Pathetic SIPTU leaders statement on water charges which is for a - TopicsExpress

Pathetic SIPTU leaders statement on water charges which is for a more reasonable charge. Most SIPTU members will not agree with this statement and would want the charges scrapped. We already pay through taxation! At its monthly meeting today (Friday 24th October), the National Executive Council of SIPTU agreed the following statement on the issue of water charges. 1. The Government must take a step back and rethink its approach on the way it is implementing the water charges regime. It must defer the payment which is due in the Spring of 2015 and develop a way of providing for the new investment that is required over the next number of years to fund the provision of a high quality treated water supply in a way that commands a reasonable degree of acceptance, while retaining it in public control and ownership. 2. The new approach must offset the cost of an adequate supply of treated water to meet each household’s normal domestic needs, while preserving the incentive for conservation. 3. We believe that the Refundable Tax Credit option, which would cost less than €350m per annum, is the best approach, thus far at least. 4. As it stands, and in the absence of such a rebalancing measure, the proposed charging structure is profoundly regressive and inequitable. This is because, whereas people’s normal need for water doesn’t vary greatly, the impact of the charge affects those on lower to middle incomes to a much greater degree in relative terms than the wealthy. The plain fact of the matter is that there are far too many people who simply cannot pay, and too many more who will find it extremely difficult to do so. 5. If the Government does not adjust its approach, we will seek engagement with others in the trade union movement, as well as relevant civil society organisations, with a view to developing an agreed policy solution to provide for the necessary investment in the water supply in a manner that retains it in public ownership and control and conducting a campaign on that basis. 6. Abolishing charges and reverting to the general taxation system will not mean that people pay less. In fact, it will mean paying more through increased taxation or further cuts in public services or both.* Indeed, we will pay more still for the water we use, because in the absence of measures to incentivise conservation, we will also be paying for the amount that others waste. 7. A campaign that does not identify a clear policy solution could open the avenue for privatisation of this essential public utility, notwithstanding what the law says, or the declared commitments of the main political parties.** This could come about by reason of the inability of Irish Water to collect the revenues necessary to enable it to remain solvent as a commercial entity. This, in turn, would open the way for the introduction of private money to the detriment of necessary investment in favour of profit taking, as occurred in Eircom. 8. The privatisation of the domestic refuse collection service provides a salutary lesson. Everyone now pays the domestic waste charge, but it goes to swelling the profits of private operators. Thousands of people on lower incomes whose charges were waived now have to pay the full cost. Meanwhile, the terms and conditions of employment in the service have been reduced to deplorable levels. 9. We also call on everyone to refrain from all forms of attacks and intimidation of workers. These cannot be condoned or defended in any circumstances. *See point 3 of “Background notes” attached. ** See point 4 of “Background notes”. Background Notes to SIPTU NEC Statement on water charges 1. We recognise the need for new investment on a very significant scale over the next number of years, if a proper public water supply is to be maintained and developed. That is why, through our participation in the original “Right2Water” campaign, which has been underway under the auspices of the European Public Services Union (EPSU) since 2009, we have advocated the creation of a democratically controlled “Water Authority” to co-ordinate the activities of the Local Councils in the provision of this essential public good. 2. The problem with the “Water Authority” approach is that its establishment would have entailed loading all the costs on the State balance sheet at a time when exchequer resources were most severely restricted. (It is understood that this would run to about €625m in 2014 and €850m in 2015, and beyond, which would affect the calculation of the deficit and require additional taxation or public expenditure cuts or both). Irish Water, as a fully publicly owned commercial utility provides a solution. 3. The Government has set a target deficit of 2.7% of GDP in Budget 2015. This amounts to €5.3 billion. The reason for this is that it is a requirement of EU rules as well as the Memorandum of Understanding that was agreed by the previous Govermment with the Troika that the deficit would be reduced to below 3% of GDP. Apart from this, it is critical to ensuring that we can borrow at sustainable rates for the future. If a water charges system does not go ahead then next year an additional €850 million will go on the State balance sheet. This will increase the deficit to over €6 billion or 3.1% of GDP. In order to get it back down towards 2.7% there will have to be additional tax increases or public spending cuts, or a combination of both, equal to about €800 million. 4. We are alert to the potential danger of the privatisation of Irish Water. However, the legislation which provided for its establishment prohibits it. Moreover, all the major political parties in the state, Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil, Sinn Fein and Labour have declared their opposition to its privatisation. We intend to ask them to reiterate this commitment in their election manifestos and to publish their responses to this request.