46 thoughts on “De Thursday Papers

  1. Sheik Yahbouti

    So, Water Committee now publicly exposed as no more than a fig leaf/time wasting exercise by FG, since they now intend to ignore its findings. There’s a shock. Time to get rid of these mendacious bums.

    1. Daisy Chainsaw

      Doesn’t bode well for any other committees/conventions etc if the weeks and months of work and money spent are just going to be ignored.

    2. dav

      fg acting as if they are in power – meehole will put a stop to it soon enough and torpedo coveney’s leadership chances in the process.

  2. martco

    Deliveroo gig economy “modern contract” scumbags

    really surprised they managed to get a foothold over here given their reputation

    I won’t use them anyway

  3. Mickey Twopints

    “It is unclear why Mr Kenny chose to publish the Fennelly report – which was received by the Department of the Taoiseach on Friday evening before being examined by Attorney General Maire Whelan – today, the same day as his long-planned meeting with Ms Merkel.”
    – Fiachra O Cionnaith, Irish Examiner

    Any ideas? Anyone??

  4. Harry Molloy

    I can’t for the life of me understand how or why there could be opposition to charges for excessive water use.

    It’s irrational and is a lot more to do with gaining political advantage rather than doing what’s right.

    1. bisted

      …there’s an anti-water charges march this weekend Harry…if you drop along to that and speak to a few participants I’m sure they’ll be happy to explain their opposition to charges…

      1. Harry Molloy

        I’m sure I’ll here lots of new points of view :-)

        It’s reached the stage where there are no longer any water charges (which is a victory for the campaign) UNLESS there is excessive use.

        What is now been said is to fill your swimming pools and don’t bother fixing those leaks, waste as much as you like, which is a lot different to the original protests about another monthly or bimonthly bill.

        1. bisted

          …only two points of view Harry, you are either in favour of initiating a regime to make an additional charge for water or you are against…over two thirds of the people elected at the last election were against additional water charges and as point out, their campaign has been successful and the water charges are abolished…

          1. Harry Molloy

            Don’t think it’s always so black and white.

            Was talking to colleagues about this this morning. Many were against water charges but don’t have a problem with charges for excessive use.

            I always favoured moderate charges to contribute to the upgrade of the system firstly but secondly, and perhaps most importantly, to reduce wastage and ensure the polluter pays.

            And from my experience, a lot who opposed my first reason would support my second.

            So I don’t think it’s a simple for everyone as being for charges for additional water or not.

          2. Topsy

            Harry- with the auld – I was talking to colleagues & a lot of people – argument. This argument usually applies when there is no real evidence.

          3. Nigel

            Pretending that it’s that straightforward is almost guaranteed to ensure that the actual water situation only going to get more and more messed up, however it works out politically.

        2. martco

          Standing back from it a bit Harry

          I think very few of us anymore trust in Leinster House and the business of politics. Lies, fudges, euphemisms, incompetences, misdirection, self-interest, dynastic, stuff that makes CJ Haughey seem normal ….ah the list goes on you know what I mean.

          I think what we witness today is that social media and modern comms has made it possible for joe public to actually see inside what’s going on and make judgements for ourselves unlike previous times perhaps.

          My father does things like pay up when he’s told, why, because he trusts the government. Yet when I ask him WHY he trusts them he can’t answer that. It’s a faith almost. Unacceptable.

          I’ll see you on the march maybe! Weather is supposed to be very nice for the day.

          1. bisted

            …well Harry…you seem very late to this discussion but you’ll be relieved to hear that the majority of people are opposed to paying an additional charge and it is to be abolished. Your opinions seem to be informed by mainstream media which has been shown to be slightly biased in favour of charges…some people even argue that elements of the media have a vested interest in imposing water charges…up to the point of privatision!
            All very far-fetched I know but fear not…the will of the people has prevailed and the charges are gone…rejoice in the triumph of democracy Harry…

          2. Steve

            The will of the people also produced brexit and in america’s antiquated college electoral – trump.

            Rejoice indeed.

          3. Happy Molloy

            I’m well aware of all you have said old boy, and the protests and resulting election results against universal water charges certainly was democracy in action which is a fine thing. I don’t believe, however, that everyone’s understanding of what you are calling “additional charges” would be the same thing. And key to this is that charges for excessive use do not equal universal charges.

            It seems like a very happy compromise to me and compromise in a democracy is also a fine thing.

            So we’ll probably have to agree to disagree. Enjoy the march.

          4. MoyestWithExcitement

            Yeah Harry, I also like to imagine lots of people agree with my point of view when I can’t defend it with a coherent argument.

    2. classter

      Completely agree, Harry.

      I don’t even understand how opposing charges for excessive use is morally sustainable

        1. Nigel

          Witches can’t cross running water which is why we need water charges to make sure all the water is flowing properly through the pipes to keep the witches hemmed in.

          1. Sheik Yahbouti

            I agree, Nigel. This is a vital protection – ignored by this Government,. On another note, I presume Harry and his mates are entirely delighted with the proposed charge and/or ban on Joe Public harvesting rainwater for car washing, gardening etc., Conservation at its’ best :-D

        1. Harry Molloy

          Agreed, absolutely. But that’s so unlikely that it’s a complete red herring to even label it as an issue dav.

          1. MoyestWithExcitement

            Yeah? How many people are engaged in “excessive water use”, how much water are they “excessively” using and how is “excessive” use defined? I assume you’ll be able to answer those questions easily given your statement just right there about red herrings and issues that aren’t really issues.

          2. Harry Molloy

            I’m not putting forward a dissertation for challenge by my peers, nor am I going to add disclaimers, caveats and reference notes to any of my comments brother.

            These are just casual comments for the purpose of discussion on a casual comments section.

            I would also suggest that demanding sources and references any time someone has a differing point of view might even kill discussion on such a forum, so perhaps you might consider limiting that. (Of course, writing an actual column for the site is a different thing and does invite such challenge).

            This previous broadsheet post, which is by no means empirical evidence but is an interesting example, does highlight an instance when a water meter reading highlighted that a dwelling was leaking enough water to fill an Olympic swimming pool each week.

            I’m glad the meter picked that up.

            I’m less glad there is now no impetus to fix it and remedy the terrible waste.

          3. dav

            but it is the admitted reason for setting up IW in the 1st case! So it’s not a red herring at all.

          4. Sheik Yahbouti

            Agreed, Dav. Quite apart from the gravy bonanza aspect for those recruited IW’s own website initially revealed the plan for privatisation. This was the sole aim of the set up of the company.

          5. MoyestWithExcitement

            Also, Kelly “protected” it with a plebiscite ie; a vote that the government are under no legal obligation to respect.

          6. MoyestWithExcitement

            So you have absolutely no idea how many people are wasting water and no idea how much is being watsted but you’re happy to lecture others for being concerned with something that’s not really an issue, according to *you*. Right wing ideology is all you have you work with. Pity reality keeps getting in the way, eh?

          7. Nigel

            Not knowing how much of something is happening does not make it not an issue, it just means we don’t have the information to know how much of an issue it is. Since water conservation is part of the supposed purpose of water charges, it would seem crucial to know how much of an issue it is. While not doubting for an instant the cynicism of the pols waving ‘excessive use’ around, turning the phrase into scare-words to invoke the spectre of privatisation is just one more stupidity on top of everything else water-related.

      1. bisted

        …I love the smell of sanctimony in the morning…and having my moral fibre questioned by a paragon of virtue like classter (or cluster or whatever else you’re calling you these days).
        Everytime I hear the swimming pool argument I’m reminded of the catholic priest who had one in his back yard a few years back and used it to lure young boys that he sexually abused…what’s your moral position on that?

        1. Nigel

          Probably that the swimming pool wasn’t evil, the priest was, and that abusing children is more evil than owning a swimming pool, and that we are one muddled and mixed-up country because I’ve no idea what argument you’re trying to make other than that horrific story has, understandably, linked swimming pools and abusive priests in your mind.

  5. Ben Redmond

    I must say that the cover illustrations for The Spectator and the Times Literary Supplement are magnificent this week.

Comments are closed.