Government fails yet again to communicate with the public

Ever since a Sunday paper splashed with the speculative story that customers would be paying €300 for their water metres, the Government’s efforts at introducing a new water charge have been appalling.

First they failed to hamstring the Sunday Times’ journalist by saying no detail on water charges could be confirmed before Tuesday’s cabinet meeting. Instead they let householders panic for nearly 48 hours that somehow, they were now expected to find €300 to pay for a water meter — before they ever started paying for a drop of water consumption.

They also provided the spark to ignite a political spat between Labour and Phil Hogan’s environment department, with the former fuming that such a decision had not been rubberstamped as it had not been signed off by the Cabinet.

And now, after unveiling Bord Gáis as the saviour of the Irish water infrastructure, we are left feeling distinctly suspicious about the “analysis” which led to Bord Gáis being chosen. The lack of figures is disturbing.

In the words of Independent TD Stephen Donnelly, we are being told that the awarding of “the most incredibly lucrative monopoly to a semi-state body” took place “without that body having done the due diligence, without having gone through a competitive tender to say what it will cost, what they will run it for and what we will have to charge people for”.

Sources who took part in the “analysis” process said all interested parties, namely Bord Gáis, Bord na Mona and the National Roads Authority, had to answer written questions from the Department of the Environment, NewEra, and the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources.

But instead of focusing specifically on how much they would run Irish Water for and what they would charge people for water, the questions centred around “money borrowing power, legal governance of Irish Water, asset management, staffing, and marketing and communications”.

Once these were answered, the parties then had to make a presentation and take part in Q&A sessions.

It was this apparent lack of focus around pricing models that has left the debate wide open to opposition party claims that consumer value for money is not driving the project.

Furthermore, the same source said it is incredibly difficult for any party to put a cost on the upgrading of the country’s pipe network and the operational costs of running Irish Water, as a centralised register detailing the full extent of the country’s leakage problem does not exist.

The €1.2bn annual figure that is being used is nothing more than an estimate that comes from estimations from the country’s 26 local authorities, he says.

Additionally, as the upgrading of the water system is to be done in tandem with the metering project, there is going to be a raft of objections to paying for water when water supply is not reliable in many areas. Take Celbridge and Maynooth in Co Kildare, where the supply was halted, in some cases, for up to 48 hours in recent weeks due to a leaking mains pipe. Imagine trying to take money from people in this area who are buying bottled water to drink and wash with?

Hardpressed consumers now also have their backs up over the lack of clarity about the likely annual costs. Meter installation costs aside, if non-domestic metering already brings in €200,000 per year, we need to raise €1bn from 1.3m households. Cursory deductions will have us looking at annual bills of about €750 per year which is frighteningly expensive — and politically explosive.

For that reason, Mr Hogan has alluded to some central financing being necessary.

And then if things don’t look bad enough, the ever cheerful Senator Shane Ross has rightly kicked up a fuss about the Government raiding the National Pension Reserve Fund to the tune of €450m to fund the metering installation programme. It’s believed the State is borrowing from that fund at a rate of at least 6% — if as is mooted we pay €40 in standing charges for the next 20 years.

This interest rate, which will be repaid by the taxpayer in the form of the standing charge, is staggering and in direct contrast, in the words of Mr Ross, to the way the banks were diverted money from this fund.

And then we had the Taoiseach yesterday saying there was unlikely to be any job losses in the local authority water services division with the creation of Irish Water. How you can create an efficient new model while retaining all local authority positions?

The Department of the Environment has learned from the septic tank and household charge debacles that the success of the water charges system is largely built upon the clarity of its communications — the same clear message needs to come from Irish Water and the Government. That message needs to be black and white and conjecture needs to be wiped from the equation. So far, they are failing — again.