Another General Election

[T McGibney]

However, Irish Water is borrowing on balance sheet so the Irish State can borrow on balance sheet, but at a much lower cost, to do exactly the same thing. It costs approximately twice as much money in Ireland per capita to supply water as it does in the UK, including in Northern Ireland where there is a similar geography and population density. Therein lies the answer to finding the several hundred million euro per year required for capital investment in the system."
Extract from Stephen Donnelly. DAIL.

So Donnelly wants the State, which is already indebted to the point of ruination, to borrow even more, with the taxpayer again left to meet the cost of repaying these additional borrowings.

 

[Firefly]

It is really a very minor issue for most people. A small decrease in Income tax / USC would offset the charges - but then the main Protestors might not get the benefit of this.

100% agree. Those most vocal about water charges are those used to getting everything else for free. Notice how it's become almost uncool to talk about water charges now? Most people agree that we should pay to protect water. It's just the usual case of a segment in society wanting the rest of us to pay for them yet again.

 

[monagt]

So Donnelly wants the State, which is already indebted to the point of ruination, to borrow even more, with the taxpayer again left to meet the cost of repaying these additional borrowings.

I am confused by the above. It all comes from the taxpayer in the end.

His point was the method and costs involved, maybe better to include it in the LPT after LPT is sorted out.(*ability to pay, city valuations, etc)

Maybe if Fine Gael allowed a proper debate in the DAIL on Water at the start we would have a different outcome today.

 

[T McGibney]

I am confused by the above. It all comes from the taxpayer in the end.

No, it doesn't. Hundreds of thousands of taxpayers don't use or have access to public water supplies. Hundreds of thousands of public water consumers don't pay taxes.

His point was the method and costs involved, maybe better to include it in the LPT after LPT is sorted out.(*ability to pay, city valuations, etc)

See above.

 

[monagt]

No, it doesn't. Hundreds of thousands of taxpayers don't use or have access to public water supplies. Hundreds of thousands of public water consumers don't pay taxes.
See above.

More Confused, I am

Hundreds of thousands of taxpayers don't use or have access to public water supplies. (Group Scheme or Wells, I presume, maybe the low LPT makes up some of the difference here and I won't mention the scourge of Ribbon Development here) also you miss out on the Fluoride poison.

Hundreds of thousands of public water consumers don't pay taxes. -> Name one (Every one pays Taxes)

 

[44brendan]

(Every one pays Taxes)

I think the point here was based on income tax rather than transaction taxes monagt. While everybody pays VAT and all motorists pay or should pay car tax these taxes are utilized in supporting the existing Gov spend and would be difficult to adjust to cover water infrastructure changes and repairs.
Neither piped water/sewage nor electricity are "god given rights" and have to be paid for (waste disposal would be another example). If central tax revenue needs to be allocated now to cover expenditure on water it means that either funds have to be diverted from other much needed areas or alternatively some element of tax needs to be adjusted upwards to pay for the services.
Without meaning to be in any way controversial on the issue it seems to me that it makes perfect sense to apply an appropriate charge to the user for these services. Obviously taking ability to pay into account.
FF have now stated that they are against the concept of "the user pays". They are perfectly entitled to take that stance but would need to put forward a properly costed and funded alternatively proposal which I have not seen (perhaps one is available!!!).

 

[monagt]

Everyone pays taxes.............. ............into ONE POT. (That why the Government was able to raid the National Pension Reserve, it was set aside but its really only a label)

For conservation purposes then have a meter and charge for use, by all means, is its about conservation. Its not, its a revenue generating game.
A better way would be to scrap LPT, call it a community charge and add it an item for water, garbage, councils and let people see what they are paying for and how much.
Lets keep the number of bills people have to pay as low as possible.

 

[T McGibney]

Hundreds of thousands of taxpayers don't use or have access to public water supplies. (Group Scheme or Wells, I presume, maybe the low LPT makes up some of the difference here

Maybe it does. But you tell me how LPT can be flexed in order to discourage wilful waste of potable treated water and I'll gladly concede your point. Incidentally group water schemes charge by metered use and such schemes saw consumers drastically cutting their water usage when usage-based charging was introduced.

and I won't mention the scourge of Ribbon Development here)

But you did. Look up the definition of ribbon development. It's an urban phenomenon and ribbon development homes in Irish towns and villages are usually connected to public water utilities.

Hundreds of thousands of public water consumers don't pay taxes. -> Name one (Every one pays Taxes)

This is a silly point. Huge numbers collect more in direct financial payments from the State than they pay in taxes.

 

[monagt]

Maybe it does. But you tell me how LPT can be flexed in order to discourage wilful waste of potable treated water and I'll gladly concede your point. Incidentally group water schemes charge by metered use and such schemes saw consumers drastically cutting their water usage when usage-based charging was introduced.

----> Until 2001, I was on GWS and paid water rates to Meath, no meter so it must be a new thing.

But you did. Look up the definition of ribbon development. It's an urban phenomenon and ribbon development homes in Irish towns and villages are usually connected to public water utilities.

----> And I thought it related to a string of Bungalows along a country road rather than in a village/town where services were more economical to provide.

This is a silly point. Huge numbers collect more in direct financial payments from the State than they pay in taxes.

-----> Ah Here, Perhaps they actually need the payments, then they pay a lot of back in indirect taxes, will agree there are a lot who should not be getting it but thats not the point.

Full Disclosure: I am not a supporter of FF, FG or Labour. (or AA/PBP etc)

 

[odyssey06]

Maybe it does. But you tell me how LPT can be flexed in order to discourage wilful waste of potable treated water and I'll gladly concede your point. Incidentally group water schemes charge by metered use and such schemes saw consumers drastically cutting their water usage when usage-based charging was introduced.

Please provide examples of wilful (that is deliberate, intentional, conscious, purposeful) waste of water by Irish citizens.
The figures that I have seen indicate an expected drop in consumption of 10% due to charging. I would not call that a drastic reduction, nor would I necessarily classify the additional 10% consumption seen without charges as 'wilful waste' as opposed to carelessness. Any claims for larger reductions usually include reductions due to leak repairs, which do not necessarily require a national charging structure for typical domestic water usage.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Similar specious argument could be made for funding electricity or gas charges through general taxation.
They are as necessary for human life as water.

This is rubbish economics.

The Irish tax base is too narrow. There are too few carrying the burden.

Talks should have concentrated on increasing taxpayer numbers by exploring ways to support meaningful job creation and reduce those relying on welfare.

They should also cast a cold eye on other matters.

The black economy undermines legitimate business. That and criminal activity, at all levels and in all forms, is fleecing the Irish State and its citizens.

If politicians are serious about reform, they need get over short-term expediencies, which cost more in the long run.

 

[odyssey06]

Similar specious argument could be made for funding electricity or gas charges through general taxation.
They are as necessary for human life as water. This is rubbish economics.

I think this thread has jumped the shark.
I'm sure you don't mean to suggest that human life only started with the ESB!
Humanity seemed to get along fine for 99% of their existence without electricity or gas
But you've been led to that conclusion but the contagious madness that is IW, which has now taken hold on the thread and refuses to release its grip.

 

[monagt]

I think this thread has jumped the shark.

- Agree, my last comment

I think this thread has jumped the shark.
I'm sure you don't mean to suggest that human life only started with the ESB!

Hold on.......I'm 99% electricity and need 3 charges per day

To summarise and a person can be in one or more of these groups.

FG, Labour, Taxpayer, Good Honest Virtuous Person beyond reproach, Religious = Pro Irish Water + Pro Water Charges

FF, SF, AAA/PBP, Marxists, Criminal, Tax Dodger, Sinner, Black Economy, Leninist, Social Welfare Freeloaders & Parasites, Trouble makers = Anti Irish Water + Anti Water Charges

E&OE

 

[Delboy]

-

FF, SF, AAA/PBP, Marxists, Criminal, Tax Dodger, Sinner, Black Economy, Leninist, Social Welfare Freeloaders & Parasites, Trouble makers = Anti Irish Water + Anti Water Charges

E&OE

I see Paul Murphy TD (c90k salary + very very generous expenses + gold plated pension) got his request for legal aid granted yesterday for his upcoming water protest/illegal detention legal case.
Only in Ireland

 

[monagt]

I see Paul Murphy TD (c90k salary + very very generous expenses + gold plated pension) got his request for legal aid granted yesterday for his upcoming water protest/illegal detention legal case.
Only in Ireland

How can this happen? Any legal eagles here who can explain this travesty?

He has income well beyond the average..............

 

[T McGibney]

----> Until 2001, I was on GWS and paid water rates to Meath, no meter so it must be a new thing.

2001 is 15 years ago.

----> And I thought it related to a string of Bungalows along a country road rather than in a village/town where services were more economical to provide.

The vast majority of these developments are on the edges of towns and villages, which are served by public water utilities.

 

[T McGibney]

Please provide examples of wilful (that is deliberate, intentional, conscious, purposeful) waste of water by Irish citizens.
The figures that I have seen indicate an expected drop in consumption of 10% due to charging.

You've just answered your own question.

 

[monagt]

2001 is 15 years ago.

--> Good with figures, eh.....

The vast majority of these developments are on the edges of towns and villages.

--> True, but you do but you see a lots of Bungalow Bliss houses lined along county roads

 

[monagt]

You've just answered your own question.

Not really, 50% of water is lost to leaks and equals the water they are going to take from the shannon.

Meters at every house is are not required required to identify the leaks so the meter money/IW/€80M consultancy fees should have been spent fixing them.

 

[T McGibney]

--> True, but you do but you see a lots of Bungalow Bliss houses lined along county roads

Doesn't alter my point though.