in the Dept of Social Protection or any other government Department.


----------



## so-crates (1 Sep 2015)

Purple said:


> The people who want to pay for nothing will continue to pay for nothing. That's what they want and that's what they will get.



 Unfortunately true. Though the problem with expensive promises is that they don't get any cheaper with time. As amply demonstrated by Syriza, they might start out shelling out the goodies to the <ahem> deserving voters that voted them in on a platform of "everyone pays except us" but when push comes to shove they'll have to face facts ...


----------



## Firefly (1 Sep 2015)

Purple said:


> The people who want to pay for nothing will continue to pay for nothing. That's what they want and that's what they will get.



I think that's why I like the concept of a Basic Income - at least we'd all get something!


----------



## Gerry Canning (3 Sep 2015)

On reading the threads I pick up too much bashing of the won,t pay people.
I think too much play is put onto the perennial (entitlement) brigade , who I agree, will not willingly pay for anything.

If as it appears, 50% of people have not paid and we have 10% unemployment ,then surely a substantial % of non payers are bona-fide taxpayers.

This large cohort are not stupid; and in the cack handed way Irish Water has been handled ,have logically decided to withhold payment.

For my own part the most grating thing was calling the e100 bribe a conservation grant grr!!; @ best it insults my brain cells. @ worst it makes me wonder is Irish Water for real ?


----------

