Water Charges 2 ??

There are various reports this morning of the 2nd coming.
RTE headlining with 'no plans to introduce' but then appear to be putting the case for introduction?!
I was in favour back in 2014 and would be again.
While this is probably Gov kite flying, there could be interesting times ahead.

I hope they are introduced. I've no problem paying for the water my family uses. I'm currently paying for the water multiple families use and I do have a problem with that.

Minister picks up his kite and runs back home.

Purple said:

I'm currently paying for the water multiple families use

Click to expand...

Could you elaborate on that?

If Gov is serious about this, they'll have to get moving as unpopular policies should be implemented in the beginning of term.
The biggest hurdle I see is the 100s of thousands of meters still to be installed. Any form of guesstimateing will be strongly resisted.
Also the ' We've already paid it with our motor tax ' brigade will once again be out in force?
I unfortunately think Gov will just kick this down the road, but I'd love to see them proving me wrong.

charlie007 said:

Could you elaborate on that?

Click to expand...

I pay a lot of income tax. That goes into the general taxation pot. Water is paid for out of that pot.

charlie007 said:

If Gov is serious about this, they'll have to get moving as unpopular policies should be implemented in the beginning of term.
The biggest hurdle I see is the 100s of thousands of meters still to be installed. Any form of guesstimateing will be strongly resisted.
Also the ' We've already paid it with our motor tax ' brigade will once again be out in force?
I unfortunately think Gov will just kick this down the road, but I'd love to see them proving me wrong.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately I agree with you.
I think that utilities such as water and power should be paid for by the consumer of those utilities. I don't think that water should be paid for through general taxation in the same way as I don't think food should be paid for through general taxation.

The government had a chance to bring the Irish people on board first time round, had it been approached with a focus on delivering a value for money public service, I believe they'd have gotten it over the line. It wasn't approached in that manner, we were being sold a pup. They'd be mad to try a round two on it and from the numbers I've seen in UK on impact on use from charges, it was not massive.

Specifically on the topic of 'excessive' use, eg people with leaks who don't get them fixed, I don't see the proposal from Irish Water of €250 a year to do much about that. And for properties with swimming pools or side hustles like cleaning cars, dog grooming, €250 isn't going to stop them. And I'd question how much revenue would be raised from it taking into account costs of monitoring, billing, metering etc.

It seems more like a fig leaf to tick a box of trying to curtail excessive use without actually doing anything about it.

The top 10% of domestic water users consume a whopping 35% of all domestic water.

That's the top 10% using a whopping five times more than the median household.



Points to leaks on property, horticultural use, leaky cisterns, etc.

A "heavy usage charge" would be great in my view.

odyssey06 said:

The government had a chance to bring the Irish people on board first time round, had it been approached with a focus on delivering a value for money public service, I believe they'd have gotten it over the line.

Click to expand...

I believe people were so angry with their own circumstances, that a backlash was inevitable no matter how they approached it.
We even had a referendum to abolish the Seanad rejected in an Anti Gov-Establishment mood.
Virtually every European country has some sort of water charge.
Its just a pity we will have to wait for another crisis for it to be foisted upon us by a Troika or something similar.
If only we could bring them back to make the tough calls and get our politicians of the hook?!

charlie007 said:

I believe people were so angry with their own circumstances, that a backlash was inevitable no matter how they approached it.

Click to expand...

A backlash maybe. But the level of the backlash, whether it was surmountable or not - that was a factor of the gombeen way they were introduced. As a jobs for the boys and get the debt off the books in the short term, with the consumer and public service dead last. They poisoned that well. It didn't have to be that way. They completely lost the trust of the public, and deservedly so. Absolute nonsense coming out of Irish Water who just saw Euro signs.

Same with the Seanad referendum. On the same day voters did back one of the referendums. It wasn't just a kneejerk anti Government vote. The Government had to make the case, they failed to do, through arrogance and incompetence.

Initially they need to name it properly and have a fixed fee which only applies after two warnings in relation to use.

Possibly call it a "wasteful use" fee.

Applied after given a 6 month notice of wasteful use in excess of 2.5 times the average household and no discernible reduction.

A "costing" of the excess use needs to be created and that used to cut the noise of the usual mouth pieces that will no doubt be against it

Eg. The cost of the excessive use is €600 - and Mr murphy asked why he is in favor of such an amount of taxpayers money being wasted by individuals and thus depriving councils of money to be spent on much need local facilities and housing?

odyssey06 said:

A backlash maybe. But the level of the backlash, whether it was surmountable or not - that was a factor of the gombeen way they were introduced. As a jobs for the boys and get the debt off the books in the short term, with the consumer and public service dead last. They poisoned that well. It didn't have to be that way. They completely lost the trust of the public, and deservedly so. Absolute nonsense coming out of Irish Water who just saw Euro signs.

Click to expand...

I have to disagree. Saying it was jobs for the boys could be attributed to all state agencies and more.
The real problem was that peoples anger and fear were fuelled with suggestions that once in, the rates would rise exponentially.
This could of course be said of any tax or charge.
Also the issues of charging and privatization were conflated with many not distinguishing between the two.
The original charges were quite modest and were really only going to affect heavy users.
There is a lot more people now who are in favour of such charges and they are inevitable in time.