Why the Irish government is

not required to implement

water charges on households
Opinion: Missing from this debate is real scrutiny of the
EU Water Framework Directive
Fri, Nov 21, 2014, 00:01
Kathy Sinnott

Water protesters shout at Jan OSullivan TD Minister for Education & Skills as
she crosses the street outside Leinster House, Dublin on Wednesday.
Photograph; Dara Mac Dnaill / The Irish Times
Despite all that has been said about water charges three
very important issues have been strangely absent from
the debate.
First, the Government claims it must charge for
domestic water because it is required to in the EU water
framework directive. This is not true.
EU directives are binding. Member states must
implement them through national legislation. Article 9
of the water framework directive requires charging for
domestic water. There is one exemption. It is known
within the European Commission as the Irish
Exemption because it was won by the Irish and only
Ireland qualifies for it. It is found in article 9.4 of the
directive.
In 2000, the Irish government brokered this exemption
and the inclusion of article 9.4 which formally and
legally absolves Ireland and only Ireland from the
requirement to charge for domestic water.
This Bertie Ahern government stood up to Brussels and
insisted that the Irish people have the water they need
uncharged. Among other points it took great pains to
explain our water-soaked climate to officials from dryer
member states.
As an MEP I brought this to the public attention in 2008
when the last government was introducing water charges
for schools. On April 17th of that year minister John
Gormley stated in the Dil that The only exemption
available to Ireland, and availed of, is contained in
article 9.4 and relates to dwelling houses using water for
ordinary household purposes.
At that time I was assured by the EU Commission that
the Irish Exemption was ours to keep. Brussels could
not take it away. In fact it could only end if Ireland
cancelled it. This exemption belongs to us, the people of
Ireland. It protects us from having an essential resource
financially controlled by private or public interests.
Mass protests
The Irish people in mass protests across the entire
country have made it clear that we do not agree to
domestic water charges. Although the Irish Exemption
is not widely known, the Irish people in their absolute
rejection of water charges have also made it clear that
they do not agree with cancelling this valuable
exemption. Once gone this exemption is gone for good.
It is evident from our Governments actions and
statements that it is attempting to cancel this exemption
without our consent or knowledge.
Our Constitution
This contravenes our Constitution. All powers of
government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive,
under God, from the people, whose right it is to . . . in
final appeal, to decide all questions of national policy,
according to the requirements of the common good.
Water is unquestionably a primary requirement of the
common good. The EU water framework directive
informs our national water legislation. The directive
gives the EU control of all water in Europe. This includes
the water that falls from the sky, that flows in rivers,
springs and underground, water that fills our wells, lines
our coasts and stretches out to sea and presumably the
water that makes up 60 per cent of our bodies.
It is this claim to EU ownership of a God-given resource,
essential to humans, plants and animals which is so
dangerous. It allows government to act as if water is its
to control; to lease, to sell, to contract and tax.
Finally, the requirement of the directive to charge for
essential use of water in homes, schools, and hospitals is
based on the UN polluter pays principle. This is a false
premise when applied to the essential everyday use of
water.
This principle may be applicable for industrial
processing and those who abuse water by contaminating
and wasting it. But it is absolutely wrong to define in law
every use of water as polluting and to define anyone
who uses water as a polluter. We must have water. It is
a requirement of life. In fact our use of water is part of
natures water cycle which replenishes and refreshes
water. It is an insult to our human dignity to be deemed
a polluter because we wash or take a drink of water.
The Government cannot be allowed to cancel the hard
won Irish Exemption. Since the Government is not
acting on our behalf nor is it acting on behalf of the EU,
why and for whom is it trying to force us to pay for
water?
Kathy Sinnott was an MEP from 2004 to 2009 and
member of the European Parliaments environment,
public health and food safety committee
http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/why-the-irish-government-is-not-required-to-
implement-water-charges-on-households-1.2009288

How the failure of just a

single mains pipe would
knock out swathes of
Dublin's water
Irish Water is dealing with crumbling pipes
and sewers that have been untouched for
decades, managing director Jerry Grant
tells Paul Melia

Irish Water MD Jerry Grant in the HQ control room on Talbot

Street in Dublin
Paul Melia
July 31 2017
The failure of a single mains pipe providing water to the
capital would result in widespread restrictions for
households and businesses across Dublin city centre.
Irish Water has also warned that large parts of the city's
sewer system have not been inspected in more than 50
years, and that the flow of wastewater from the north to
the south of the River Liffey would be stopped if a single
pipeline collapsed.
In an interview with the Irish Independent, managing
director Jerry Grant said the utility needed a guaranteed
source of funding over at least a five-year period,
otherwise it would not be held "accountable".
But the Government has yet to commit to funding the
utility beyond 2018, and there is a need to spend 13.5bn
over the longer-term upgrading the network.
"We have to work on the basis that our five-year plans,
which are approved by the Government, will attract
committed funding at the appropriate time," Mr Grant
said. "If we say we're going to deliver all these things and
outcomes, and the money doesn't come through, there's
really no accountability on us.
"The point I'm making is if at some point the funding falls
off, it damages the programme but it also damages your
ability to deliver because the supply chain loses
confidence. We're trying to develop a supply chain to
match our needs. If we can't follow through, that supply
chain will disappear and go to other things."
Among the major concerns are the failure of "critical
assets", many of which were built by the British and
haven't been inspected or upgraded in decades.
Last week, more than 50,000 households and businesses
in the north-east were left without water after an asbestos
mains ruptured. Later in the week, the beach at Kilkee in
Co Clare was closed to swimming after the failure of a
pumping station.
"The biggest concerns have to be failure of critical assets,"
Mr Grant said. "We have so many old rising mains, old
pipelines and plants still that the kind of serious event that
we saw in the north eastyou can never rule that out.
"There are plenty of examples. Everybody knows about the
Vartry system. We would be very anxious still about the
pipeline between Ballymore Eustace to Saggart. We have a
pipeline to Swords that fails on a regular basis. We're
going to replace that, and the contract will start before the
end of the year. There are many other examples."

Residents at Termon Abbey in Drogheda queue for water supplied

by the council. Photo: PA
Failure of the Vartry Tunnel, which links the treatment
plant in Co Wicklow to the Stillorgan reservoir, would
leave 100,000 people in north Wicklow, including Bray
and Greystones, without water.
If a pipe from the Ballymore Eustace treatment plant in Co
Kildare fails, before planned additional storage and a
back-up pipeline is constructed, it would leave the capital
in "big trouble", he said. If repairs took longer than two
days, it would result in "considerable" restrictions in the
city centre.
"The main point is very few capital cities would be as
reliant as we are in the greater Dublin area on one river
(the Liffey) for a start, and a single pipeline from its main
treatment plant."
The utility said it needs to replace some 1pc of the entire
national pipe network every year at a cost of 200m. It
currently spends 70m.
There is also a "huge number" of small wastewater
treatment plants discharging raw sewage which will take a
long time to replace, while brick sewers running under
Dawson Street and Dublin city centre - most of which
haven't been inspected in more than 50 years - are
currently the subject of an indepth study to assess the
upgrade works required.
Mr Grant was appointed in June 2016, having served as
MD of RPS in Ireland and head of asset management in
the utility. He says he cannot rule out problems across the
network, due to the need for so much investment - at least
13.5bn over the longer term, with 3.5bn up to the end of
2021.
Upgrading drinking and wastewater treatment plants,
pumping stations and other assets just to keep them
operational will cost hundreds of millions of euro. In many
cases, they're temporary fixes.
"It's a huge dilemma for Irish Water," Mr Grant said. "We
have to balance how much upgrading we do to an old
asset, because a new one has to come in the next five or 10
years.
Performance
"We can only do so many schemes in the context of a
3.5bn spend out to 2021. We're going to spend at least
500m or 600m upgrading assets to get them fit for
purpose. We're hitting 300, 400 or 500 sites a year now
compared with 50 a few years ago. We're stopping things
from failing, and improving the performance of the broad
range of assets."
He said the creation of a national water utility should have
happened 20 years ago, given the pace of change in how
services are delivered.
"In terms of people and capability, we're significantly
down the road. We have a lot of knowledge about our
assets, and have systems recording and capturing our
assets and telling us the condition they're in.
"We're not as advanced in wastewater because it's much
more complex. We don't know the capacity of the sewers
or the condition of the sewers. Fixing that is a generational
challenge of at least 20 years. But we have the basis of a
utility. We're now gradually rolling out a single way of
working, and developing centres of excellence."
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/how-the-failure-of-just-a-single-mains-
pipe-would-knock-out-swathes-of-dublins-water-35983111.html

Councillor: Anti-water charges campaign not

to blame for crisis
Grinne McGuinness
29.07.2017

Members of the Defence Forces from Costume Barracks, Athlone

help locals fill their water containers in Rathoath, Co. Meath earlier
this week

A WORKERS Party councillor has rejected any suggestion that populism or

the anti-water charges campaign are to blame for the water crisis in the
Louth/Meath area.

Cork City Councillor Ted Tynan said that the many issues in the countrys
water and sewage infrastructure had its origins in decades of underfunding of
local government and key infrastructure.

He also pointed the finger at what he described as long-term tax

underpayment by big business in this country.

Speaking to the Evening Echo this week, former Bord Gis CEO John Mullins,
said the failure of Irish Water to secure its own funding outside general
taxation would lead to serious problems down the line.
While he did not directly blame the anti-water charge campaign he pointed out
that, as a result of the water charges debacle, water infrastructure would be
up against housing, health and other departments in the annual fight for
budget funding.

He suggested this made it almost impossible to plan the kind of multi-year

investment that our water network badly needs.

But Cllr Tynan holds an opposing view and said The Workers Party favoured
water costs remaining in the general taxation bundle.

We totally reject that argument, he said.

An elected Government should sit down around the cabinet table. They
discuss the issues health, education, housing and water infrastructure.

What they do then is produce a budget and if theres a shortage of money

then they increase taxation, tax the wealth in this country.

We live in a wealthy country despite the image given that the Government
have only so much money to play with.

They will not tax the wealthy people of this country.

Cllr Tynans view was the finger of blame should instead be pointed towards
those who allowed maintenance of the system to lapse in the past two
decades.

The severe deterioration in the countrys water and waste system did not
begin today or yesterday, he said.

This has been a process over many decades.

While the Workers Party and others were demanding the upgrade of this
infrastructure and proper spending on housing and local government groups
such as Cork Chamber, of which Mr. Mullins is a former president, were
demanding cutbacks and they were calling for tax amnesties and the
privatisation of publicly owned state companies.

It is these policies and not populism which got us where we are today.

Bill OConnell, current president of Cork Chamber, said he would not be

drawn into a discussion on past events, but reiterated the groups backing of
water charges.

The Chamber has always supported the introduction of domestic water

charges, he said.
Businesses have always historically been the only people paying for it and
we do have years of under investment. I think what we need to do is put some
kind of a secure funding stream together for our water system to be upgraded.

If we introduce domestic water charges and they are part of a funding model
it would go part of the way in solving the infrastructure problems we currently
face in Ireland.

An elected Government should sit down around the cabinet table. They discuss the issues
health, education, housing and water infrastructure.
What they do then is produce a budget and if theres a shortage of money then they
increase taxation, tax the wealth in this country.
http://www.eveningecho.ie/corknews/Councillor-Anti-water-charges-
campaign-not-to-blame-for-crisis-4a387625-2943-443b-8320-2150ab3c69b8-
ds#.WX9Ewkyj3-M.facebook
OLIVER CALLAN
Shambles over burst water pipe in
Louth and Meath is a wake up call
that our water system needs
investment
The near-hilarity of seeing citizens queuing up for water in 2017 in
scenes reminiscent of Third World droughts is proof the system is on
the brink
By Oliver Callan
27th July 2017
THE cluster-shambles over the burst water pipe in
Louth and Meath has exposed two horrible truths
about Irish Water.
First, the Fine Gael-Labour coalitions botched effort to set
it up has saddled the country with a donkey of a public
utility that has received hundreds of millions in tax money
but barely functions.

Local in Louth fills up his water container from a tanker

And second, no one seems to know how to fix our water
system without charges.
The near-hilarity of seeing citizens queuing up for water in
2017 in scenes reminiscent of Third World droughts is
proof the system is on the brink.
Pity the poor folks of Louth and Meath, but this weeks
crisis has been badly needed.
Its a wake up call. Our water system needs investment.
The reaction to the fiasco, from renewed calls for water
charges to protest noises from those against, shows the
whole Irish Water episode remains one of the most
misunderstood scandals in our history.
The reality is the public had quietly accepted charges after
the troika arrived and in the years up to Irish Waters
creation in 2013.

NOT KNOWN CLEAR WITH PICTURE DESK

4
By 2014, public rage erupted over the 80million bill for
consultants fees. Paying for water wasnt the cause of the
row, it was the feeling that citizens were really funding the
rip-off fees of consultants that bland term for the golf
club set close to Government who benefit whether the
country is booming or in deep recession.
Perhaps if the firm had been set up fairly and the issues
communicated effectively, namely that money would be
used for infrastructure rather than bonuses, things may
have been different.
The decision to spend time and money installing water
meters first was infuriating, not to mention the move to
award a contract for the job to a firm owned by a man
criticised in a tribunal report.
The storm erupted and the intensity of it meant there were
only two sides, pro and anti water charge.
What we really needed was a third way, a movement that
wanted our water service to improve through phased-in
charges, but by starting from scratch.
We needed a fair public company that would enshrine
State ownership and control of water services in law and
one that would prioritise providing a service over making
threats to errant customers.
We needed to develop a culture among citizens about
conserving water, from yelling at teenagers to shorten
showers to washing the car less frequently and caring
more about leaking garden pipes.
The threatening talk started again this week, with Minister
for State Damien English less than subtly saying the lack
of charges means more problems like the Drogheda leak
are coming.
He said: Irish Water needs to spend 15billion. They
need to spend it to ensure there are no more situations
like this, that was the reason for the introduction of water
charges.
Hes suffering from a mains leak himself. Where did he get
the 15billion figure from? Damien English, how ironic to
have a Minister named after a language I think he has little
aptitude for.
His barely sentient message makes it sound like Irish
Water doesnt exist.
The years of protests make it easy to forget how much the
firm has made since 2013, the 80million spent on
consultants in the end, and millions more besides.
Some 61 per cent of customers actually paid their bills,
netting the firm 110million.
So what has this well-funded beast actually been doing for
the last four years, besides paying its staff bonuses for a
service that leaves a whole region without water for a
week?
What are its 675 workers doing every day, especially now
that no bill has been collected for over a year while staff
levels havent reduced?
How come this cash-rich corporation didnt fix the water
main near Drogheda that they had been warned
repeatedly about? Water meters were installed
nationwide, a move we were told was essential to spot
leaks, like the one that happened this week.
Are they using meters to monitor problems elsewhere?
Lets not forget Irish Water knew about the Louth leak
since at least June 2016, and possibly earlier.
They must have known for 12 months that the 50-year-old
pipe would one day go completely, that it would be
complex to fix, yet they did nothing. Why? Because Irish
Water was born a donkey and it remains a donkey.
For all its PR and advertising spend, Irish Water isnt
communicating with the public on the crises we all face
either.
A third way on the water issue would highlight the domino
effect of under-funding the system.
Financing it through central taxation merely stretches the
budget for other areas such as education and health that
are already struggling.
Episodes such as the Louth burst pipe, where even the
emergency supplies had to be boiled by customers,
erodes trust in tap water further. This is driving people
towards bottled water and contributing to toxic plastic
pollution, which is now regarded as an environmental
crisis on a par with climate change.
The third way would also inform people about how raw
sewage is still being pumped into our waterways,
incredible for a wealthy country in the 21st century.
Last year the EPA identified 29 towns and cities that failed
to meet mandatory EU waste water treatment standards.
Effluent has been found on every beach in Dublin.
Sewage treatment plants in the capital are under
enormous pressure, resulting in leaks and failures that
contaminate swimming areas around the city.
Seapoint, regarded as one of the cleanest swimming
beaches in Dublin, has had two outbreaks of deadly E. coli
this year alone, yet mystifyingly still has a blue flag
fluttering over it.
The Louth pipeline problem is a sign of worse to come.
Ignore the Damien Englishes and the water protesting
Paul Murphys, we need a grown-up solution to our water
crisis.
There has to be another way, otherwise we will be
surrounded by oceans full of plastic and not a drop to
drink.
RTE lead the way on gender balance
RTE radio host Marian Finucane
THE gender pay gap at the BBC is grossly unfair and the
fallout from the debate at that very British institution has
now made its way across the Irish Sea.
The revelation by Sharon Ni Bheolain that she is paid
much less than Six One anchor and co-worker Bryan
Dobson shifted the focus to RTEs gender balance.
But the Beeb storm has no equal at RTE, where women
run the firm and where there is no scarcity of female talent
on huge salaries.
RTE is actually quite progressive in its balance of women
across the company.
The director general and the chair are both women and its
best on-air talent are also female, such as Claire Byrne,
Mary Wilson, Caitriona Perry and Martina Fitzgerald.
An argument sometimes made that women presenters are
dropped at a certain age while men are allowed to
continue doesnt stack up at RTE either.
Marian Finucane is 67 and the best paid female TV host
Miriam OCallaghan is 57.
Meanwhile, there are rumours Dobbo, also aged 57, may
be removed from the telly after 21 years and
shunted into radio.
Campaigners should maybe look closely at Today FM
where the primetime line-up is exclusively male and
mostly middle-aged.
Newstalk fares little better where a solitary woman, co-
presenter Sarah McInerney, features in its schedule.
Diesels staying power is doomed
BRITAINS plan to ban fossil fuel cars by 2040 is good
news but should come with a warning.
Governments must incentivise the move towards hybrid
and electric rather than disincentivise diesel and petrol.
In Ireland, like much of Europe, the State encouraged a
move towards diesel with lower taxes as it was seen as
the cleaner fuel.
It would be unfair and foolish for any government to
punish citizens who acted in good faith by levying
penalties on the vehicles they were asked to purchase.
Irelands electric car incentives lag far behind. There are
currently VRT reliefs on hybrid and electric but they should
be exempt from the horrible tax altogether.
Electric should also be exempt from tolls and car taxes
and parking should be free in congested areas like Dublin
city centre if cleaner air is what we are truly after.
The main problem with the death sentence for diesel is
that it gives Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe an excuse
to gather extra taxes in Budget 2018 under the apparent
guise of environmentalism.
They have already flown worrying kites about increasing
motor tax on diesel cars, reversing cuts that made most of
us buy diesel, and to bring excise duty in line with petrol.
The news from Britain already devalues the resale worth
of every diesel car in use and drivers would be rightly
miffed if they are hurt in the pocket further.
If what governments really want is cleaner air, they should
phase out the dirty fuels with incentives to encourage
more sales and use of electric and hybrid vehicles, rather
than look for a quick buck.
Planning is needed too because if, by 2040, all cars are
electric, where does that power for them come from?
Currently 45 per cent of Irelands electricity comes from
burning natural gas and six per cent from peat.
Removing fossil fuels from cars by ramping up their use in
power plants merely puts us back to where we started.
https://www.thesun.ie/news/1318214/shambles-over-burst-water-pipe-in-
louth-and-meath-is-a-wake-up-call-that-our-water-system-needs-investment/
Why the water charges never made sense and people rejected #Irishwater
Money Down The Drain - Why Water Charges Don't Add Up
Feb 20, 2016
If you do the mths, water charges don't add up...and here's why.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVEeCNWQtUw&feature=youtu.be
Alan Kelly said calls for referendum on water
privatisation was not necessary @PatKennyNT
Thankfully @JoanCollinsTD pushed it.
5.5bn? Or 8 billion? I'm at 8 billion. Minister is selling crackers.
medium.com/@beyourownreas
https: // #irishwater
on/how-many-times-are-you-goi ng-to-pay-for-irish-water-21a537134c8e#.micrjhfzb
The Government are under fire for holding back money for cash-starved
services and instead plunging the unspent budgets into refunding
households for the botched water charges regime.
Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe confirmed that 178m will be spent
on water refunds, potentially by the end of the year, a one-off spend
which will come from savings across departments.
However, questions have arisen over whether services and supports in
health, education and social protection among other areas will be
neglected to pay back over a million households.
Fianna Fils Barry Cowen has written to Housing Minister Eoghan
Murphy with concerns and warned that the refunds plan was a
surprise, a situation contrary to the Fine Gael-Fianna Fil confidence
and supply agreement.

In the letter, obtained by the Irish Examiner, Mr Cowen said: It was

therefore quite surprising to read that this funding is going to be found
from unspent monies this year or indeed excess income from tax
receipts.
It is also surprising to learn that unspent monies to that extent will be
found in 2017, given the extensive pressure on services and given that
the fiscal space was so very tight.
Mr Donohoe told the Oireachtas budgetary committee yesterday the
refunds would amount to 171m, while the process would cost 5m, and
the equalisation of group water schemes would be another 2m,
bringing the total to 178m.
Opposition TDs noted the total underspend in departments so far this
year was 322m, including 57m unused for capital projects. The
Government has confirmed the water refunds will come from this.
A mid-year expenditure report released yesterday confirmed there has
been a 21m underspend in health, a 56m underspend in social
protection, and education is 29m below profile.
Another 159m has not been spent across another 13 areas, the review
notes.
Opposition TDs at the committee, including Sinn Fins Pearse Doherty,
questioned whether projects would start later in the year and taking
their cash away would therefore cut services.
He also raised concerns that crucial monies could be taken out of capital
projects, such as housing, and be instead plunged into water charge
refunds.
Mr Donohoe confirmed he had received correspondence from health
about funding for homecare packages but he expected spending in that
department to come in on target, unlike other years.
But an increase in overtime for garda would have to be addressed,
committee members were told.
No departments had sought extra money, he said, and no services
would be cut to refund water charges, insisted the minister.
He defended criticism from opposition TDs: Many political parties said
water should be paid by general taxation. Thats what were doing now.
Were making it happen in a way that public services continue not to be
affected.
However, there are other questions. It remains unknown how
households some who paid over 300 will apply or be given their
refunds. Other commitments by the Fine Gael government on the back
of an Oireachtas report around fresh metering for newly built properties
and a referendum to keep water in public ownership have also still to be
explained. This was stressed by Green leader Eamon Ryan.
Mr Cowen has also questioned why money given to homeowners for the
so-called conservation grant but who did not pay their charges
cannot be recouped. His letter added: It beggars believe that there
seems to be no mechanism available to prevent people from keeping
the conservation grant even though they may never have paid any
water charges.
Households set to keep 100
water grant and get refunds
Those who live in a household of more than one person
will be entitled to 325
Mon, Jul 17, 2017,
Sarah Bardon

More than 190,000 people claimed the water conservation grant but did not
pay any of the five bills distributed by the water utility
Householders are unlikely to have the 100 water
conservation grant deducted from their water charge
refunds when the process of reimbursing Irish Water
customers begins in the autumn.
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has confirmed that people who
paid their bills are to have the money returned by the
end of the year, but the method of repayment, which is
expected to cost 170 million in total, has yet to be
decided.
The process is likely to begin in October, but those who
have moved home or changed address since the last
payments were sought may not have their money
returned by the end of the year. The Department of
Housing believes this will prove to be a logistical
nightmare and require additional time.
Householders who paid their five bills and lived alone
will be entitled to 200. and those who live in a
household of more than one person will be entitled to
325.
Government figures confirmed the water conservation
grant, distributed by the Department of Social
Protection, may not form part of the repayment scheme.
People will get water charge refunds before Christmas,
says Varadkar
Irish Water wants no public access to Stillorgan reservoir
site
Insufficient information in Irish Water's Vartry Reservoir
plans
The 100 grant was introduced in 2015 in what some
described as an attempt to entice people to sign up to the
billing system. The then government insisted it aimed to
encourage more considered use of water.
Both Mr Varadkar and Minister for Foreign Affairs
Simon Coveney have previously said they believe the
100 should be deducted from any repayment to those
who paid their Irish Water bills.
However, it is understood the Department of Housing
has been advised of potential difficulties in this regard
due to assurances given to the European Commission
that the grant and the charges were not associated.
More than 190,000 people claimed the grant but did not
pay any of the five bills distributed by the water utility.
Source of the money
The cost of the refund scheme is not expected to impact
on the budget for next year. An underspend in the
Department of Social Protection due to falling numbers
claiming jobseekers allowance is likely to be the source
of the money.
Fianna Fil has called for clarity on the process, and
criticised the Taoiseach for announcing the details of the
refunds scheme in an interview in the Sunday
Independent.
The partys housing spokesman Barry Cowen said the
Oireachtas had compelled the Government into
refunding householders.
The Taoiseach is bound to implement the
recommendations of the Oireachtas Committee on
Water Charges. He is not refunding people for any other
reason that the committee forced him into doing so.
Therefore it is the Oireachtas that should have been
informed of the process.
The legislation was due before the summer break, and
the Minister for Housing [Eoghan Murphy] advised us it
was not ready and we accepted it. Two days later it is
announced through the media.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/households-set-to-keep-100-water-
grant-and-get-refunds-1.3156928
Two weeks after the trial, the Irish Times accepts there may be something worth investigating in
Garda evidence in #JobstownNotGuilty.
Government cynically presents five year old corruption bill
as new in a bid to look busy
JULY 27, 2017

The government has resorted to

cynically re-announcing a pre-existing
corruption bill in a bid to make itself look
busy, Risn Shortall TD said today.
The co-leader of the Social Democrats
was commenting on the announcement
by the Minister for Justice that the
Criminal Justice (Corruption Offences)
Bill 2017 was discussed at cabinet
yesterday.
This Bill has been on the books since
2012 and it is cynically being re-
announced now in a desperate bid by
this government to make itself took busy
on the anti-corruption front. This is truly
a case of serving up old wine in new
bottles. What I would like to know is
why, five years after this promised law
was first announced, has it not
advanced any further?
It is being sold to us as a key piece of
legislation that will go a long way
towards meeting Irelands obligations
under a number of international anti-
corruption instruments, and to
addressing some recommendations of
the Mahon Tribunal.
But the Mahon Tribunal made its
recommendations in March 2012 and
this Bill was originally published in June
2012 (see Department of Justice press
release) and is already on the
governments current legislative
programme.
Deputy Shortall added:
To re-announce a five-year-old piece of
legislation is one thing. To back it with
resources needed to ensure successful
enforcement, detection and prosecution
is quite another. As we have seen from
the recent collapse of the trial of Sen
Fitzpatrick, our corruption and white-
collar crime laws only work if they are
matched by proper resources and
expertise.
The Social Democrats have
consistently called for the establishment
of a robust and fully resourced
Independent Anti-Corruption Agency to
tackle white collar crime and corruption
in the corporate world and political
spheres. In the absence of a dedicated
law enforcement agency, we will
continue to see fine laws on our statute
books which meet international
standards but which lead to few actual
consequences for corrupt behaviour.
ENDS
27 July 2017
https://socialdemocrats.ie/2017/07/27/government-cynically-presents-five-
year-old-corruption-bill-new-bid-look-busy/
'Expert Commission' vindicates the #Right2water campaign. http-
//www.right2water.ie/blog/water-commission-report-vindicates-right2water-
campaign #Irishwater #not1pipe #morningIreland #todaysor
SenatorMcDowell brings up more concerns about #Irishwater contracts and Denis O'Brien
#IBRC #not1pipe #vinb
This is the view right now from the Short Strand. Toxic fumes from the bonfire seen in the other
picture. Imagine having to endure this
Sick cunts is all they are.
Investing in the right to a home Housing, Haps and Hubs Dr Rory Hearne and Dr
Mary P Murphy pdf doc
https://www.maynoothuniversity.ie/sites/default/files/assets/document/Inves
ting%20in%20the%20Right%20to%20a%20Home%20Full_1.pdf
Last yr @campaignforleo said this. Yet today, lone parent told by DSP she couldn't move from
FIS to JST to start her nursing course.
Pat Flanagan: Gardai acting like a
private police force for Regina Doherty
Following the Jobstown false imprisonment scandal it now appears the gardai are
being used to stamp out Government criticism

BY PAT FLANAGAN
, 7 JUL 2017

Fine Gael's Regina Doherty at Leinster House, Dublin

Ireland sure is a strange country where Islamic terrorists

can slip in and out of the country unnoticed yet a woman
who criticises a Government minister on Twitter is stopped
at an airport by gardai.
We are all familiar with Turkish dictator Recep Tayyip
Erdogan's attempts to shut down social media to prevent
criticism of his regime, but it now appears this is happening
here.

The strange case of academic and blogger Catherine Kelly

who writes for the Jude Collins blog gets stranger and
more sinister by the day and was raised in the Dail by
Solidarity TD Ruth Coppinger yesterday.
Youd imagine the gardai would have enough on their plate
facing more than 20 separate investigations and inquiries
to even contemplate acting as a private police force for a
minister.
If this is all new to you its because this baffling case has not yet appeared
in what many now refer to as the mainstream media.

But this alleged incident has been bubbling under this past few weeks on
social media which is as feared as much by our own rulers as it is by Sultan
Erdogan.

Fine Gael's Regina Doherty

It began with the detention of Tyrone-born academic Catherine Kelly who
claimed she was recently approached by gardai when she arrived at Dublin
Airport.

After her identity was confirmed she was cautioned over posts on social
media and online articles about Social Protection Minister Regina
Doherty.

Apparently the issue related to her commenting on Minister Dohertys

alleged former business dealings involving a company which folded with
debts of 280,000.
Deputy Coppinger said the officers confirmed a complaint had been
made and she was cautioned not to tweet about Minister Doherty.

She added: She was told to sign a statement. Her name was obviously
given to the gardai by the airline.

She was told to sign a statement or she wouldnt be allowed to proceed

to the gate.

If what is emerging is true we are heading back to the days when Charlie
Haughey was using the gardai to tap journalists' phones who were
writing articles critical of the old crook.

In the Dail yesterday Ruth Coppinger told the house how Catherine
Kelly was stopped at the airport by plain clothes gardai who asked if she
uses social media and if she had written an article about Regina
Doherty.

This raises all sorts of scenarios because if the gardai threatened to

detain Ms Kelly without a warrant could this not amount to false
imprisonment or does this only apply to water protesters.

Can you imagine the officers on the case going to their superiors to
obtain a warrant to arrest a woman who allegedly wrote something of
concern to a Government minister?
Regina Doherty

Now that would really put us up there with Turkey.

Can you imagine the cops in any other country, outside of Turkey and
Russia, getting the passenger lists from the airline to intercept a blogger
for commenting on a minister?

The irony is that in recent weeks it emerged that Jihadis were travelling
in and out of the country without being detected.

Last Monday a spokesperson for Minister Doherty confirmed to

TheJournal.ie that a complaint had been made to gardai regarding a
political academic.

The spokesperson said: A complaint has been made to the gardai,

however it would be inappropriate to comment as Garda inquiries (are
ongoing) and a Garda investigation is under way.

Any individual has the right to make a complaint to the gardai should
they believe that they are being subjected to unlawful activity.

Sure they do Regina but this has nothing to do with criminality.

 The problem for Minister Doherty, and the gardai, is that allegations
like these are a civil matter and has nothing to do with the police, unless
of course you are using the force for political purposes just like Sultan
Erdogan and Charlie Haughey.

If there is an alleged libel there is a legal remedy available and dont I

know all about it.

When there are such draconian penalties for newspapers when they get
it wrong, or cant fully prove they got it right, is it surprising they are
reluctant to take on the rich and powerful.

In effect the media has been effectively gagged while social media can
still strike terror in those who would like to keep their dirty linen hidden.

We can only hope that the Islamic terrorists who are using Ireland as a
base write something bad about Regina before they travel overseas on
their bombing missions, thatll catch them for sure.

Fine Gaels Regina Doherty has slammed accusations of

her party conspiring with Fianna Fail to muzzle smaller
opponents in the Dail.
Green Party TD Catherine Martin today slammed
proposals to change the rules around talk time in the Dail.
She said: This is clearly a case of Fianna Fail and Fine
Gael conspiring to silence the smaller parties and to
muzzle the smaller parties.
Ms Martin suggested that the reason Fine Gael and
Fianna Fail want to have speaking times proportionate to
party sizes is because smaller parties like hers were
punching above their weight.
Appearing on RTEs The Week In Politics, she claimed:
We are not only holding government to account but we
are setting and leading the agenda.
From the Fine Gael corner, Social Protection Minister
Regina Doherty declared that the set speaking time was
undemocratic.
She said the Dail Reform Committee had previously
changed the rules around speaking times so that
independent TDs got a chance to have their say, but this
has had unintended consequences.
I represent a party of 50 TDs and we get exactly the
same speaking time in the Dail as a party of six TDs.
Thats not democracy... she said.
She added that under no circumstances was she trying
to reduce the speaking time of independent TDs like
Mattie McGrath or those in smaller parties.
Nobody is trying to reduce the speaking time that Mattie
has...or trying to block independed voices, radical voices,
whatever the other parties want to call themselves.
Ms Martin, however, blasted the move to change speaking
times in the Dail as a retrograde for democracy
I was not elected to speak for one and a half minutes on
Brexit, to speak for one and a half minutes on mental
health or education or whats happening with the Garda
Commissioner, so that is doing a disservice to the people
who elected us and its not respecting the people who
voted for a diverse Dail, she said.
Fianna Fail and Fine Gael need to accept that civil war
politics dominating the Dail is gone.
Fianna Fails Michael McGrath weighed in to back up Ms
Dohertys points, saying that each TD in a party had the
right to speak on behalf of their constituents.
Only Sinn Feins Carol Nolan was optimistic that a compromise on Dail
speaking time could be reached. She suggested one way would be to extend
debate time.

We feel that might be the way forward, so we would like to get opinions from
the other parties on that because its an issue thats not going to go away,
she said.

People Before Profit TD Richard Boyd has previously said the proposals were
a panicked reaction to the success of left-wing Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn.

http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/news-opinion/pat-flanagan-gardai-acting-like-
10754157.amp

Ministers criticised after

blogger cautioned by garda
The blogger wrote a post relating to Regina Doherty
6 Jul 2017

Ministers have been accused of using garda as their

personal police.
The issue was raised in the Dil this afternoon.
It follows the detention of a blogger while travelling through
Dublin Airport last week.
The blogger was cautioned over a post written in April this
year.
It was questioning the personal business dealings of the
Social Protection Minister, Regina Doherty.
A spokesperson for the minister confirmed earlier this week
that a garda complaint had been made, and could not
comment further.
Ruth Coppinger of Solidarity says the role of the garda is
sinister.
"In the blog she merely raised issues with the minister's
dealings in a bankrupt company in 2009.
"Is it now Government policy to attack anybody who criticises
anyone in the Government on social media in this very sinister
way?"

The new Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has spent the evening

mulling over who will go where in his Cabinet.
Mr Varadkar took office following a Dil vote and ceremony
with President Michael D Higgins earlier.
As the youngest ever Taosieach, as well as the first openly
gay one, the world has been taking notice.
As for his Cabinet, Seamus Woulfe will become the new
Attorney-General after Mire Whelan was appointed to the
Court of Appeal.
View image on Twitter

Follow
The Bar of Ireland @TheBarofIreland
Congratulations to Seamus Woulfe SC, Vice Chairman,
Council of The Bar of Ireland on his appointment as
Attorney General
5:10 PM - Jun 14, 2017
1 1 Reply 69 69 Retweets 140 140 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Charlie Flanagan moves to Justice, and Simon Coveney goes
to Foreign Affairs.
Mr Coveney will also have special responsibility for Brexit.
Paschal Donohoe will be the new Finance Minister - and will
double as Public Expenditure Minister - while Regina Doherty
will be Social Protection Minister.
Eoghan Murphy is to be appointed Housing Minister, while
Denis Naughten retains his Communications ministry.
Frances Fitzgerald is keeping her role as Tnaiste - but will be
moved to an Enterprise and Innovation portfolio.
Mary Mitchell O'Connor becomes a Minister of State with
special responsibility for Higher Education.
The Agriculture portfolio stays with Michael Creed.
Michael Ring is given a new role as Minister for Community
and Rural Affairs, which is being split off from the Department
of Arts led by Heather Humphreys.
While Shane Ross, Katherine Zappone and Richard Bruton
stay in the Departments of Transport, Children and Education
respectively.
Joe McHugh becomes Government Chief Whip.
Announcing his appointments, Mr Varadkar told the Dil his
was a Government that was prepared for a new generation.
Source: Department of the Taoiseach

Leo Varadkar has become the youngest ever Taoiseach,

after being given his Seal of Office by President Michael D
Higgins earlier.
The former Social Protection Minister also won the Dil vote to
be elected Taoiseach by 57-50 votes - with 45 abstentions.
He is also the first gay man to hold the office. His family and
partner Matt Barrett were in ras an Uachtarin to watch him
take office.
Leo Varadkar's family and friends, including parents Ashok and
Miriam with his partner Matthew Barrett, at Aras an Uachtarain in
Dublin to see him receive his Seal of Office as Taoiseach from
President Michael D Higgins | Image: Brian Lawless/PA Wire/PA
Images
World leaders have been reacting with congratulations, while
the global media is focusing on his sexual orientation.
The American Chamber of Commerce Ireland has welcomed
his election, with its President James OConnor saying: "There
is no doubt that the uncertainty of Brexit and a new US
administration means that Ireland has a more important role
than ever to play in the US-EU relationship.
"As the leadership voice of over 700 US companies with
EMEA and International Headquartered Operations in Ireland,
the American Chamber of Commerce looks forward to
constructively engaging with Mr Varadkar and his Government
on the issues of concern to the US FDI sector in Ireland".
Leo Varadkar is congratulated as he leaves Leinster House in
Dublin after he has been elected as Taoiseach | Image:
Rollingnews.ie
President of the European Council Donald Tusk, tweeting in
Irish, also sent his congratulations to Mr Varadkar.
He says: "Ireland is rightly admired for its strong economy;
vibrant and open society; and stalwart commitment to Europe.
"I want to assure you of the great sensitivity amongst your
partners in the EU27 to the challenge now facing the island of
Ireland after the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the
European Union in 2019.
"Addressing these unique circumstances is a priority for the
first phase of talks. Flexible and imaginative solutions will be
needed and I am fully committed to working closely with you in
this respect.
"I look forward to welcoming you to the European Council next
week where we will discuss security and defence; jobs, growth
and competitiveness; migration; and external relations."
View image on Twitter
Follow

Donald Tusk

@eucopresident
Comhghairdeas leis An Taoiseach Leo Varadkar
@campaignforleo. Is mise le meas
http://
europa.eu/!pY93UK

3:01 PM - Jun 14, 2017 Brussels, Belgium

 50 50 Replies 344 344 Retweets 668 668 likes
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Several global news agencies are also covering the story.
AFP runs with the headline: Ireland's first gay prime minister
enters office.
It says: "Although regarded as relatively liberal on social
issues such as gender equality and abortion rights, Varadkar
has been criticised by opposition parties for his right-wing
economic views."
Reuters also focuses on Mr Varadkar's sexuality, saying:
Ireland elects first gay prime minister Leo Varadkar.
The article says: "Despite inheriting Europe's fastest-growing
economy, he will face immediate challenges in the shape of
neighboring Britain's exit from the European Union, a political
crisis in Northern Ireland and a housing crisis at home."
But in a second piece by Reuters - featured in The New York
Times - it looks at his Indian roots, featuring the headline:
Immigrant's Son Becomes Ireland's Youngest PM.
Britain's The Guardian says one of the first world leaders Mr
Varadkar plans to call is Theresa May, while also focusing on
the issue of the 8th amendment.
The Telegraph headline reads: Ireland elects first gay prime
minister Leo Varadkar - with the piece talking about his
career, personal life and questioning his longevity in the job.
While the UK's Gay Times magazine is also running the story,
saying: Ireland now officially has its first ever openly gay prime
minister.
It notes that Mr Varadkar joins Luxembourgs Prime Minister
Xavier Bettel as the only other openly gay world leader
currently serving.

http://www.newstalk.com/Ministers-criticised-after-blogger-cautioned-by-
garda
New Minister for Social
Protection will continue
crusade on welfare fraud
Regina Doherty was speaking to Newstalk Breakfast about
her plans for the new position
15 Jun 2017

The newly appointed Minister for Social Protection and

Employment said she will be following through with
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar's mission to clamp down on
welfare cheats.
Speaking to Newstalk Breakfast, Minister Regina Doherty said
"anybody who's claiming money that they shouldn't be
claiming that would deny other people who should be claiming
the money is obviously going to be a priority".
"I think it's interesting that every single TD yesterday from the
left stood up and challenged the Taoiseach over that [welfare
fraud] campaign when it's defrauding money from the state,"
she said.
"There's nearly an acceptance by the left that if it's vulnerable
people that are doing it we should turn a blind eye to it."
She added that she was "very excited" the new role, saying
her main aim was ensuring that money is made available to
those who need it most.
"The Taoiseach said to me that I need to make sure that any
budgets that we have in the future are progressive," she said.
Yesterday, Varadkar announced his Cabinet in full, which
meet today for the first time.
http://www.newstalk.com/Ministers-criticised-after-blogger-cautioned-by-
garda
ReginaCops #ReginaDoherty @NewstalkFM @FineGael Soon we'll have 'a policeman on every
street'... checking your Twitter a/c!
Will the @thephoenixmag or @BrendanHowlin be getting Gardai calling to their homes or
stopped at the airport ? For queries about Regina?

Leo Varadkar wants Jobstown evidence looked at

Leo Varadkar has made a significant intervention in the fallout from the
Jobstown trial and urged Garda management to examine the
investigation including any conflicting evidence.

Friday, July 07, 2017

Juno McEnroe and Daniel McConnell
Garda HQ last night said a review into the policing response and the
subsequent investigation into the incident at Jobstown began last
Friday. It is being carried out by Assistant Commissioner Barry OBrien.
But the Taoiseachs remarks that the public need to trust what garda
say and that any clashing evidence from the force is a problem will
fuel claims by the trial defendants that they were stitched up.
Solidarity TD Paul Murphy says Mr Varadkars intervention, while
important, cannot be answered by garda investigating themselves and
that a full independent probe is warranted.
Protesters say the uploading of trial material and video evidence online
will further add to pressure for an inquiry. This was set to go up
overnight.
Mr Varadkar told RTs Prime Time that, while he did not think a public
inquiry was necessary, that consideration should be given as to why the
prosecution was unsuccessful.
People need to trust what the garda say on the stand and I can
understand a scenario where lots of things are happening quickly and
people are caught up in the heat of the moment, they may have a
recollection that isnt exactly as things happened, he said.
But I would be very concerned if it is the case that we would ever have
garda on the stand in the court giving evidence that is not in line with
the facts, that is not in line with the video evidence.
And I think there is something there that needs to be looked at both by
the garda commissioner and by senior garda management because we
need to be able to trust that when garda stand up in court, when they
say something happened, that it did happen and it shouldnt conflict
with video evidence and if it does, then that is a problem.
Mr Murphy and other Jobstown protestors were acquitted of falsely
imprisoning former tnaiste Joan Burton and her adviser during a water
charges protest in 2014. In the heated demonstration, objects and
abuse were hurled at the two while they were also trapped in a car for
hours.
Mr Murphy and others claim garda perjured themselves and video
evidence proves this. The TD says a garda claim that he said he would
keep Ms Burton here all night was contradicted. One garda did not
stand over claims Mr Murphy incited crowds by megaphone, he says.
Speaking to the Irish Examiner, Mr Murphy said Mr Varadkars
intervention was significant and a first step towards an inquiry.
From the time we raised a call for a public inquiry over a conspiracy and
attempt to stitch us up for false imprisonment, we have been met with
refusals, said Mr Murphy.
This is the first crack in that wall of resistance. If he [Mr Varadkar]
accepts the possibility garda might be lying in the trial, garda
investigating themselves is not an answer.
Mr Varadkars latest remarks will raise questions about government
confidence in the force and pile pressure on Garda management to
address claims of a conspiracy over the Jobstown trial.
Garda HQ last night told the Irish Examiner the review will be from a
lessons-learnt perspective, and the following areas will be examined:
Key learning points; Identification of organisational practices/policies
which require improvement; Training; Any other issues of note.
Meanwhile, updating colleagues at Cabinet on the public finances,
Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe is said to have made it clear
spending increases come budget day will be very modest.
The meeting was convened ahead of publication of the summer
economic statement, expected next week.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/leo-varadkar-wants-jobstown-
evidence-looked-at-454292.html

Latest: Divisions between FG and FF widen over

Jobstown comments
Friday, July 07, 2017

Update: 8.15pm Divisions between Fianna Fil and Fine Gael are
widening tonight over the Taoisach's intervention in the Jobstown case.

Last night Leo Varadkar called for an investigation into the Garda
handling of the case while Fianna Fil leader Micheal Martin today
accused the Taoiseach of 'interfering' and setting a dangerous
precedent.

Speaking tonight fellow Fianna Fail TD, Jim O'Callaghan, said he

agreed.

"His (Leo Varadkar) comments clearly implied that the gardai who gave
evidence in that trial ... deliberately gave false evidence. That is why we
think it was unwise ... to make those comments.
Update: 1.15pm Fianna Fil leader Michel Martin has said Taoiseach
Leo Varadkar's comments about the Jobstown trial set "a dangerous
precedent", writes Daniel McConnell Political Editor.
Speaking in Cork today, Mr Martin has taken issue with Mr Varadkar's
pointed criticisms of the Garda handling of the Jobstown protest, which
saw six defendants cleared of all charges last week.
In an RTE PrimeTime interview, Mr Varadkar said that both the Garda
and Garda Commissioner Noirin O'Sullivan should now "look into" the
evidence given by officers at the marathon trial.
The Taoiseach also said consideration should be given as to why the
high-profile and elongated prosecution of former Anglo Irish Bank boss
Sean Fitzpatrick was unsuccessful.
However speaking today, Mr Martin said the Taoiseach's public
comments were "very serious" and clearly had potential implications for
the Garda involved in the trial.

"I think it (the comments) were ill-judged," he said.

"The courts process is first of all independent. The Director of Public
Prosecutions (DPP) is independent. I think politicians need to be
extremely careful when wandering into that domain," he said.
"In particular, just taking particular aspects of evidence from what was a
very lengthy trial. I was concerned about the Taoiseach's comments - I
think they were not fair to the Garda who gave evidence during that
trial, Mr Martin added.
Mr Martin said that the Taoiseach has left an impression - although he
heavily caveats what he says, to be fair - but he nonetheless leaves the
impression that maybe those Garda didn't give the full truth in
accordance with the facts."
"That is unfair and, in my view, the jury made a decision. We shouldn't
second-guess the jury," the Fianna Fil leader said.
"Those who were accused were acquitted and I accept the court
decision. The judge is in charge of that particular domain and the
Taoiseach should not have interfered in my view. There could be other
cases coming down (the tracks) in relation to that incident. He may have
prejudiced such cases, he said.
Mr Martin went further saying he felt it is a very dangerous precedent
to set - he has authority as Taoiseach and he was unfair to the Garda."
"Those Garda have their civil liberties too - they have their rights. There
are all kinds of things being said on social media about them and I don't
think it is on for somebody with the authority of the Taoiseach to add
fuel to that and pander to those who suggested that this was some
State conspiracy."
Mr Martin was speaking at University College Cork where he delivered
the Jack Lynch lecture.

Update: 12.37pm Sinn Fin President Gerry Adams has said that the
Garda and the DPP have serious questions to answer regarding their
handling of the Jobstown prosecution.

Mr Adams welcomed the Taoiseach Leo Varadkar's intervention saying

the Garda Commissioner Nirn OSullivan should look into the evidence
given by members of the force during the trial.

The Sinn Fin President said: "He (The Taoiseach) has acknowledged
the need for an examination of what went on regarding the Jobstown
prosecutions. That is very significant. However, it is not appropriate for
the Garda to be investigated by the Garda. I believe the call for a public
inquiry is a very reasonable demand.

"The controversy around the Jobstown prosecution and the role of the
Garda and the DPP is not an isolated incident. The Garda and the DPP
have serious questions to answer regarding the events leading up to the
murder of Garda Tony Golden in Omeath in 2015. There are also grave
concerns about the decisions taken by the Garda and the DPP
surrounding the hit-and-run incident that resulted in the death of Shane
OFarrell outside Carrickmacross in 2011.

"Indeed, in November of last year, the then-Taoiseach Enda Kenny met

the family and told them he would ask the Attorney General to request
the Law Reform Commission President Mr Justice John Quirke to
examine how we can reform the law to provide enhanced public
understanding for significant decisions made whilst fully preserving the
independence of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Nothing has
materialised since that commitment was made.

Mr Adams welcomed the GSOC investigation into the Jobstown case,

but pointed out that it does not have the capacity to bring criminal
charges.

Mr Adams said: "Public confidence in the administration of policing and

justice in this state is on the floor. Part of the process in repairing that
confidence must be to ensure that citizens have the truth.

"The decisions taken by the DPP, in all the cases I have outlined,
demand further scrutiny, and answers must be provided to these very
important questions."

Earlier: The Garda Representative Association says calls for a public

inquiry into the Jobstown case are "farcical".
An internal Garda inquiry is already underway, but those involved in the
protests want it to go further.

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar says he would be worried if Garda misled the

court during the trial.

John O'Keeffe from the GRA has said he is "flabbergasted" at calls for a
public inquiry.

Mr O'Keeffe said: "I just couldn't help wondering how the families of
Bloody Sunday, or those across the water in Hillsborough or the Grenfell
Tower disaster, how would they feel that their truly tragic causes now
seem somehow to get public billing beside ther acquittal of a number of
men in Dublin on allegations that were made about false imprisonment?

"I mean it's farcical."

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/latest-divisions-
between-fg-and-ff-widen-over-jobstown-comments-796820.html
So, Varadkar wants Gardai to investigate Gardai from #Jobstown trial? Despite political policing
of #Right2water!? Oh, right! Get it #rtept
Garda is prosecuted for
assaulting RTE
cameraman

Cameraman Colm Hand

Andrew Phelan
July 7 2017
A garda is being prosecuted for assaulting an RT
cameraman who was filming a violent protest in Dublin
city centre.
Garda Sean Lucey is alleged to have hit cameraman Colm
Hand in the groin during a baton charge.
Mr Hand also had his camera damaged in the incident, it
has been alleged.
Gda Lucey is being summoned to court to face assault and
criminal damage charges after a complaint was made to
the Garda Siochana Ombudsman Commission (GSOC).
Serious
Judge Michael Walsh granted the issuing of the
summonses at Dublin District Court after an application
by the Director of Public Prosecutions, who is acting on
behalf of the commission.

Stuart Duguid, an officer with the commission, told the

court that Mr Hand was allegedly assaulted at the junction
of O'Connell Street and Cathedral Street on February 6
last year.
Judge Walsh said it was a serious allegation and asked
what the background was.
Mr Duguid said that, at the time of the alleged assault,
gardai were using batons to move back a line of protesters,
some of whom were being violent. The court heard that Mr
Hand was in front of the gardai, filming the violence.
State solicitor Michael Durkan said, after the alleged
assault, Mr Hand made a complaint through his employer
to GSOC. The court heard that Mr Hand had attended
hospital, was seen by a doctor and suffered bruising to his
groin.
This was the basis for the assault allegation, said Mr
Durkan.
The criminal damage charge related to the part of the
camera that was allegedly broken off.
Judge Walsh granted the application after Mr Duguid
signed the information he had sworn before the court.
A legal representative for the accused was present in court.
Violent clashes broke out when 1,000 people turned out
for a protest against the launch in Ireland of anti-Islam
group Pegida.
Gardai intervened when people thought to be linked to the
group were singled out and attacked by a group of men.
Pegida - which stands for Patriotic Europeans Against The
Islamisation of the West - began in Germany last year,
largely in response to the European refugee crisis.
Clashes
As small groups of Pegida supporters approached the GPO
from surrounding streets, violent clashes quickly broke
out.
Members of the Garda Public Order Unit baton charged
protesters back towards O'Connell Street and then set up a
cordon in the middle of North Earl Street. O'Connell Street
was closed to traffic in both directions between Abbey
Street and Cathal Brugha Street, while Cathedral Street
was cordoned off by public order.
Mounted garda and garda dogs were used to control the
crowds. Gardai directed Luas to suspend services from
Smithfield to the city centre.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/garda-is-prosecuted-for-
assaulting-rte-cameraman-35904231.html
There once was a journo called Knox
Who wrote of a Taoiseach and socks
What she would omit Is regardless of kit
The man is a bit of a pixy nit
Interesting that @ReginaDo tried / failed to have comments removed from Facebook as
reported by @oconnellhugh #TravelBan #vinb

Minister for Employment and Social Protection Regina ODoherty;

Professor Catherine Kelly
Tyrone-born, US-based academic Catherine Kelly (via the Jude
Collins blog) writes:

Leaving Ireland on June 27, 2017 to return to New York, I was

approached by two men in plain clothes who presented themselves as
officers from Pearse Street Garda Station.

They asked, Is this your name Catherine Kelly?. When I confirmed

my name they stated they needed to speak with me.

I was quickly shown one Garda badge though I did not have time to
note any identification number of name. One of the men did all the
talking while the other looked on.

I was asked if I use social media, which I confirmed. I was

asked if I use Twitter, which I also confirmed. I was shown a
small notebook in which the words Sane Politico were
written.

I was asked if I used the name Sane Politico, which I again

confirmed. I was asked if I had written an article about Minister
Regina Doherty and that too was affirmed.

This is the article in question.

I was then informed that a complaint had been made against me at

Pearse Street Garda Station. There was no information offered about
who filed the complaint. I was informed that I was being
cautioned and that I was not to tweet Regina Doherty or
any material relevant to her again.

I was informed she does not like it. As the Regina Doherty and Sane
Politico accounts have utilised mutual blocks for at least two years, I
explained how I cannot and do not tweet Minister Doherty directly.

This explanation was not understood by the man posing the

questions.

I then informed the interrogator that I am a Professor of Political

Science at an American University and that I teach about the use of
social media in political contexts. The man responded, Sure half of
these ones do not even understand what social media is.

The man who questioned me then reintroduced a small notebook and I

saw a page of notes that I did not attempt to read. I was asked to sign
the page of notes at the bottom. I did as requested, as I was informed I
was required to do so before I could proceed to my gate.
I signed the page, Catherine Kelly. As I had an urgent personal matter
to attend to in New York, it seemed like the wisest action to take.

Broadsheet contacted the Garda Press Office and was told it cannot
confirm anything about the matter as it cannot comment on individual
cases.

Broadsheet also contacted a spokesperson for Fine Gael TD Regina

Doherty and we are awaiting a call back.

Theres Quare [and Sinister] Things in Dublin by Catherine

Kelly (Jude Collins)

Thanks RevolutionIRL

Rollingnews

UPDATE:

A spokeswoman for Ms Doherty said:

If there is an investigation going on or enquiries being made by the

gardai, it wouldnt be appropriate for any comment but I am aware of
a complaint having been made. Its a matter for the garda.

How Do You Solve A Problem Like

Regina? by Catherine Kelly
by Jude Collins on April 14, 2017

Fine Gael TD Regina Dohertys recent call for prayer in the Dail
reminded me of a pet peeve I have: kissing the altar rails on a
Sunday while misbehaving for the remainder of the week.
Another pet peeve I want to confess to is political corruption. More
specifically, I get truly rattled by the deliberate and ill intentioned
skirting of the rules that we see politicians indulge in so often. The
acts that I speak of are usually highly immoral in even the most
neutral observers book but are defended and excused away by the
I did nothing illegal announcement. Legality and morality become
skewed and conflated in an effort to obfuscate from the carry on
that politicians indulge in.
According to a report in the Irish Independent, it is alleged Ms.
Doherty finally liquidated a poorly run company in 2013: Enhanced
Solutions folded with losses of 280,000, including almost 60,000
owed to the Revenue Commissioners, 50,000 owed to state
owned bank AIB and various debts owed to suppliers. The same
story claims the company was not run properly, with serious
accounting failures reported in violation of Section 202 of the
Companies Act. It was also reported that a loan taken from the
company by Ms. Doherty violated the same act.
(http://www.independent.ie/business/small-business/fine-gael-tds-
firm-folds-with-debts-of-280000-29021682.html).
Ms. Doherty was elected to the Dail as a Fine Gael TD in 2011 in the
backlash against Fianna Fail. In her election disclosure of 2011, the
Meath TD would appear to have broken the law by failing to reveal
the Enhanced Solutions bankruptcy. Records seem to show she did
not disclose her bankruptcy in 2011, she disclosed the bankruptcy
in 2012, 2013 but it then seems to have disappeared off her
disclosures again in the run up to the election of 2016. Is it too
cynical to suggest that Ms. Doherty might have been picking and
choosing when to disclose her bankruptcy according to the election
cycles?
When social media picked up this story that the establishment Irish
media had largely ignored, Ms. Doherty was forced to go to the
establishment media with her defence a Nixonian plea of I am
not a crook. This claim went uncontested by RTE, the Irish Times
and so forth despite the clear evidence that appeared to indicate
that yes indeed, Ms. Doherty had violated the Companies Act.
http://www.thejournal.ie/regina-doherty-defends-liquidation-of-
company-2781806-May2016/
According to the Irish Independent, it seems that Ms. Doherty took
an illegal loan from her company. Ms. Doherty has apparently
broken the law by not acting according to accounting standards
and further would appear to have broken the law by failing to
disclose her bankruptcy details to her constituents in violation of
election rules. None of these alleged violations has been denied
and yet, Ms. Doherty has offered no explanation as to how these
items were resolved and the media have made no effort to get any
answers.
Despite the apparent illegality of it all, her actions seem to
be morally dubious, especially when you consider her voting
record in the Dail. Ms. Doherty has voted consistently for
legislation that mercilessly punishes her own constituents who
have lost their homes, their jobs and their hopes. For instance, Ms.
Doherty in recent days voted for Fine Gael housing and rental
legislation that has largely benefitted landlords while
homelessness in her Meath constituency has skyrocketed.

Single Households Total Number

Adults/Couple With Children of Households
Households
Jan March 50 6 56
2015
Jan March 48 16 64
2016
Jan March 62 27 89
2017
Data provided by Meath County Council
Ms. Doherty also recently scolded her constituents, informing
them that their water bills were not going to magically
disappear, unlike her bankruptcy bills which appear to have been
paid for by the tax payer.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/water/irish-water-crisis/pay-
your-water-bills-chief-whip-tells-tds-34700271.html
Of course, the problem of corruption in politics in Ireland is
worsened by the unwillingness of the establishment media to hold
elected officials to account. Ms. Doherty was given a platform to
bat away the story without one journalist prodding about what
would appear to be legally questionable and morally
dubious activity.
There is something disturbing about a politician calling for public
displays of piety. One would think that Ms. Doherty would have
enough to be bothered with, what with the growing homelessness
and desperation in her constituency and indeed across Ireland.
Perhaps a little reminder is in order: Ms. Doherty, God is watching
us, even when we are not publicly beating our chests in Church or
in the Dail.
GOVERNMENT CHIEF WHIP Regina Doherty has defended her decision to
liquidate a company in 2013.

Doherty was a director along with her husband Declan of Enhanced Solutions
Ltd, a company which bought and sold IT components until it went to the wall in
2009. However, it was not liquidated until 2013.

The liquidators report shows the company owed 59,000 to Revenue and
50,000 to AIB.

The company had lost over 205,000 according to its most recent accounts.
Separately, a judgement was awarded against the company by UK firm Eurosimm
for over 10,000.

Before Februarys election, Doherty told The Peoples Debate with Vincent
Browne that her debts had been paid.

However, her promotion to Chief Whip led some to question whether there were
debts left outstanding.

Last week, Doherty declined to speak to the Mail on Sunday, but today penned a
piece in the Irish Independent defending her actions.

She also took to RTs Saturday with Claire Byrne to give her side of the story.

Failure
Doherty said that she has been reminded of how much of a failure she is since the
liquidation ended in 2013.

She said she and her husband had taken out a loan to pay back AIB.

That will probably take me the rest of my life to pay back and thats cool because
Im fortunate enough to be in a position to do that and some other debts were
written off during the liquidation.

The Revenue debt was part of that written off, some being written off against VAT
owed to the company.

She says that she has been reminded of the liquidation daily by people who think
theyre smart.
People think theyre smart reminding me of it, but I lived with it.
She said that she had ignored the social media commentary on the liquidation
until her appointment as Chief Whip two weeks ago.

Then, she said, the interactions went through the roof, leading the story to take
on a new life.

I cant just ignore people saying things about me that are not true.

I cant have an ambiguity for people and there cant be many left, Im sure
who do actually like me.

I havent hidden anything, Im not happy or proud about what happened.

Im not a bad person, I had a tough time in business and Ive learned more from that than
everything else.
She said that some of the criticism was politically motivated, but added that there
was no political party conspiring to organise it.

She said that the Companies Registration Office had deemed an auditors
concerns insignificant.

I havent broken the law.

Yeah, I did liquidate a company and the company did owe people money, but we didnt
get to that space by choice.
Food on the table

She said that once she and her husband liquidated the company, they were not
entitled to social welfare.

The only reason there was food put on our table was because my parents and
Declans parents got us through.
If I had the money, the company would have been liquidated in 2009, but I didnt have
the money. We didnt have the money to go to Lidl on a Friday evening.
The company was liquidated two years after Doherty was elected as a TD for
Meath East.
A Fine Gael TD regarded as a rising star in the party could face prosecution
after a company she owns went into liquidation with questions over how the
firm was run.

Meath East TD Regina Doherty could face prosecution by the Director of

Corporate Enforcement following the liquidation of her Enhanced Solutions
Ltd company last week.

A creditors meeting to put the business into liquidation was held last week.
Losses are understood to be 280,000, including almost 60,000 owed to the
Revenue Commissioners and 50,000 owed to state owned bank AIB.

Business failure is not an offence but accounts filed before the liquidation
reveal damning evidence that the company was not being properly run.

In a special report dated August 2012 the company's own independent

auditors said it had failed to keep proper books of accounts in 2010, the last
period covered by filed financial accounts.

Auditors BCC Accountants issued the special report to the directors of

Enhanced Solutions, saying they had "not obtained all the information and
explanations" necessary for the purposes of auditing the company.

"We determined that proper books of accounts had not been kept by the
company," the report said. "The directors have since taken the necessary steps
to ensure proper books of account are being kept by the company (going
forward)," BCC said.

Failing to keep proper books of accounts is a specific offence under Section

202 of the Companies Act.
As a director of the IT consultancy, the Meath TD could potentially faces
serious penalties, including in the extreme case up to five years in jail, and
10,000 in fines.

The book-keeping breaches become a serious offence if a company later goes

into liquidation as Regina Doherty's Enhanced Solutions Ltd did earlier this
month and the accounting failure is regarded as part of the reason why the
company went under.

Jail sentences and heavy fines specifically come into play if the failures to keep
the books led to some creditors being left out of pocket, more than they would
have been in a normal liquidation or if the failures made it harder to shut the
business down in an orderly fashion.

Even if that draconian action is not taken, the Dohertys could be restricted
from being directors of any other companies.

Under the Act, the main defence against prosecution is if no harm was caused
by the directors' failures, and if the breaches of the Act were not wilful.

That will all be considered in a report that liquidator Edward Walsh must
send to the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, the watchdog for
company law offences.

First-time TD Ms Doherty has previously admitted taking loans totalling

37,360 from Enhanced Solutions Ltd when the size of the loans relative to
the business was also in contravention of the company law, but the debt has
been paid back and Ms Doherty has said she had informed the Director of
Corporate Enforcement of the breach herself.

Ms Doherty has said previously that Enhanced Solutions Ltd had ceased
trading in 2009. She didn't declare her directorship of the company in the
annual declaration of TDs' interests after becoming a TD in the 2011 General
Election.

She later admitted her error and asked that her records be corrected.

Enhanced Solutions Ltd was struck off by the Companies Office in 2011 for not
filing its accounts, but was later reinstated on the register.

Ms Doherty did not return calls last night

http://www.judecollins.com/2017/04/solve-problem-like-regina-catherine-
kelly/
#JobstownNotGuilty Victory for the "Working Class Heroes" of @Right2WaterIRL ! James
Connolly would be proud of you, but NOT @labour !
Any redirection from Judge Greally #JobstownNotGuilty #not1pipe
Waiting to hear #NotOneGuilty with @caulmick #JobstownNotGuilty
Received my degree, left & stood in solidarity with protestors #joanburton
Dept had concerns over calling
people 'cheats' in controversial
welfare ad campaign
Newly-released FOI documents show that the Department had
considered changing the title to something less forceful.
Jun 24th 2017,

Source: Sam Boal/RollingNews.ie

CONCERNS WERE RAISED in the Department of Social
Protection over calling people cheats as part of the
controversial advertising campaign on social welfare
launched by Taoiseach Leo Varadkar while he was Minister
for Social Protection.
The Welfare Cheats Cheat Us All campaign was launched in
April and caused considerable debate over highlighting
welfare fraud so prominently and for asking people to
anonymously report their neighbours.
Internal departmental emails obtained by TheJournal.ie
reveal that with just weeks to go, the department considered
changing the campaign title to something a little less
forceful.
An email explained: I know there was concern re: the use of
the word cheats in our advertising campaign strapline. I
want to ensure we are comfortable progressing.
We did ask the creative team to consider an alternative and
they could work with Welfare Fraud Costs Us All as
opposed to our current line Welfare Cheats Cheat Us All.

Source: Ken Foxe - FOI

Concerns were also flagged about using words like fraud
and crime as part of the campaign.
One email shows that the Department was worried that
these words would get linked back to the current Garda
scandals involving Templemore training college and other
controversies.

Source: FOI - Ken Foxe

(To see in finer detail, click here)
Another internal email suggested the campaign was likely to
go down well with members of the public.
It said: Given the size of the Department, and the control
savings we can, and do achieve, and the appetite of the
public to know that we guard their money very carefully, this
campaign should be well received overall.

Source: FOI - Ken Foxe

(To see in finer detail, click here)
To help achieve that, the email said they needed to have
spokespeople available for national and regional radio to
talk about detecting and reducing fraud.
The message also said the aim of the project was to change
culture and attitude.
It said the campaign had three overall objectives, the first of
which was to encourage people to report people they
suspected of cheating dole payments. The email said they
wanted to make it easy for them to report anonymously
their suspicions.
The second objective was to change perceptions that welfare
fraud was a victimless crime and lastly that the
department took the problem seriously and would
investigate and prosecute.
Right to Know
Source: Sam Boal/RollingNews.ie
The records are part of more than 400 pages of documents
on the advertising campaign released under FOI to Right to
Know, an organisation which campaigns for transparency in
Ireland.
They show the department was also aware that there would
be extensive querying of just how prevalent social welfare
fraud was.
One internal email said: The ad campaign will doubtless
bring a focus on the levels of fraud and our track record in
fraud detection so any useful lines for media tough
questions would be great.

Source: FOI - Ken Foxe

(To see in finer detail, click here)
Among the tough questions they prepared to answer were
whether anonymous reporting of welfare fraud actually
yielded results.

An internal FAQ [Frequently Asked Questions] posed the

question: How will we judge the success of the current
campaign vis--vis the 172k were spending on it?
Other questions raised included one asking: Do we honestly
believe the majority of people getting social welfare
payments are honest? How do we know/basis for saying
that?
Another asked whether some areas in the country were
worse than others for fraud.
The email also said: What do we say to those who think
were soft on fraud and there is no deterrent really cheap
loans for people with little prospect that theyll be
prosecuted.
The correspondence also talked about the importance of
developing branding around the welfare fraud campaign.
We are also looking at developing some brand elements for
the welfare.ie website, one email said, so if people come to
report a fraud there, there is brand recognition from the
campaign.

Source: FOI - Ken Foxe

(To see in finer detail, click here)
Work on the campaign was already underway last October,
according to the records, and Minister Leo Varadkar was
closely involved in its development.
One message explained how Varadkar would be attending a
meeting to discuss communications strategy and
campaigns on 1 December last year.

Source: FOI - Ken Foxe

(To see in finer detail, click here)
An email sent later by his press adviser Nick Miller said:
Leos thoughts on this are that he likes the [redacted] one.
However, he feels we need to emphasise more that this is
not just money from your pocket; that someone else will lose
out directly. We want to reduce fraud so we can preserve
resources for those who need them most. Could that be
worked in somehow?

Source: FOI - Ken Foxe

(To see in finer detail, click here)
The involvement of Varadkar who was then minister at the
department during the launch was also considered key.
One email said: My own view is that we get the minister on
the case and perhaps do a main chat show.
The documents also show that part of the intention of the
campaign appears to create a talking point for the public.
It is a multimedia campaign that will deliver high
awareness and get people talking about the campaign, said
one email from the Departments media buyer.

Source: FOI - Ken Foxe

(To see in finer detail, click here)
Minutes of a meeting also described how discussions took
place over how loud the message should shout, in order to
get maximum impact.
Source: FOI - Ken Foxe
(To see in finer detail, click here)
http://cdn.thejournal.ie/media/2017/06/department-of-
social-protection-response.pdf

In a lengthy statement, the Department of Social Protection

said the campaign was intended to make the point that all of
society was impacted by welfare fraud, and that no level of
welfare fraud is acceptable.
It said: Crimes involving the loss of public revenue are
sometimes portrayed as victimless crimes. This campaign
challenges the perceptions of people who perceive welfare
fraud as a lesser or socially acceptable fraud.
Our strong campaign message Welfare Cheats Cheat Us
All and supporting radio and print ads were considered by
the Department at length and considered to be the most
appropriate.
We also considered a campaign Welfare Fraud Costs US
All. However, on balance, it was felt that this was a less
emotive and less immediate statement and did not carry the
impact of the chosen campaign.
It said the campaign had been successful in bringing welfare
fraud to the fore.
The statement said: The campaign has also led to a
considerable increase in the level of suspected fraud
reporting (a 66% increase in overall reporting during the
initial campaign period) and since the campaign launch the
Departments fraud reporting numbers are 46% higher than
the same period in 2016.
http://www.thejournal.ie/foi-dept-social-protection-welfare-cheats-3460425-
Jun2017/?utm_source=shortlink

19.85 billion to be spent in 2017 for 2.05m beneficiaries

5 increase in max. rate of all weekly payments for pensioners, carers, people with
disabilities, widows, lone parents, jobseekers etc. 1.5 million beneficiaries
Invalidity Pension eligibility will be extended to the self-employed from December 2017 and
for Treatment Benefits, such as Dental, Optical and Hearing, from March 2017

Lone parents package including new 500 Cost of Education Allowance

More Dental and Optical Benefits for all insured employees and self-employed from October

Proportionate increases for people in receipt of reduced rate payments and for qualified
adult dependants

50,000 extra children to benefit from School Meals

Reversal of cuts to Farm Assist & 500 additional places on the Rural Social Scheme

2 million for pre-activation supports for people with disabilities

Young Jobseekers: full Back to Education Allowance, lower contributions to Rent

Supplement

Christmas Bonus of 85% will be paid in early December to 1.2 million recipients

https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Budget-2017.aspx

Source: Sam Boal

So which side is telling the truth?
(Send your FactCheck requests
to factcheck@thejournal.ie, tweet @TJ_FactCheck, or
send us a DM).
Claim: 500 million was saved in Ireland in 2016 as a
result of the reporting of benefit fraud
The Evidence
In order to FactCheck this claim, we asked the DSP to
provide:
Details of all reports of fraud made by members
of the public to DSP in 2016
The calculations used to arrive at the figure of
500 million
The nature of any estimates or modelling that
might be used to approximate the overall figure
The Departments response can be viewed here.

Source: Department of Social Protection

The key to the Departments approach to estimating fraud is
a control scheme, one that uses a series of multipliers
(estimates of how long a fraud would continue to be carried
out before being brought to a halt in other words) in its
calculations.
In simpler terms, the Department assumes that if a fraud
isnt detected, it will continue for a set further period of
time, with different time periods applied to each of the 70
welfare schemes DSP operates.
These calculations cover both reductions in and termination
of payments once fraud has been identified, and are
measured in weeks (and in certain cases months). They
range in size from 26 weeks for Jobseekers Benefit (for both
reduction in payment and termination), to 52/136 weeks for
Carers Allowance and most other benefits, to 12/34 months
for Child Benefit.
The Department declined to provide TheJournal.ie with
calculations regarding how the figures for individual
benefits were calculated; however, the overall figures
contributing to the 506 million figure are as follows:
Savings breakdown by scheme 2016
Source: Department of Social Protection
Click here to view a larger image
Note that the overall estimated figure of 506 million is not
atypical in recent years in fact according to figures
released to Sinn Fin TD John Brady on the subject
(viewable here), the total breached 600 million in the
austerity years of 2011, 2012, and 2013:

Source: Department of Social Protection

Click here to view a larger image
The methodology underpinning the calculation of the
savings was developed by the Department, in conjunction
with the CSO and is similar to that used in other countries,
such as the UK and Australia, the DSP said in relation to
the system used to estimate welfare fraud.
However, that system has been in use since at least 2009
whether or not it has been adjusted to account for changing
social metrics such as rising/falling unemployment is
unclear.
The DSP, in its release to TheJournal.ie, states that 19,361
reports of benefit fraud were reported by members of the
public in 2016:

Number of reports of fraud 2016

Source: Department of Social Protection
Click here to view a larger image
However, it also states that:
Recent exercises concluded that savings and/or
overpayments have been recorded in about one-third of
cases where a report was received from a member of the
public.
This statement is given a caveat note that this work is not
designed nor is it large enough to allow for statistical
inferences to be drawn from the results however, for the
basis of this FactCheck we will assume this one-third figure
is applicable across the board.
Running the Numbers
Source: Department of Social Protection
Click here to view a larger image
Lets take the three largest figures attributed to welfare
schemes as samples.
These three schemes account for almost two-thirds 318
million of all welfare fraud savings made last year,
according to DSP. In each sample, well be looking at how
many allegations of each type of fraud there were last year,
how many were likely to have resulted in actual fraud, and
the total savings this would have amounted to.
These calculations have been arrived at with the assistance
of Professor Michel Collins of the UCD School of Social
Policy.
Jobseekers Benefit / Allowance
Number of reports in 2016 5,310; Estimated savings 172
million
Jobseekers welfare benefits form almost 40% of DSPs
overall calculations for last year, so these schemes are
particularly significant.
For the duration of 2016, jobseekers benefit was 188 per
week. Using the 172 million total, this indicates 914,894
weeks of fraud savings last year. Using the above table of
multipliers, DSP assumes that each beneficiary of welfare
fraud is equivalent to 26 weeks of payments lost. Dividing
the total number of weeks by 26 therefore indicates 35,188
individuals were guilty of jobseekers fraud last year which
equates to 12% of the average number of people on Irelands
live register (302,945) in 2016. In other words, the
assumption is that one in ten people claiming jobseekers
benefit are committing fraud. Which is a high figure by
anyones standards.

However, DSPs own figures appear to contradict this.

5,310 reports of such fraud were made last year. However,
assuming only one-third of those led to
savings/overpayments, that figure becomes 1,770. Which
leads to two possibilities:
(i) 1,770 x 52 weeks (multiplier used for Jobseekers
Allowance) x 188 = 17.3 million
(ii) 1,770 x 26 weeks (multiplier used for Jobseekers
Benefit) x 188 = 8.65 million
Splitting the difference here gives an indicative figure saved
of just under 13 million, or about 7.6% of 172 million
less than a tenth of the actual savings being
claimed.
One Parent Family Benefit (OPFB)
Number of reports in 2016 3,383; Estimated savings 77
million
Throughout 2016 the OPFB stood at 188 per week, with an
additional 29.80 per child covered. For the basis of this
comparison, well assume a single parent and two children -
or payments of 247.60 weekly. The control number of
weeks for termination of this benefit is 136 (more than 2.5
years). That suggests a saving to be made per incidence of
fraud of 33,674. Using the 77 million total estimate, this
indicates fraudulent claims at the full estimated rate in
2016.
The most recent Social Welfare Services statistical report
(for 2015, available here) indicates that 670.1 million was
spent by the State on this benefit that year. This indicates an
overall incidence of fraud rate of 11.5%, which is broadly in
line with the assumed rate of fraud for jobseekers detailed
above.
Again, however, DSPs figures appear to contradict this.
3,383 reports of such fraud were made last year. Again,
assuming only one-third of those led to savings, that figure
becomes 1,128:
(i) 1,128 x 52 weeks (multiplier used for reduction in
payment) x 247.60 = 14.5 million
(ii) 1,128 x 136 weeks (multiplier used for termination of
payment) x 247.60 = 38 million
Even taking into account the larger multiplier, which would
appear to be very high, the estimated figure of 38 million
saved is less than 50% of 77 million - less than half of
the actual savings being claimed.
Child Benefit
Number of reports in 2016 556; Estimated savings 69
million
From January 2016, the child benefit rate per month in
Ireland was 140, or 1,680 per year. This indicates 41,071
instances of such fraud in 2016. According to the 2016
census, there were 1,190,502 children aged 18 or younger in
the state. Assuming one payment per child, that indicates a
fraud rate of 3.4% or one in every 30 childrens benefits
are fraudulent. Again, this seems quite a high estimate given
the strict nature of the child registration process.
Once more, DSPs figures appear to contradict this.
556 reports of such fraud were made last year. Again,
assuming only one-third of those led to savings, that figure
becomes 185:
(i) 185 x 12 months (multiplier used for reduction in
payment) x 140 = 310,800
(ii) 185 x 34 months (multiplier used for termination of
payment) x 140 = 880,600
Again, even taking into account the larger multiplier, which
assumes nearly three years worth of savings per instance of
child benefit fraud, the estimated figure of 0.9
million saved is less than 1.3% of 69 million - just over
one hundredth of the savings being claimed by DSP.
Conclusion
Together the three benefits analysed account for 63% (318
million) of the DSPs announced savings of 506 million as
a result of reported fraud in 2016.
From our analysis, even following what appear to be
especially high multipliers used to estimate savings, that
figure is closer to 51.9 million just 16% of the 318
million officially estimated by DSP. Note that this is an
especially generous reading of these multipliers others
have estimated that the savings made were considerably
lower.
It should be noted also that even if the savings figures for
the remaining welfare schemes were 100% accurate, the
total could not come close to the 506 million being
claimed. In fact, using our calculations as a proxy for the
remainder, the overall savings figure would be in the region
of 82 million.
It also bears repeating that while DSP
provided TheJournal.ie with the system of multipliers used
when estimating fraud savings, the Department declined to
provide its own methods for calculating those figures.
Therefore, it has not been possible to check the logic behind
those calculations.
There are two conclusions to be taken from our own
calculations:
The estimated savings made by DSP as a result of reported
fraud bear little or no resemblance to the reality
Even if the 506 million figure were accurate, it would
indicate a highly inefficient welfare system with nearly
3% of all transactions (overall annual budget for DSP
is approximately 20 billion) being fraudulent
Assistant Secretary at DSP Kathleen Stack with then Minister Leo Varadkar,
pictured at the launch of the Welfare Cheats campaign on 17 April
Source: Sam Boal
The purpose of this FactCheck is not to question why DSPs
savings estimates are as high as they are (and have been so
consistently for at least the last eight years). However, in
anecdotal conversation with statistical experts conducted in
preparation for this article, it has been suggested that such
outlandish figures were possibly of benefit to the
Department when Ireland was involved with the Troika in
the early years of this decade, and huge savings were
expected to be achieved at all levels of government.
Given that Ireland now appears to be relatively clear of
recession, such substantial welfare fraud makes far less
intuitive sense.
In its correspondence with TheJournal.ie, DSP claimed that
its system for estimating fraud is subject to frequent
reviews, but also acknowledged that the last review of its
welfare fraud estimating procedures was run in 2012 by the
Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG).
It also acknowledged that this review five years ago
recommended changes, which do not appear to have been
applied as yet.
The Department is rolling out updated IT systems during
2017 to improve the data collection and analysis of its
control activities, its statement reads.
Regardless, for this FactCheck, the conclusion regarding the
Departments claim is that it is false.
Claim: 500 million was saved in Ireland in 2016 as a
result of the reporting of benefit fraud
Conclusion: False
http://pdf.cso.ie/www/pdf/20170106082103_Live_Register_December_2016_f
ull.pdf
18/04/2017
WELFARE CHEATS CHEAT US ALL
Varadkar calls on public to report welfare fraud at launch of hard-
hitting campaign
Publics engagement vital in supporting Departments efforts to
tackle fraud and abuse
Anti-fraud and control measures in 2016 saved over 500 million in
expenditure

Minister for Social Protection Leo Varadkar has launched a hard-hitting

publicity campaign designed to raise awareness of social welfare fraud and
encourage members of the public to identify potential cheats.
Speaking at the launch, Minister Varadkar said: The vast majority of
people receiving payments from the Department of Social Protection
are fully entitled to those payments and are compliant with the
conditions. However, we take fraud very seriously and have a
responsibility to taxpayers to ensure that people receive what they
are entitled to. Nothing upsets people more than someone else
cheating the system at their expense. Thats why we are launching a
new campaign to encourage members of the public to report
suspected or known cases of welfare fraud.
Members of the public play a vital role as whistleblowers. Last year
some 20,800 allegations of alleged social welfare fraud were dealt
with by the Department. These are investigated and where warranted,
payments are reduced or stopped and, in some cases, claimants are
prosecuted. Overall, a range of anti-fraud and control measures in the
Department of Social Protection saved taxpayers over 500 million
last year.
The hard-hitting publicity campaign promotes the Departments online and
telephone fraud-reporting services. Its designed to encourage debate
about social welfare fraud and challenge the perceptions of those who see
it as a victimless crime. It kicks off in the next few days with online, print,
and broadcast advertisements and a national poster campaign.
The majority of public reports in 2016 concerned Jobseekers Schemes,
Supplementary Welfare Allowance and One Parent Family Payments. The
most common reports allege issues such as working while claiming,
cohabiting with a partner who is making a financial contribution, or claiming
while living abroad. The Department estimates that approximately one in
three reports results in a payment being reduced or stopped.
Last year, the Departments Prosecution Service considered some 300
cases of which 194 were referred to the Chief State Solicitors Office for
proceedings to issue. A further 160 cases were referred for prosecution to
the DPP by the Departments Special Investigations Unit.
Minister Varadkar continued: The Department of Social Protection has
the single biggest budget of any Government Department, spending
19 billion every year. Last year, 1.4 million people received a weekly
social welfare payment. Even with a budget of this size, there are still
many positive changes I would like to make but have been unable to
do so due to budgetary constraints. Thats why savings are so
important. And thats why the public has a vital role in ensuring that
we only target resources at those who most need them.
Confidential reports can be made using:
A confidential facility on-line on the Departments website
www.welfare.ie/cheats where concerns can be reported;
The dedicated telephone facility 01 673 45 45 staffed by trained
personnel;
Reports by letter are also welcomed and encouraged (Fraud Reports,
Central Control Division, DSP, Shannon Lodge, Carrick-on-
Shannon, Co Leitrim);
Reports can also be made to any of the Departments offices nationwide.
What are the main schemes/areas that are reported on?
Jobseekers Schemes, Supplementary Welfare Allowance and One
Parent Family Payments.
What are the main allegations that are reported?:
Working & claiming: Where a person claims a payment, such as
Jobseeker's Benefit/Allowance or an Illness payment, but takes up
employment and does not notify the Department.
Cohabitation: People may be living as a "family unit" and fail to notify the
Department of the situation in order to qualify for higher rates of
payments, or payments to which they may not be entitled.
Living abroad: Where a person claims a social welfare payment, and is
not resident in this jurisdiction, without notifying the Department but
continues to claim the payment.
Employer Issues: Social insurance and employer non-compliance: where
employers fail to maintain appropriate employment/wage records
and where non-compliance or non-remittance of Pay Related Social
Insurance occurs.
Non-disclosure of means: Where a person claims a means tested
payment, for example Jobseekers Allowance, but they do not fully
disclose their means or sources of income to the
Department. These sources of income might include cash earnings,
inheritances, hidden savings, investments, maintenance, or
compensation payments.
Multiple claiming or personation: Where a person makes a claim for
more than one social welfare payment or by assuming and falsely
using the identity and PPSN of another person which would include
claiming benefit for a person who is deceased or claiming for a
person who is in prison or has emigrated.
Life events: Where a person continues to claim a payment to which they
are no longer entitled to such as a lone parent who marries, enters
into a civil partnership or is cohabiting, or someone who continues to
claim Carers Allowance claim where caring duties have ceased, or
where a pensioner dies and no notification of death has been made
and the pension continues to be collected.
Ends
Note for editors: Copies of the campaign Ads are attached (formatted
for reprinting by press).
https://www.welfare.ie/en/pressoffice/Pages/pr180417.aspx

Total welfare spending in 2017 will be 19.854BN

New Deal for Self-Employed including long-term illness and treatment benefits
5 increase in maximum rate for ALL weekly benefit recipients including
pensioners, carers, blind, widows, disabled, lone parents, Jobseekers,
maternity/paternity benefit, people on CE schemes etc
Total restoration of Farm Assist & expansion of Rural Social Scheme
Return of dental & optical benefits under PRSI
New 500 Cost of Education Allowance & pro-work measures for lone parents
50,000 extra children to benefit from free school meals

Budget 2017 is designed to make sure that everyone benefits from the recovery:
employed, self-employed, carers and those who cannot work, urban, rural, young and old. It
is a modest budget and there are no giveaways, nonetheless, more than 840,000 people will
benefit from the first increase in weekly payments since 2009,Minister for Social Protection
Leo Varadkar said today, Tuesday 11 October 2016.

The Social Protection Budget aims to:

Be prudent, with modest increases across the board and more targeted measures;
Ensure that the recovery benefits everyone, with no one left behind;
Make work pay, through reforms to PRSI benefits;
Make a New Deal for the Self-Employed.

Minister of State with special responsibility for Disability Payments and Supports, Finian McGrath
welcomed the social protection Budget package as making a solid contribution to the position of
persons with a disability (as part of the wider budget package agreed by the
Government. Clearly the bedrock of the package provides for an increase in basic payment
rates to people on disability payments which will go some way to addressing the hardships
endured by people with disabilities since the onset of the recession. However a number of
other measures relating to the extension of social insurance coverage for self-employed
people with a long-term incapacity and the provision of funding for back-to-education and
community based schemes will also benefit individuals with disabilities.

Minister McGrath welcomed the increase in medical card coverage to all children in receipt of a
Domiciliary Care Allowance. The Minister of State also welcomed that carers and blind people
were included in this Budget. He also welcomed the announcement of funding for a pre-activation
programme which will allow for the adoption of innovative approaches in addressing issues
regarding the employability of people with disabilities. Minister McGrath will be giving
consideration over the next few months as to how best to secure the best results from this
additional funding.

New Deal for the Self-employed

Minister Varadkar explained: Budget 2017 includes a new deal for up to 380,000 self-
employed people who pay PRSI at the S class. They will have new benefits extended to
them, including treatment benefit such as free eye and dental tests for the first time, and
access to the safety-net of State income supports if they have a serious illness or injury
that prevents them from working without having to go through a means test. Its all part of
the Governments policy of making work pay and encouraging self-employment and
entrepreneurship.

This theme is taken up by the re-introduction of some dental benefits linked to PRSI for all
classes of PRSI payees, including employees, and special measures for working lone
parents so they can keep more of the income they earn.
Weekly benefit recipients

Minister Varadkar said: In order to ensure that the recovery benefits everyone and nobody is
left behind, the maximum rate of all weekly benefits will increase by 5 a week, to people of
working age as well as retired people aged 66 or older. This is the first increase awarded to
carers, blind people, people with disabilities, and widows under the age of 66 since their
rates were cut by 16 a week by Fianna Fil during the financial crisis, and its only the
second increase awarded to pensioners since that time. This will benefit a total of 1.49
million people. It delivers the Programme for a Partnership Government commitment, and is
a permanent increase which will apply from March, the earliest possible time of year at
which it can be commenced. To do otherwise would have required the exclusion of certain
groups, which could not be countenanced.

Rural Ireland

Minister Varadkar said: As part of the Governments commitment to rural Ireland, I am

announcing the total reversal of cuts to Farm Assist, a programme which helps more than
8,000 farm families. The introduction of additional income disregards for farmers with
children further ensures that farm families with children will benefit. I am also announcing
the provision of 500 more places on Rural Social Schemes, bringing the total number of
places from 2,600 to 3,100. At a time of falling farm incomes, its essential that we
strengthen the safety net for farmers who are on the margin.

Supports for lone parents, & employment & education incentives

As part of Government policy to make work pay, lone parents are set to benefit from four
measures in Budget 2017, in addition to the Childcare Package from the Department of Children.

These comprise:

A new 500 annual Cost of Education Allowance;

A 5-a-week increase to the One Parent Family Payment and the Back to Education
Allowance;
A proportionate 5 increase in the Back to Work Enterprise Allowance, which will become
available more quickly following unemployment;
The income disregard for the One Parent Family Payment and Jobseekers Transition
payment will also rise, representing a further potential increase of up to 10 a week.

The new 500 annual Cost of Education Allowance will be made available to Back to Education
Allowance participants with children. This will help parents, including lone parents, to return to
education.

The Back to Education Allowance will increase by 5. The Back to Work Enterprise Allowance will
also see a proportionate increase. Furthermore, the Back to Work Enterprise Allowance will
become available more quickly after becoming unemployed, with the qualification period reduced
to nine months, down from 12 months.

The One Parent Family Payment will also increase by 5 a week. The income disregards for the
One Parent Family Payment and Jobseekers Transition payment will rise by 20, from 90 to
110 per week, reversing previous reductions, to encourage one parent families to stay in and
return to work. This will benefit lone parents earning more than 90 per week. For those earning
110 per week or more, this will increase the combined social welfare and earnings income by up
to 15 per week.

Young jobseekers

From next September, young jobseekers participating in the Back to Education scheme will
receive the full adult rate of 193 per week. Their current rate of weekly payment is 160. This
21% increase demonstrates the States support for young jobseekers who seek to enhance their
skills.

Young people who are on reduced benefits will pay less towards the cost of their Rent
Supplement. The personal contribution of young people on reduced benefits will be lowered from a
maximum of 30 to 20 a week for those on the 144 or 160 rate, and from 30 per week to 10
per week for those on the 100 rate.

Children

More than 50,000 children will benefit from increased funding to the School Meals programme,
providing breakfasts and lunches, which will rise by 5.7 million to 47.7 million in 2017. Of these,
some 35,000 extra school breakfasts will be provided in non-DEIS schools from the start of the
new school year and will be expanded in future years.

Guardians payments, for those who provide guardianship for a child, will increase by 15 per
week, from 161 to 176.

Christmas Bonus

The Department has received Government approval for the payment of a Christmas Bonus this
December. This recognises the needs of people who are long-term financially dependent on their
social welfare payment for all or most of their income, such as pensioners, people with disabilities
and carers. It will be paid at 85%, and will benefit 1.2 million long-term social welfare recipients at
a cost of 221 million.

Carers & Disabled People

In 2017 a new measure will continue payment of the Carers Allowance for 12 weeks when the
care recipient permanently enters a nursing home. This comes on top of the existing 12 week
payment in cases where the care recipient dies. This is in addition to the 5 weekly increase in the
Carers Allowance. A further 2 million in funding for pre-activation supports for people with
disabilities is being provided under the remit of Minister Finian McGrath.

Community Services

Funding for the Community Services Programme is being increased by 1 million in 2017, to 46
million, to support voluntary and community companies to provide local services to their
communities.

ENDS

https://www.welfare.ie/en/pdf/budfact17.pdf
Minister Varadkars recent campaign against people on Social Welfare, we decided to run a
slightly different campaign.

Vulture Funds Cheat US ALL -If you have info of malpractice by NAMA or Vulture Funds
BUT Never has the
9.4 EXEMPTION
been more Relevant Than NOW...
WE could loose it as Submissions need to be made Before the end of August 2017..
EXTRACT
""The Government cannot be allowed to cancel the hard won Irish Exemption. Since the
Government is not acting on our behalf nor is it acting on behalf of the EU, why and for whom is it
trying to force us to pay for water?"
Politicians must fix the leak
in Irish Waters funding
TDs need to take responsibility for the consequences of
capitulating on water charges
about 14 hours ago

Cliff Taylor

Water supplied to the community by the local council in Drogheda, Co Louth,

following a pipe burst. Photograph: Niall Carson/PA Wire
The controversy over the interruption to the water
supply in the northeast might all too easily be dismissed
as just the latest in a series of dramas surrounding Irish
Water. But what happened is as clear a warning sign as
you could want that years of underinvestment and poor
planning in our water infrastructure have left us
dangerously exposed.
There are scores of other potential flashpoints in the old
copper and asbestos pipes around the country, in
treatment plants which date from the 19th-century and
in our creaking waste water infrastructure. What is
emerging is a giant failure of public policy over many
years.
We have been investing too little in our water for years
and are now starting to pay the price. It never really
became an issue, because people start to care about
pipes only when they burst.
And for politicians there was more mileage presiding
over the opening of a new school or hospital wing than
ensuring the upgrading of a waste water plant or
replacing a few miles of an old 1970s asbestos pipe.
The anti-water charges argument that
we are 'already paying for it' via general
tax has won
Irish Water has a plan to start fixing this and has already
undertaken some important investments. But years of
neglect will take years to fix.
And it will take funding, too, with investment spending
by Irish Water due to rise from 522 million this year to
595 million next year and steadily higher to top 800
million by 2021, with further spending on this scale
required for years thereafter.
Consequences
With the Irish Water funding model now in tatters, the
Oireachtas will return to the issue of how this will be
paid for in the autumn. Right now, funding is agreed
only up to the end of next year.
The anti-water charges argument that we are already
paying for it via general tax has won. But no one is yet
facing up to the consequences of this. Money spent on
water means less spent elsewhere, or more taxes raised.
Guaranteeing money for water might mean less on
housing, or hospitals, or for a pre-election tax cut.
When our politicians return in the autumn, will this
weeks events have focused minds on the need to really
address this? Or will they all get carried away in point-
scoring over the water charges and claiming credit for
the repayment cheques?
Preparing for economic shocks is more important than a
tax cut
Rural broadband should be an absolute priority
Cliff Taylor: Post-Brexit frictionless Border is a fantasy
One of the central ideas behind the establishment of
Irish Water was that it would raise funds for itself and
be, in part at least, independent of the central exchequer
and in time off the State balance sheet.
An independent stream of income from domestic water
charges and the ability to borrow independently would
have given some guarantee of funding.
Now the risk is that needs of water will have to fight each
year against all the other State priorities for investment
social housing, rural broadband, roads and railways
and so on and the wider demands on the budgetary
pot.
There isnt a lot of point in refighting the water charges
debate. And nor is it relevant to what happened in the
northeast.
This resulted from decades off underinvestment and
mismanagement when 31 local authorities and three
urban councils managed the water and waste
infrastructure and services.
They operated on the basis of uncertain and often
inadequate funding, leading to delays, underinvestment
and to a string of locally-based, inefficient facilities.
Leaking mains
The network inherited by Irish Water in 2014 was
creaking at the seams, and some of our largest plants
date back to the Victorian era.
We have rusting, leaking cast-iron mains in our major
cities, some more than 100-years-old, and the estimate is
that 49 per cent our water is lost through leakage.
There have been an average of 168 local sewage incidents
each year. Just this week, Kilkee beach in Co Clare was
closed at the peak of the tourist season due to a pump
failure in a local waste treatment plant.
The original Irish Water funding model has
collapsed and no one is quite sure
where to go next
Solving all this will require significant investment over a
period of many years. Trying to square all the circles, the
Oireachtas committee on water funding suggested in its
April report that a specific chunk of general tax revenue
be earmarked to provide the necessary funding.
In this way, Irish Water would have its guaranteed
resources and, the committee argued, users would be
seen to pay, as required by EU directives.
Whether this will fly is open to question. Governments
will always want freedom to move tax revenues around,
rather than setting aside money for one purpose a
point specifically made by the Department of Finance at
the committee hearings.
Also, the EU may not let us off the hook so easily in
terms of the user-pays principle. Is earmarking some
USC, for example, for water investment really users
paying? There is some political support for so-called
wasteful houses to be charged, though collecting this
might cost nearly as much to collect as the revenue
raised.
We have driven ourselves into a cul de sac here. The
original Irish Water funding model has collapsed and
no one is quite sure where to go next.
We need to face up to the need for pay for this and
ensure that Irish Water has the certainty about funding
that it needs. If we arent paying via water charges, then
we will indeed be paying via general taxes. And the tax
pot will stretch only so far.
Taoiseach Leo Varadkar says that the squeezed middle
want tax cuts. But they are surely likely to put even
higher priority on water coming out of their taps.
The anti-water charges argument that we are already paying for it via general tax has
won. But no one is yet facing up to the consequences of this. Money spent on water means
less spent elsewhere, or more taxes raised. Guaranteeing money for water might mean less
on housing, or hospitals, or for a pre-election tax cut.
When our politicians return in the autumn, will this weeks events have focused minds on the
need to really address this? Or will they all get carried away in point-scoring over the water
charges and claiming credit for the repayment cheques?

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/cliff-taylor-
politicians-must-fix-the-leak-in-irish-water-s-funding-
1.3170154#.WXzJvyaoQMU.facebook

The Jobstown 23

Once there was an honest politician

The plight of working people her concern
And when she was in need of inspiration
To Connolly or Larkin she did turn
From a Stoneybatter cottage to the Council
And on to take her place in the Dil
She championed the weak, the disadvantaged
Her decency was praised were by one and all

But then the day arrived for the decision

A choice to serve the prosperous and the poor
Something made her slip towards the dark side
Eclipsing all the good she'd done before
Propping up the puppets of the privileged
Favouring the friends of the elite
She seemed to have forgotten where she'd come from
So they stopped her in her tracks on a Jobstown Street

They asked her why we pay the bank's lost gambles,

Taxed to pay a debt that we don't own?
They wondered if she knew how she'd betrayed them
And the Jobstown 23 are not alone

For nine long weeks they listened in that courtroom

As the witnesses told tales of the minister's plight
How the dregs were bent on anarchy and violence
How they promised that "they'd keep her there all night"
Then a voice from above said there's no hassle
And the judge declared "that memories we re frail"
But if the cameras didn't show what really happened
Could those "memories" have put them all in jail?

And what of the cases still outstanding?

Could a child falsely imprison on his own?
Enough's enough, it's time to drop the charges
For the Jobstown 23 are not alone
The Jobstown 23 are not alone
released July 26, 2017
Written and performed by Mick Blake
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfwi6htbou8
This should contradict anything that any journalist has to say about the jobstown
protest
https://www.facebook.com/JobstownNotGuilty/

Traitors in our midst. The IIEA are trying to get us involved with a EU army, an
army the Germans, French and others hope will rival the United States and
Russian armies. We are already being sucked into this imperial project, Varadkar
is full square behind it. Coveney went to the secret Bilderberg Group in 2013 and
after he came back home started pushing hard to get us involved, cheered on by
the Irish Times. If they get their way, Irish men and women will soon be invading
countries in Africa (to plunder their natural resources) and many will come
home in body bags. The IIEA is working hard behind the scenes to scrap national
sovereign states in favour of a United Europe. But will Ruairi Quinn and Brendan
Halligan volunteer to fight on the battlefields when EU goes to war? Don't be
silly.
BULLYING THE DEFENDANTS, THEIR SUPPORTERS AND THE JURY PRE TRIAL
WILL NOT WORK, YOUR HONOUR: The Real Irish Media is not going to get into
the Jobstown argument because we do not wish to jeopardise their cases. We will
not be commenting on this 2nd trial or re visiting the events at Jobstown while
the trial is ongoing. However, we publicly and unashamedly support all the
defendants and hope they are all acquitted. But the Labour Party appointed
Judge Melanie Greally should recuse herself from this 2nd round of political
prosecutions after her obvious biased tone yesterday. To keep mentioning social
media as if it was some type of illegal weapon just shows how scared the
establishment is of the ordinary people of Ireland having a say in public. If it was
up to judges like Melanie Greally, ALL court proceedings would be held in top
secret with only the mainstream media being told to parrot what the courts tell
them to parrot. There would be a greater chance of receiving justice in a shed in
rural South Armagh, surrounded by men holding AK47s and wearing balaclavas.
The contempt with which some members of the judiciary, at the behest of their
political controllers, hold the right to free speech is becoming obvious and it
should merit concern for all of us. The first shots against this 2nd batch of
Jobstown defendants have been fired and they have been fired not by the
prosecution but by the judge. The media are still in mourning at the jury's not
guilty verdict of the Jobstown 7 and the Taoiseach is still denial that those 7 men
are totally innocent in the eyes of the law, having been found so by a jury of their
peers. The 'politically appointed' judge did not include Dennis O' Brien's media
empire or the goverment's press office RTE in her 'warning' of yesterday, media
outlets that have publicly denounced the decision of a jury. There is a war being
waged against the people by the establishment and it is time to fight back with
whatever means is at our disposal.

The PSNI is breaching the human rights of families of victims of a Ulster

Volunteer Force (UVF) murder gang in the 1970s, the High Court has ruled.
https://www.courtsni.gov.uk/en-
GB/Judicial%20Decisions/SummaryJudgments/Documents/Summary%20of%2
0judgment%20-
%20Court%20finds%20Chief%20Constable%20breached%20article%202%20
by%20failing%20to%20produce%20HET%20Report%20into%20activities%20
of%20Gl/Summary%20of%20judgment%20-
%20In%20re%20Edward%20Barnard.pdf

A Guide to Environment Law in Ireland - A&L

much of which is based on EU directives. Environmental legisla- ... group, the Irish Environmental
Network ... that led to the breach

http://algoodbody.com/media/A%20Guide%20to%20Environment%20Law%2
0in%20Ireland.pdf
Irish Water advises Tipperary customers of water outage on Galtee water scheme
Irish Water regrets that due to a pipe burst overnight that customers on the Galtee water
supply scheme may be currently without water.
The areas affected will include:
Bansha, Lisvarrinane, Aherlow, Ardane, New Inn, Knockgraffon, Emly, Lattin, Cullen, Banard,
Ballydrehid, Rockwell, Cloonfinglass, Currana, Rossadrehid, Newtown, Golden, Kilross, Monard,
Donaskeigh, Knockavilla, Cashel, Thomastown, Suirville, Clerihan and surrounding areas
The pipe is currently being worked on and Irish Water aim to restore supply as soon as possible.
In order to address the shortage, temporary water stations have been established at the following
locations:
Kilross (outside the public house)
Emly (outside the school)
Cullen (at the crossroads)
Monard (at the school)
Customers are reminded to bring clean containers and to boil water taken from these stations before
use, as a precaution.
Irish Water apologises to customers for the inconvenience caused and thanks them for their patience
while crews work to repair the pipe
Extract from Oireachtas Ctte on Funding Domestic Water
Ireland EU Compliance, Feb 15, 2017
Jul 26, 2017
30 mins extract from the Oireachtas Committee on Future Funding of Water in Ireland.
Members spent one and half days in public and private sessions debating the most important
question about Ireland's obligation to and compliance with EU legislation especially the Water
Framework Directive 2000 and it's implementation through the River Basin Management
Plans. Crucially for Ireland as the video of the debate shows Ireland has availed of the 9.4
Exemption clause in the past and can do so into the future.

The Committee was made up of 20 members that included an 'independent' chairman,

Pdraig Cidigh. The 10 members who professed opposition to Irish Water Ltd, water
charges and household metering and advocated funding of Ireland's water infrastructure
through general taxation included five Right2Water TDs, two Sinn Fin, one Solidarity/PBP,
two Independents and five Fianna Fil.

Two Senior Counsels gave excellent opinions, Conleth Bradley invited by Fianna Fil can be
heard approx 9 mins and Matthias Kelly invited by Sinn Fin approx 12 mins.

Although Sinn Fin and Fianna Fil mentioned many times that they sought legal opinion over
the Irish Exemption, this was the first time it was published, albeit only in part. We would like
to hear more.

You would think that such an important debate would have formed a major part of the
chairman's final draft report.

In fact there wasn't one mention about it, both the River Basing Management Plan and the 9.4
Exemption never seen the light of day.

In the first place this omission was a serious remiss by the chairman. Secondly there wasn't a
whimper from any of the Right2Water members, incl Sinn Fin and Solidarity/PBP or Fianna
Fil about the omission in the draft or final reports.

Source: https://oireachtas.heanet.ie/mp4/cr4/...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l6wDv2JpEE&feature=youtu.be
Heard TV3 are going to replace Vinnie B with .... Brendan O'BOC-N-CONNOR. Are they off
their stupid little heads? Who wants to see this EGO spouting his Right Wing views every
week night? One of Denis O'Brien's favourite lick-arse propagandists sitting in Vin B's chair
doesn't just bear thinking about, I for one will be switching off. In fact if I see this gobshite
appearing on the screen I will likely get a hammer and smash up the TV, so BOC off you
Blueshirt bollix
Contempt laws
'inadequate' to curb
social media comment
Updated / Friday, 28 Jul 2017

Judge Melanie Greally decided not to alter bail conditions

A Circuit Court judge has said contempt of court laws

are hopelessly inadequate to curb comment on social
media, which has the potential to interfere with the
integrity of trials.
Judge Melanie Greally made her remarks during a
pre-trial hearing concerning the bail conditions of a
number of people charged in connection with the
Jobstown water charges protest who are due to go
on trial in October and April next.
The judge had considered changing the bail
conditions of the next group of Jobstown defendants
to ensure there was no comment on social media
which could compromise a trial or seek to influence
the outcome.
However, she decided bail conditions did not need to
be altered because anyone engaging in commentary
on social media or engaging in campaigns intended
or calculated to influence the outcome of the trial
would be a breach of the usual condition of bail to
keep the peace and be of good behaviour.

She said she wanted to remind all defendants that

any such behaviour would be evidence of criminal
conduct in the crime of contempt.
The judge also issued a stark warning to others,
including mainstream media, about the dangers of
commenting on the Jobstown case and "lumping" the
forthcoming defendants with those involved in the
previous trial.
Her warning came after defence lawyers said
"outrageous" comments had been made by journalist
Paul Williams on Newstalk recently.
The court heard the DPP was considering what
action to take in relation to the broadcast.
Judge Greally said they were at a very sensitive
stage in the immediate run up to the next trials.
She said the accused were entitled to a fair trial to be
decided on the evidence in the case and commentary
threatening the viability of the trial would jeopardise
those cases going ahead as planned, she said.
Lawyers for the defendants objected to bail
conditions being altered to include a ban on social
media commentary.
They said using bail conditions for this purpose was
the wrong mechanism and said the rules governing
contempt of court were sufficient to deal with any
interference with the court process.
Defence counsel Giollaosa Lideadha said today's
hearing "serves as a very powerful reminder to those
who seek to step over the line from a position of
freedom of expression into the area of actually
interfering with the process of the court is stepping
over the line of criminal conduct and contempt."
He said all courts have an inherent jurisdiction to
protect the integrity of the court process but it can be
achieved by a clear and unambiguous statement
that communications in public which step over the
line of freedom of expression and amount to an
interference with the trial may be the subject of
serious criminal proceedings for contempt of court.
He said there were a range of mechanisms open to
the court to deal with such breaches including up to
life in prison.
However, Judge Melanie Greally said the contempt
of court laws were "hopelessly inadequate to curb
comment on social media".
This was obvious from recent comments from the
outgoing Chief Justice Susan Denham about the
need for reform in the area of social media and the
courts.
Judge Greally said her proposal to impose
restrictions on public comment as a condition of bail
was a precautionary condition seeking to prevent the
trial from being in any way compromised.
Her concerns were prompted by the previous
Jobstown trial during which comments were made on
social media and could have collapsed the trial at a
very late stage had they not been taken down.
She said the previous trial had demonstrated "a very
pressing need for the social media commentary
surrounding this case to be controlled".
She said there was no right for anyone to express
themselves on social media in relation to an ongoing
trial.
Prosecuting counsel Tony McGillicuddy said there
was a hierarchy of rights and the right to a fair trial
comes first.
He said the right to a fair trial applied to both sides
and "not to just one side of the house".
He said there was a "curious" distinction being put
forward by the defence about a right to "report" on a
trial.
He said it was hard to see how someone involved in
a trial could do so as to do so they would be
expressing an opinion in some manner.
Her warning came after defence lawyers said "outrageous" comments had been made by
journalist Paul Williams on Newstalk recently.

The court heard the DPP was considering what action to take in relation to the broadcast.

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2017/0728/893720-jobstown-court/

The Habeas Corpus Project Annual Report 2014 - 2015

I read yesterday about a refusal for Free Legal Aid or at least the potential of withdrawal of
the scheme to certain individuals. I did a Google search on the 'Haas case' and found this
http://habeas-corpus.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Annual-Report-
Final-Edit.pdf

Leo Varadkar says major water leaks can never be

avoided completely
Sunday, July 30, 2017
Leo Varadkar says Fine Gael has thrown in the towel on water charges
and will not campaign for their reintroduction.

The Taoiseach has denied that the scrapping of water charges - or their
introduction in the first place - would have avoided the major leak that
crippled the Drogheda region this week.

He says no matter what kind of investment there was, or what kind of

charges would exist, major leaks can never be avoided.

"I'm sure water pipes burst and they get fixed and that's what happened
in Drogheda," he said.
"I think it's probably a bit too simplistic to say if we had had water
charges or if we had set up Irish Water 20 years ago the pipes wouldn't
break. I'm sure under any system pipes burst on occasion."

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/leo-varadkar-says-major-
water-leaks-can-never-be-avoided-completely-800040.html

Water shortage blamed

on leaking pipes crisis
Supply cannot meet household demands
as councillor slams creaking system
Wayne O'Connor
July 30 2017
The country's creaking water system is leaking thousands of litres every day in
regions currently facing usage restrictions as reservoirs run perilously low.

Families in Donegal, Carlow and Galway have been told to limit their water
usage this summer, while residents in Louth and Meath were without a
regular water supply for more than a week because of a damaged water pipe.

Supplies in the north east were returning to normal yesterday after a complex
repair on a uniquely high-pressured water main at Staleen Water Treatment
Plant. Temporary water stations were being stood down in places where taps
were flowing normally.

However, night-time pressure reductions have been enforced in Carlow town

and surrounding areas. A reduced flow there each night between midnight
and 6am is likely to remain in place until August 4.

Residents living in an area stretching 18km along Donegal's coast between

Quigley's Point and Greencastle have been told to conserve as much water as
possible and report leaks.

It comes as concerns grow about water supplies to homes and businesses in

the region as reservoir levels become increasingly low because of unusually
dry weather.

Local representatives have been told supplies in Lough Fad cannot meet the
demand for the two million litres of water delivered to the region every day, an
average of more than 600 litres per customer. Locals say this is indicative of
the volume of water being wasted and leaking out of the country's aging water
infrastructure. Recent studies show a household uses 250 litres on average per
day.

Labour councillor Martin Fadden said if the leaks were fixed there would be
no need to conserve water. Now locals are concerned further restrictions will
be put in place that will see pressure reduced at night-time.

"Irish Water said they have been in contact with Northern Ireland's water
company and put things in place to try and make sure that they could get
water if it was needed," said Mr Fadden.

"The only thing I am concerned about is that we will get notification to say
that we will get cut off or a reduced supply for a couple of hours. They said
that could happen but it hasn't happened yet."

Irish Water originally issued the conservation notice to customers in the area
in May but reiterated its request to residents this weekend and asked people
living on two separate pipelines to minimise the amount of water they use.
Residents in Milford, Kerrykeel, Rathmullan, and Ramelton, served by Lough
Colm, have also been asked to conserve as much water as possible.

Irish Water said it plans to spend 9m on different projects and drought

prevention measures in the county. It has also made changes so customers
affected in Milford will receive water from another supply.

"In the short term, in the Milford area 750,000 is being spent by Irish Water
on pipeline extensions while, in the long term, 1.2m is being invested in
pipeline extensions from Milford to Letterkenny," said a spokesperson.

"A further 750,000 is also being spent on extending the supply from
Cranford to Milford.

"A long-term project in this area will see an interconnector laid between Illies
and East Inishowen which is being progressed at a cost to the utility of 5.8m.
This is combined with a further 500,000 spend on water rehabilitation pipe
line replacement works."

Long-suffering residents on the Aran Islands face water usage restrictions

every summer and have been battling with local authorities or Irish Water for
the past 20 years to see the issue addressed.

They hope tanks will be installed and filled on Inisheer before next spring to
alleviate water shortages there.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/water-shortage-blamed-on-leaking-
pipes-crisis-35981131.html
Are any bottled waters coming out by day anywhere in Ireland ? and in
pitaicalour are there any large quantities being removed Anywhere In New areas
? Someone did say ,isn't it strange they want keep public eye off water Reservoirs
in Ireland now ? . Curious ? .
CLOUDS OF SUSPICION OVER
OMISSION OF 9.4 EXEMPTION
IN OIREACHTAS WATER
COMMITTEE REPORT
July 30, 2017
by Enda Craig and James Quigley

European Commission and Senior Counsels on 9.4 Exemption and River

Basin Management Plans Feb 15 2017
Oireachtas report omits any mention of crucial European Law
session
In this article we will again return to the question of Irelands 9.4
Exemption, the River Basin Management Plans and their
inexplicable omission in the draft or final report of the Oireachtas
Committee on Funding Domestic Water when it concluded
business in April 2017.
 Conleth Bradley, SC legal opinion
Anyone not acquainted with the importance of the above topics
can read our article Michael Noonan 'Water Charges Required
Under European Law' is a Lie or listen to the 30 mins video below
or read the excellent legal opinions by Irish Senior Counsels,
Conleth Bradley and Matthias Kelly, who, by the way, were invited
to present submissions to the Committee by Fianna Fil and Sinn
Fin, respectively.
This article zones in on the Oireachtas Committee on the Future
Funding of Domestic Water debate on the 15th February,
2017. We draw your attention to the fact that the subject of the
debate i.e the 9.4 Exemption and the River Basin Management
Plans are of the utmost importance to the anti water charges
campaign, that the debate lasted for a complete session and it
somehow never got included in the final draft report or the
subsequent final report of the committee. This final report was
passed by the Dil on the 13th April 2017 and will form the basis of
any future legislation.
 Matthias Kelly, SC, legal opinion
Report procedures and inconsistency
It could be the case thatits the way they do business down in
Dil, as we were informed by a R2W TDs on the Oireachtas
Committee, however, as ordinary citizens, we can only take the
explanation found on the Oireachtas website itself at face value
where it says
On an ongoing basis Committees publish reports based on the
meetings and hearings they have held.
Ordinary citizens would instinctively know that any chairperson
would include in their report such important matters that were
debated for a complete session, especially one with top opinions
from senior counsel.
However, this was not the case here. One would think that the
Committee members, those opposing water charging, including
Fianna Fil and Sinn Fin, would be up in arms over such an
omission, especially since they were responsible for inviting legal
submissions in the first place.
Significantly, there wasn't even a whimper after the draft report
was presented to the committee member on the 5th April, 2017,
(sans any hint of 9.4 Exemption or the RBMP).

Understanding the sequence of events for reports

Pdraig Cidigh, Chairman
After all the meetings of the Oireachtas Committee had ended, it
was up to the chairman Pdraig Cidigh and his team to furnish
a " confidential draft report". This report should have included and
reflected the various topics that had been discussed during the
committees private and public sessions. This procedure allows
committee members to scrutinise the contents and then agree or
not to a final report.
In this case a draft report was duly compiled and circulated to each
committee member on the 5th April, 2017. After reading that report
it would have immediately been obvious that any mention of one of
the most important sessions, namely, the 9.4 Exemption and the
River Basin Management Plans was not included.
Now would that not raise alarm bells?
If the R2W members or for that matter Fianna Fil members had
been genuinely fighting for the 9.4 Exemption as they professed
during the 15th February session , they would have immediately
taken steps to remedy the situation and insist that the draft report
be rewritten to include the vital information.
This did not happen and as we have witnessed, when the draft
report (without 9.4 Exemption) was circulated, unbelievably, Paul
Murphy, Richard Boyd-Barrett, Mick Barry and Brid Smith headed
for the media and claimed a great victory. This was followed the
next day by a crowd of R2W TDs who again claimed exactly the
same 'victory'. Fianna Fil and Fine Gael then rejigged a few
words in the draft report during the following week and came up
with a final report that again never mentioned the 9.4 Exemption or
the River Basin Management Plan.
What are we to make of it
Flabbergasted at the short shortsightedness, appalled at the
double-cross and wonder at why the wastefulness of the elaborate
legal opinions especially in defense of the 9.4 Exemption.
However, such is our paranoia, we can not rule out that Cidigh
did include the February session, as per protocol, but for some
reason it was removed by agreement of the Oireachtas members.
Such was the secrecy of some parts of the committee sessions
and the scarcity of information about what was going on especially
from R2W that we are really at a disadvantage.
If we take it that Cidigh and his team omitted the February
session, then we might look at that as grounds for calling for a
mismanagement of committee protocol and ask for the final report
to be deemed null and void.
Another aspect of members not objecting or saying anything is
how can R2W hold Fianna Fil, or vice versa, accountable if
neither objected to the omission or worse colluded in it.
That is depressing enough but what is worse is the lack of any
credible answers from R2W, Sinn Fin, Fianna Fil and the Left
despite being asked.
One response we came across is worthy of a mention though.
That can be found in an unaccredited Right2Water Ireland
revisionary article where, in relation to the victory claim, it referred
to R2W Oireachtas members as Naive.
Now if there is one description we would never use to describe
Sinn Fin, it would not be naive. More like seasoned, wily,
cunning, ruthless establishment politicians, cut from the same cloth
as the rest down in the Dil..
http://buncranatogether.com/home/2017/7/29/clouds-of-suspicion-over-
omission-of-9-4-exemption-in-oireachtas-water-committee-report

Extract from Oireachtas Ctte on Funding Domestic Water

Ireland - EU Compliance, Feb 15, 2017
Jul 26, 2017
30 mins extract from the Oireachtas Committee on Future Funding of Water in
Ireland. Members spent one and half days in public and private sessions
debating the most important question about Ireland's obligation to and
compliance with EU legislation especially the Water Framework Directive
2000 and it's implementation through the River Basin Management Plans.
Crucially for Ireland as the video of the debate shows Ireland has availed of
the 9.4 Exemption clause in the past and can do so into the future.

The Committee was made up of 20 members that included an 'independent'

chairman, Pdraig Cidigh. The 10 members who professed opposition to
Irish Water Ltd, water charges and household metering and advocated
funding of Ireland's water infrastructure through general taxation included five
Right2Water TDs, two Sinn Fin, one Solidarity/PBP, two Independents and
five Fianna Fil.

Two Senior Counsels gave excellent opinions, Conleth Bradley invited by

Fianna Fil can be heard approx 9 mins and Matthias Kelly invited by Sinn
Fin approx 12 mins.

Although Sinn Fin and Fianna Fil mentioned many times that they sought
legal opinion over the Irish Exemption, this was the first time it was published,
albeit only in part. We would like to hear more.

You would think that such an important debate would have formed a major
part of the chairman's final draft report.

In fact there wasn't one mention about it, both the River Basing Management
Plan and the 9.4 Exemption never seen the light of day.

In the first place this omission was a serious remiss by the chairman.
Secondly there wasn't a whimper from any of the Right2Water members, incl
Sinn Fin and Solidarity/PBP or Fianna Fil about the omission in the draft or
final reports.

Source: https://oireachtas.heanet.ie/mp4/cr4/...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l6wDv2JpEE

Two thirds of the money diverted to Irish Water came from

your motor tax
Feb 5, 2015
JOHN MCGUINNESS has said it was a mistake to not ensure Irish Water comes under the
remit of the Public Accounts Committee.
The chairman of the committee said Ireland will regret the decision to not allow the
Comptroller and Auditor General monitor the utility.
I think well learn to regret that in future years.
Representatives from the Department of the Environment appeared before PAC today.
Fianna Fil TD Sen Fleming said he was absolutely shocked that the Department could
give Irish Water such large subventions without service level agreements.
The semi-state body received a subvention of 439 million in 2014 and is expected to receive
399 million and 479 million in 2015 and 2016 respectively.
The committee heard that two thirds of this money came from motor tax payments.
McGuinness said this is difficult to justify at a time when local authorities are starved of
money to fix the potholes.
He said the committee had been on a financial mystery tour regarding the utility, before
reading out a text from a man who told him potholes were no longer water holes but
reservoirs.
Its just getting more bizarre as time goes on, Fleming added on the motor tax issue.

He said if the HSE were to give out this amount of money without service level agreements
PAC would excoriate them.
sean f
Source: Oireachtas.ie
John McCarthy, Secretary General of the Department of Environment, said Minister Alan
Kelly will send an expectation letter to Irish Water in relation to the funding.
He said that the utility is ultimately answerable to Kelly, the Commission for Energy
Regulation and the Oireachtas Environment Committee, before which representatives will
appear in the coming weeks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGhdjNX50-8

Sen Fleming at Irish Water PAC meeting

Feb 6, 2015
"It is just getting more bizarre as time goes on. That is all I can say." Sen Fleming at
yesterday's PAC meeting where it was revealed that motor tax, traditionally used to maintain
services and roads, is being used to prop up Irish Water.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9Z7wDz1YrE

Jonathan Sugarman on Banking and Financial Regulation in

Ireland.
Apr 16, 2017
Unicredit Whistleblower tells of liquidity breech in bank and the Financial Regulators inaction.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Le1wfSMIsUw

Whistleblowers - Jonathan Sugarman 15 11 2016

Nov 19, 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuAQO-jkjwM

TV3 - Tonight with Vincent Brown - Jonathan Sugarman

(5/12/16)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuEhUicQz4s
THE RIGHT2WATER BATTLE
CONTINUES AND ITLL NEVER END

Water is now the most valuable resource on the planet. In the UK,
water companies generate three times the profit levels of oil or
gas. With water becoming scarcer, and the planets population
growing, the battle for water ownership and privatization is only
going to continue and escalate. Big business knows this:
Water is a focus for those in the know about global strategic
commodities. As with oil, the supply is finite but demand is growing
by leaps and unlike oil there is no alternative. Credit Suisse.
Household names such as Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase,
Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Allianz, Deutche Bank and HSBC have
joined companies such as Nestl in securing a stake in the
privatisation of water. Others firms such as Veolia Water, a
company intimately linked with Irish Water, form part of a
conglomerate known as the Global Water Summit, whose domain
name (www.watermeetsmoney.com) tells us everything we need
to know about the agenda being pursued by those involved.
So with this in mind, we must accept that elements of the Irish
political establishment and the elites of the world will always be
trying to commodify and get their hands on our water so they can
hand it over to private profiteers, and that the battle will never, ever
end. Theres simply too much money to be made from water for
them to ever walk away from obtaining its ownership so we cant
either.
Is this a victory?
Much criticism has been made of a number of TDs who support
Right2Water declaring a victory on the plinth of the Dail on 5th
April 2017. At that particular time, the Joint Oireachtas Committee
on Water had agreed a draft report stating that charges were to be
abolished, mandatory metering would end and the referendum to
enshrine public ownership of our water supply would take place.
Had that Report been adopted, it would indeed have been a
massive victory for everyone who had campaigned against water
charges.
Instead, Fianna Fail and Fine Gael conspired to change the report
outside of committee hearings, a scandal in itself, undermining the
democratic processes of the Oireachtas, and not for the first time.
In the same week, Simon Coveney, the Minister responsible for
water, issued threats to the committee when he wrote to the Chair.
The result was another flip-flop from Fianna Fail who were now
back in favour of water charges. Remember, before the 2016
general election, Fianna Fail not only declared that they would
scrap water charges, but that they would also abolish Irish Water.
Heres a direct line from Fianna Fail before the election:
Fianna Fil is committed to:
Abolishing Irish Water
Suspending water charges
Investing in infrastructure
Returning services to democratic local councils under a national
framework.
What happened after the election was that more than two thirds of
all TDs elected were officially opposed to water charges. Yet the
charges remained. As David Gibney said in 2016, this is an affront
to democracy.
But back to the victory. Was it a victory? Not exactly. The
government are continuing to ram water charges in through the
back door. They will do anything they can to keep this project alive.
After losing half of their seats in the last election, youd wonder
whether some of these government TDs have shares in private
water companies.
The call of a victory was a bit premature. However, was it a
scandal that they spoke on the Dail plinth and declared a victory?
No. It was naieve to trust the Fianna Fail and Fine Gael members
of the committee but with an Independent chairing the committee,
one might expect a bit of honesty. Furthermore, it must be
remembered that Fine Gael members of the committee were out
lobbying the media on the plinth for weeks, trying to get favourable
coverage for their arguments, which they obviously received. The
Right2Water TDs had to challenge that.
The Right2Water campaign has also come in to criticism for
declaring a substantial victory for people power. Now this, I
believe, is true.
Think back to 2010 and the original plans for water charges. John
Gormley from the Green Party had planned to raise 1 billion from
domestic water charges. By 2014, that had reduced to 300m. By
2015 it was down to 271m and now its down to 0.
In terms of households, a four person family in 2014 was expecting
a bill for 480. By November 2016, that was down to 260. And
everyone was offerred a 100 conservation grant to subscribe to
Irish Water. Three years later and there are no bills and those who
were intimidated into paying are expecting a refund.
Furthermore, Irish Water is no longer looking for your PPS
number, they are no longer threatening to turn your water down to
a trickle for being unable to pay your bills, the government were
forced to legislate to keep Irish Water in public ownership and
there has now been a unanimous vote in favour of a referendum in
the Dail, Eurostat ruled against the government in their off-balance
sheet exercise, and there are many, many more victories.
Arguably, the greatest is the increased level of cooperation of TDs
opposed to austerity as was seen throughout the water committee
hearings. Does this mean the battle is over? No, it never will be, as
mentioned previously.
Importantly, the next two steps in this battle are to:
Insist that the government includes the 9.4 Exemption from the
Water Framework Directive in their River Basin Management
Plans.
Demand that the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Housing,
Planning, Community and Local Government, along with the
Government, deliver the referendum to enshrine ownership
of our water in the hands of the public.
The River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) and
the 9.4 Water Framework Directive Exemption
Despite mischievous reports to the contrary, the Right2Water
campaign has continually called for the utilisation of the Water
Framework Directive 9.4 exemption from domestic water charges.
The campaign shared Kathy Sinnotts article on the exemption in
2014. We also shared Marian Harkins video in relation to the
exemption. In fact, in a letter of complaint to RTE about their
coverage of water charges, the campaign coordinators were highly
critical of the portrayal by the State broadcaster that the derogation
was gone.
For anyone interested, Right2Water sent a detailed submission to
the Expert Commission on Water which is available for anyone to
read in full here. This is a good resource for anyone wishing to
understand Right2Waters true perspective on water charges. But
specifically in relation to the exemption or derogation, as its
often referred to, the excerpt is here:
In response to a question from Irish MEP Marian Harkin in
June of this year, the European Commission stated that:
Ireland made a clear commitment to set up water charges to
comply with the
provisions of Article 9(1) [of the Water Framework Directive]
... Ireland
subsequently applied water charges and the commission
considers that the directive does not provide for a situation
whereby it can revert to any previous practice.
However, the Commission is also on record as stating that it
considers established practices to be those practices which
were an established practice at the time of adoption of the
directive. This Directive was adopted on October 23rd, 2000,
and transposed into Irish law in 2003, when it is beyond doubt
that Ireland used general taxation as its established practice.
Indeed, this was the established practice right up until the
introduction of domestic water charges in October 2012 in a
project which has now been resoundly rejected by the
majority of Irish citizens.
On this basis, Right2Water believes it is the Irish
governments duty to use its derogation, justify its approach
to river basin management and, if necessary, challenge the
Commission through the EU courts. If the political will is there
this could be done with reference to the 2014 landmark case
on EU water recovery rules whereby the European Court of
Justice found in favour of Germany, after the European
Commission tried unsuccessfully to take that state to court
for, in its opinion, failing to fulfil its Water Framework
Directive obligations. This judgment conclusively stated that
it cannot be inferred that the absence of pricing for water
service activities will necessarily jeopardise the attainment of
the Water Framework Directive.
To clarify this matter further, every time you call for water charges
to be scrapped, you are calling for the use of the derogation. If the
government were to agree to the scrapping of water charges, or
the Joint Oireachtas Committee was to recommend in favour of
scrapping water charges, this would obviously have to be done by
using the 9.4 exemption.
However, those who have insisted that the Right2Water campaign
prioritise the 9.4 exemption above all else are playing a very
dangerous game. Even if the government include the derogation in
the River Basin Management Plan, the government can still bring
in or continue with water charges. Simply utilising the exemption
does not scrap water charges, abolish Irish Water or end metering
for that matter. Are those who portray the inclusion of the
derogation as the only way to achieve success unaware that the
derogation has been in existance since 2003, and yet the
government brought in water charges anyway? Are they ok with
water charges in place, as long as we have the exemption?
Having said that, it is true that if the government does not include
the derogation, it will be devestating for the campaign. Over the
coming weeks and months we need to focus our attentions
collectively on those who can ensure the exemption is included
in the River Basin Management Plan. This includes Fine Gael,
Fianna Fail and the Independent Alliance. You can find out more
about the RBMP here and we will be lodging our submission
shortly which will be available to the public.
Its important also to remember that the 9.4 exemption is not
permanent. It has to be included in the RBMP by the government
of the day. They and they alone have the right and, in our opinion,
obligation, to compile and submit such plans. Each RBMP covers
a six year period and the current plan is overdue and will apply
until 2021, when again, we will have to demand it is included
again. Remember we said this is a permanent battle? This is also
one of the reasons why all those opposed to water charges must
get sufficiently organised. More on this later.
Attacks from within?
Right2Water is a broad based campaign, deliberately so. Since the
beginning we have encouraged all activists to utilise all peaceful
methods to prevent water charges from being imposed on the Irish
public while not focusing on one tactic alone. This included support
for those boycotting bills, blocking the installation of water meters
and lobbying of politicians. This strategy has been a success, so
far. Through mass mobilisation on numerous fronts, and through
unity, together we have delivered some major victories along the
way.
However, since the beginning of the campaign, there has been
powerful opposition. The Irish State has come down heavy on
protesters like those from Jobstown in recent weeks. The
mainstream media has continually misrepresented the anti-water
charges movement and protesters have been labeled dissidents,
sinister fringes, and even been equated to ISIS. Irish Water has
been spending more than 3 million a year on advertising, so we
were never going to get a fair hearing. So called experts have
been rolled out for a well resourced pro-water charges lobby. The
EU has set up fiscal rules which incentivise commodification and
privatisation of water. This is all to be expected.
What is unexpected and unexplained is how many who say they
want water charges scrapped continually misrepresent others in
the campaign. Why do some attack politicians who have
continually voted to scrap charges and refuse to vent their anger or
attention at politicians who vote in favour of them like Fianna Fail
or Fine Gael? They criticise five TDs on a committee of 20 for not
being able to include the 9.4 exemption, yet have never criticised
the person who drafted the report or any of those who voted in
favour of it.
When you look at the facts and the statements linked above, you
wonder what motivation some of these activists have in trying to
undermine the Right2Water campaign?
Right2Waters most recent blog has one sentence which captures
the demands of the campaign:
Irish Water should now be abolished, wasteful metering
programme should be ended, a referendum must be held and
all charges against water protesters should be dropped.
This has been consistent throughout the campaign, so those who
refer to political parties, independent politicians, Right2Water
representatives or anyone else within the campaign as sell outs,
must have some other agenda? Again, for clarity, this is the official
Right2Water policy and it hasnt changed since it was adopted.
For those who still question the motivations of Right2Water, more
evidence is here. And here. And here. And here. And here.
All Right2Water meetings are public and anyone can attend and
have their say. If anyone has genuine criticisms of strategy or
tactics, they can contact us at right2waterirl@gmail.com. It is
important to note that this campaign does not have and never had
anyone working full-time on it.
In the meantime, those who have experienced and felt the power
we have all felt over the last number of years through the water
charges movement, and are genuine about achieving real change
in our country, can attend a Congress for a New Ireland on
Saturday, 9th September 2017 to establish exactly how we can
work together to achieve more successes, including the future
abolition of water charges. Please register to attend the
conference here.
http://www.right2water.ie/blog/right2water-battle-continues-and-itll-never-
end
RIGHT2WATER
Water is a human right, essential for life and for all our human needs. As such, water provision
and sanitation should not be subject to the profit motive or the free market and should be made
available to all, free at the point of use, and on the basis of need, not means.

Irish Water PLC and domestic water charges will be abolished within the first 100 days of a
progressive Government.

Irish Water PLC will be replaced with a single national water and sanitation board which will be
solely responsible for the provision, transmission, sanitation, management and operation of the
public water and sanitation supply in the public interest.

This policy will see a full referendum to enshrine a new Article in Bunreacht Na hEireann. The
date of this referendum would coincide with the establishment of the new national water board.

Article 28 Section 4:2.1

The Government shall be collectively responsible for the protection, management and
maintenance of the public water system. The Government shall ensure in the public interest that
this resource remains in public ownership and management.
This policy will provide for an end to water meter installation and ensuing costs.

This policy will see conservation measures legislated for including mandatory planning
permission requirements, incentivised and subsidised water saving devices, and a public education
campaign.

Our water infrastructure is in desperate need of investment in order to upgrade the system and
repair leaks. This policy provides for an investment of between 6 and 7 billion to be provided
through a progressive taxation model, details of which are available in the accompanying Fiscal
Framework Document.

Funding our water services through progressive taxation measures will ensure citizens always
have access to water based on their needs without the possibility of water shut-offs due to unpaid
bills in the future. It will also ensure our water services will never be privatised and that Ireland
remains with zero water poverty.
Acknowledgement The Right2Water Unions acknowledge the support and advice in framing the
above referendum position of Seamus OTuathail S.C. and Treasa Brannick OCillin, candidate
Barrister at Law Degree, The Honourable Society of Kings Inns.

9TH RIGHT2WATER NATIONAL

DEMONSTRATION SET FOR
SATURDAY APRIL 8TH

Campaign welcomes unanimous Oireachtas Committee

endorsement of referendum
Complete abolition of charges and metering remain bottom
line
At a press conference held this morning (Thursday March 9th), the
Right2Water campaign announced that its 9th National
Demonstration will be held on Saturday April 8th. The Press
Conference was addressed by Right2Water Co-Ordinator Brendan
Ogle, Oireachtas Committee member Jonathan OBrien and
Maeve Curtis of Dundalk Right2Water, a non- party community
activist, Wife, Mother and Grandmother
Commenting, Unite official and Right2Water Coordinator Brendan
Ogle said:
Without the sustained pressure exerted by the public through the
Right2Water campaign since 2014, we would not be where we are
now with charges nearly abolished and an Oireachtas Committee
largely reflecting the views of hundreds of thousands of people
who came onto the streets of our towns and cities to assert our
human right to water, as well as the electorate in Election 2016.
We welcome the unanimous view of the Committee that a
referendum should be held to enshrine our water services in public
ownership.
The demonstration on April 8th will allow the public to
demonstrate that this issue is not an issue of political opportunism
but is, and always has been, about vindication of our human
Right2Water by paying for our water and sanitation through the
exemplary model of progressive taxation. I would like to reiterate
our view that charges should be abolished in their entirety and that
water metering, which is an enabler of charges, should also be
abolished and the associated funds invested instead in our
antiquated and leaking water infrastructure, Mr Ogle said.
In addition Right2Water responded to arguments about excessive
use by calling on Minister Simon Coveney to enact a swimming
pool tax and have committed to supporting such a simple and
direct tax to assuage ministerial and other concerns about
excessive use linked to swimming pool ownership.
The demonstration on April 8th will be in Dublin City Centre with
route and assembly to be announced closer to the date.
MICHAEL NOONAN 'WATER
CHARGES REQUIRED UNDER
EUROPEAN LAW' IS A LIE
March 9, 2016
Article by James Quigley
Former Fine Gael finance minister Michael Noonan's
comments made to RTE on March 07, 2016, have been
exposed as lies by Kathy Sinnott. Ms Sinnott was a member
of the European Parliament from 2006 to 2009 and has written
extensively on the Water Framework Directive and the River
Basin Management Plan, with particular reference to Ireland's
derogation (exemption) to the Water Framework Directive,
2000/60/EC .

Mr Noonan said on RTE News, Mon March 07, that "Under

European law, Ireland was obliged to charge consumers for
water. There was a derogation up to 2010 where Ireland wasn't
obliged to charge for water, but the derogation was ended by the
Fianna Fil-Green government, so legally now under European
law water must be charged for in Ireland."

KATHY SINNOTT - MR NOONAN IS INCORRECT.

Kathy Sinnott Independent MEP 2004-2009

Ms Sinnott said "Mr Noonan is incorrect. Our derogation is
included in the first Irish River Basin Management Plan (RBMP)
2008-2015. This was supposed to be a 7 year plan but Ireland is
behind schedule. The next Irish River Basin Management Plan
was supposed to come out this year for the period of 2016-2021,
however, there is a delay and it may not come out until 2017"
Ms Sinnott said that "as long as we are functioning under the first
plan that was put in place when I was an MEP, then we have a
derogation, the so called Irish Exemption". She believed that"Alan
Kelly may haveput water charging in the second River Basin
Management Plan for 2016-2021. However, if this new plan is not
activated then we are still functioning under the 2008 plan."
Michael Noonan is misinformed or maybe lying when he says our
derogation ended in 2010. It could be he is getting mixed up
between the Water Framework Directive and the River Basin
Management Plan. A mix up that is quite easy to make for
ordinary folk but for a minister, well, that is another matter.
Ms Sinnot said that" the EU was functioning at that time under the
2008 plan and would have continued for at least the next 7
years. When I was checking it out I spoke to an official In the
European Commission in the section that deals with the European
Water Framework Directive which the River Basin Management
Plan comes under. I was informed that we still had the
derogation. The official assured me that the EU could not take the
derogation away from us and that the only way we could loose it
was for Ireland to give it up voluntarily."
The official told Ms Sinnott that the then Minister for Environment,
Alan Kelly was going to get rid of the derogation. However, any
detail of the new plan has not been made public. Whether it will be
passed remains to be seen especially in light of developments in
relation to the issues around Irish Water and water charging.
See full details of Kathy Sinnott's The Irish Exemption in
Attack The Tax

NESSA CHILDERS QUERYING ALAN KELLY'S

NEW RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLAN 2016-
2021

Nessa Childers MEP Incumbent

Buncrana Together contacted Ms Nessa Childers, MEP Dublin,
who has written extensively on the Water Framework Directive,
Childers Welcomes Clarification from European Commission
Re Water Charges and European Law.
Bronwen Maher on behalf of Ms Childers said that
" the 2016-2021 River Basin Management Plan was submitted by
the Irish Government last year and included water charges (the
Government thereby opting out of the non domestic charge clause
in the Water Framework Directive). I suspect as the last
Government has submitted the next RBMP that it cannot be
withdrawn but we will table a question with the Commission to
seek clarification on this issue. Please note that it can take up to
four weeks, if not longer, for an answer to be returned to an MEP "
Ms Childers in the above article, December 2015, welcomed
clarification from the European Commission that member states,
including Ireland, do not have to apply individualised domestic
water charges to comply with the Water Framework Directive.

She said "Each EU member state is obliged to draw up plans

under this directive to show how water sources are protected from
pollution, and how the cost of water services is carefully priced,
including domestic usage. It is an extremely good piece of
European environmental legislation and we have much work to
do to improve water quality in Ireland. However I am perplexed
about reports that Ireland will formally submit a plan to include
domestic water charges under our EU Water Framework
Directive. I strongly recommend that we reserve the option to
design our water services funding to suit our needs in Ireland."
Interestingly the article gives a response to Ms Childers questions
to the Commission, Dec 05, 2015 where Mr Vella on behalf of the
Commission stated
" The responsibility for implementation of the Water Framework
Directive (WFD) lies with the Member States and there is no
obligation to follow particular schemes or methods. However,
methodologies for calculation of cost recovery of water services do
exist and are being developed further. For example there is work
under way within the Common Implementation Strategy for the
WFD implementation on further guidance on assessment of
environmental and resource costs.
There is no specific requirement in Art 9 of the WFD for cost
recovery to rely on individual consumption. However, for the
Commission, an adequate implementation of the principle of
incentive water pricing included in the provisions of Art 9, as well
as of the more general polluter-pays principle embedded in the
Treaties, requires a clear link between water tariffs and actual
individual water consumption. In this context, water metering
seems to be a basic precondition for proper implementation of the
WFD."
Make of that what you will. Notice the work 'seem' in the last
sentence. It seems to be in the interpretation.

FLIUCH OFF IRISH WATER LTD - ZONES IN ON

ARTICLE 9 OF WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE

Fliuch Off Irish Water Ltd, a Cork City based anti Irish Water
organisation stated that" Irish people have paid for their water
infrastructure over the years via income tax this was the
understanding that Irish people had now we are being fed the lie
that we must be like our EU neighbours and pay for our water
while 11 billion of water infrastructure is given to Irish Water
gratis.
What Irish media and government politicians fail to point out is that
most other EU citizens get a far higher quality of public services
i.e. a bigger bang for their buck. You simply cannot compare the
current system in Ireland to any other EU country its like
comparing apples and oranges."
Noel from Fliuch Off directed our attention to Article 9 of the Water
Framework Directive and emphasising the complete article pointed
out clause 4 and in particular phrase *established practice*. He
said " what they've done now is tried to say that direct domestic
charges are now and 'established practice'. This is patently
untrue.

WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE 2000/60/EC

Read full text, in particular Ariticle 9 of the Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.
Article 9
Recovery of costs for water services
1. Member States shall take account of the principle of recovery of
the costs of water services, including environmental and resource
costs, having regard to the economic analysis conducted
according to Annex III, and in accordance in particular with the
polluter pays principle.
Member States shall ensure by 2010

- that water-pricing policies provide adequate incentives for users

to use water resources efficiently, and thereby contribute to the
environmental objectives of this Directive,
- an adequate contribution of the different water uses,
disaggregated into at least industry, households and agriculture, to
the recovery of the costs of water services, based on the economic
analysis conducted according to Annex III and taking account of
the polluter pays principle.
Member States may in so doing have regard to the social,
environmental and economic effects of the recovery as well as the
geographic and climatic conditions of the region or regions
affected.
2. Member States shall report in the river basin management plans
on the planned steps towards implementing paragraph 1 which will
contribute to achieving the environmental objectives of this
Directive and on the contribution made by the various water uses
to the recovery of the costs of water services.
3. Nothing in this Article shall prevent the funding of particular
preventive or remedial measures in order to achieve the objectives
of this Directive.
4. Member States shall not be in breach of this Directive if they
decide in accordance with established practices not to apply the
provisions of paragraph 1, second sentence, and for that purpose
the relevant provisions of paragraph 2, for a given water-use
activity, where this does not compromise the purposes and the
achievement of the objectives of this Directive. Member States
shall report the reasons for not fully applying paragraph 1, second
sentence, in the river basin management plans.

QUESTIONSTHE COMMISSION MUST BE ASKED

As well as Ms Childers submitting questions to the European
CommissionBuncrana Together has already sent questions to Mr
Enrico Brivio, spokesperson for Environment, Maritime Affair and
Fisheries, European Commission. In particular this isimmediate
question we would like answered -
Is Ireland at present operating under the River Basin Management
Plan 2008-2015?
Other questions are we have to ask is
1. Has the last Government presented a new plan?
2. When and how will it be ratified?
3. Is it possible to view the contents?
4. Has Mr Kelly implemented charging for water and if so has his
submission done away with the Irish derogation as implied in the
RBMP 2008-2015?
5 Last but not least can Ireland revoke Mr Kelly's plan?
The above questions must be asked by all our newly elected TDs
and parties, especially those who have promised the abolition of
Irish Water and Water Charges. However, they must go a lot
further and question the bona fides of Mr Kelly and the former
government in their handling of the Irish Water and Water Charges
issue and in particular the veracity of any submission to the
European Commission. We have to question Mr Alan Kelly and
Mr Noonan's constant misrepresentation of fact especially in light
Mr Kelly possibly not renewing the Irish derogation and his
inclusion of Water Charges into the River Basin Management Plan
2016-2021.

The Pensive Quill

Buncrana Together would like to thank all the above
contributors. We would like to make special mention of
Anthony McIntyre editor ofThe Pensive Quill. He has
tirelessly championed truth and justice. His constant and
recent facebook and twitter posts kept to the fore the
question of the Water Framework Directive. See the article in
Pensive Quill, written by Direct Democracy Ireland EU Say
Irelands Domestic Water Charge Exemption Is Safe, Unless
Alan Kelly Gives It Away On January 1st
http://buncranatogether.com/home/2016/3/9/noonan-
waterframworkdirective-lie
Role of Regulators and Compliance with European Law:
Discussion

Chairman: I draw the attention of witnesses to the fact that by

virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are
protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the
committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to
cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to
so do, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in
respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence
connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be
given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to
the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make
charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such
a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. The opening
statements submitted to the committee will be published on the
committee's website after this meeting.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary

practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or
make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official
either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

At the request of the broadcasting and recording services

witnesses and those in the Public Gallery are asked to ensure that
for the duration of the meeting their mobile phones are switched off
completely or switched to airplane, safe or flight mode, depending
on their device, and not just to silent.
Today's meeting will consider the role of the regulators and compliance with
European law, and to assist us in our discussion I am pleased to welcome from the
European Commission, Directorate on the Environment, Mr. Aurel Ciobanu Dordea;
Mr. Gerry Kiely and Mr. Jorge Rodrguez Romero; from the Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA, Ms Laura Burke, Mr. Gerard O'Leary and Mr. David Flynn; from the
Commission for Energy Regulation, CER, Dr. Paul McGowan, commissioner, and Ms
Sheenagh Rooney; from the Department of Housing, Planning and Local
Government, Ms Maria Graham and Mr. Pat Duggan. The legal adviser for Sinn Fin
is Mr. Matthias Kelly Queen's Counsel and for Fianna Fil, Mr. Conleth Bradley,
Senior Counsel.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: Contrary to what I said outside to the Chairman I would
like to have the privilege of making an introductory statement of three or four
minutes.
Chairman: We will facilitate that and then move to questions
and answers with the other witnesses.
Mr. Matthias Kelly: Before we proceed I would like to clarify that I am not a legal
adviser to Sinn Fin. I am an independent Queen's Counsel who happened to give
advice to Sinn Fin on this issue. There is a difference
Chairman: There is a subtle difference. I stand corrected.
Mr. Kelly is not the legal adviser to Sinn Fin, he has given them legal advice
Mr. Matthias Kelly: Yes.

Chairman: Fair enough. That is all right with me. I invite Mr.
Dordea to speak
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: I thank the Chairman. Good afternoon ladies and
gentlemen, distinguished Members of the Irish Houses of Parliament. It is a privilege
for us to be here today and to make ourselves and our knowledge and understanding
available to the distinguished members of this parliamentary committee. This is a
matter of importance in Ireland. We understand this very well. It is also very
important for the European Commission and it is also important across the European
Union because water is a basic element of life and is vital for the balanced and
sustainable development of our societies.
We are also deeply respectful of the current political process in Ireland, involving the
Parliament, the Government, and large swathes of Irish society because we believe
that any legal rule and obligation must be understood properly and perceived as
profitable for the society in which it applies. There is no simple obligation by
constraint. The rules must be understood, as well as their sense and the overarching
objectives they serve. There is no blind compliance and no theoretical or abstract
compliance in itself. There are objectives of societal importance and they must be
understood and accepted by large majorities of our societies.
This is the situation in this case where several obligations and rules of the EU Water
Framework Directive are at stake. The circumstances predominating in Ireland are
very important. The EU Water Framework Directive is not intended to be applied in
an abstract world. It must be applied in the concrete circumstances of each EU
member state and in this case in Ireland, with the geographical and environmental
peculiarities, with the social, economic and political peculiarities and characteristics
of Ireland. We believe that the Water Framework Directive is a sufficiently flexible
instrument, allowing member states to comply with its obligations while paying
utmost attention to the particulars of their economies, societies and societal interests.
This is why it is called a framework and it is a directive.
We have been mindful of the fact that this distinguished committee has paid attention
in past hearings to the challenges faced by the Irish water system, an infrastructure
which is in serious need of upgrade and where the level of leakage is high. There is
clear evidence that previous water pricing policies have been ineffective in providing
both the revenues to ensure the necessary levels of investment and the incentives to
citizens to use water efficiently. Ireland's non-compliance with the Urban Wastewater
Treatment Directive, as illustrated also by the measure taken today by the political
college of the European Commission in Brussels, and with the Drinking Water
Directive, are cases in point. We have been mindful of the conclusions of the expert
committee that was engaged to make some recommendations and to explore the
matters for the attention of the parliamentary committee. We have also noticed that
the expert committee noted that Ireland is a long way from achieving a good status in
its waters under the Water Framework Directive and that no overall improvement in
water quality was recorded between 2009 and 2015. The services of the European
Commission endorse the findings of the committee which we believe are objective.
Against this backdrop the fundamental questions which deserve an earnest public
debate and appropriate solutions are, one, how to secure equal access to good
quality and healthy drinking water and good quality water services for all citizens
whether vulnerable children or elderly people, rich or poor, working or
unemployed. Ensuring healthy drinking water means protecting the health of Irish
citizens. This is of paramount importance and does not apply only to the health of an
abstract Irish citizen. It applies to every individual who lives on the territory of the
Republic of Ireland and benefits from water services. The second important question
is how to avoid wasteful expenses for the public purse, generated by significant leaks
and malfunctions, and to address the inability to provide drinking water of sufficient
quality. I am sure Irish lawmakers and citizens have a very clear understanding of
how careful spending of the public budget can lead to the utmost benefit being
reaped.
A third crucial question is how to secure the smart investments required for
upgrading the water sector as a public service. The water framework directive is a
flexible instrument allowing the public authorities of each EU country to ask these
questions in a way that best fits the local circumstances. Water pricing policy must
comply with the cornerstone principles of cost recovery and polluter pays, but there is
wide scope for adaptation to specific societal and economic circumstances. The
paramount argument in this respect is taken straight from the directive, and is that
national authorities are allowed to take into account, when establishing differentiated
water tariffs, the variation in economic and social conditions in their respective
jurisdictions. Therefore, there is room for social tariffs for vulnerable citizens.
The recovery of costs must ensure the water sector meets its serious needs in terms
of both maintenance and investment in water and wastewater infrastructure. In order
to comply with the polluter pays principle and for the charges for excessive or
wasteful use to attain their purpose, the consumption of water for normal use should
be set at a reasonable level and the charges for excessive or wasteful use should be
dissuasive. This entails the ability to objectively and consistently measure the
amount of water used
The European Commission and its services remain at the disposal of Irish authorities
during this hearing, after this hearing and throughout the deliberative process for any
further exchanges that are necessary.
Deputy Martin Heydon: I understand that the representatives
from the Commission are here with the full authority of the
Commissioner and represent the Commission's views. We are
working through the recommendations of the expert commission
report. If we accept the commission's recommendation that, in the
future, we should pay for normal water usage through general
taxation, we would like as generous a daily allowance as possible
up to the point where excessive usage kicks in. What is the
Commission's view of the expert commission's proposal? Does it
comply with Article 9 and does it fit in with the polluter pays
principle? If so, at what point would a personal allowance meet
excessive usage? We would want to give the general allowance
but also stay within the confines of the water framework directive.
If Ireland reverts to the previous system whereby water infrastructure is funded
through general taxation, what does the Commission do next? Would we
automatically face infringement proceedings? What would the process be? In such a
scenario, can Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea give a range of possible fines the European Court
of Justice could impose? Can he outline the likely fines related to the case he
referenced, in which the Commission is taking Ireland to the European Court of
Justice in respect of urban wastewater? Finally, has Ireland used or forfeited its
derogation under the water framework directive in the past?
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: Can the Deputy repeat the last question?
Deputy Martin Heydon: In the opinion of Mr. Ciobanu-
Dordea, has Ireland used or forfeited its derogation under the
water framework directive in the past?
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: The Deputy has asked a series of questions of
fundamental importance. We are indeed here on behalf of our Commissioner,
Karmenu Vella, who is in charge of environmental, fisheries and maritime affairs. We
officially represent the European Commission and are not here in a private capacity.
The Commission appreciates the findings of, and the process and analysis
performed by, the expert committee. One might wish to be more nuanced about
various recommendations but it is not our purpose, at this stage of the deliberation in
Ireland, to act as a review body for the recommendations of the expert committee.
We need to leave room for the experts to exchange views and for politicians to
discuss the issues with the public and to deliberate. It is not the role of the European
Commission to act as a professor who reviews the debate at every stage. We are a
public authority, entrusted with specific competences, but we also have to pay
attention to the principle of subsidiarity and there is room for the application of
subsidiarity when applying the EU water framework directive
When making a deliberation about the new system the Irish authorities should have a
careful look at the broad picture. What is Ireland's situation in terms of the provisions
and quality of water services and access to services for all citizens? Which are the
positive and less positive sides of the water system in Ireland? We have drawn the
attention of the Irish authorities to a few serious shortcomings, such as the 45% leak
rate. This is significant and was also mentioned by representatives of Irish Water. In
addition, in a large number of agglomerations the secondary and tertiary treatment of
urban wastewater is not appropriate to a significant extent. Also, the need for
investment in modernising the system, bringing it up to speed and making it able to
expand and to provide ever finer services for a society in development are fairly
significant, amounting to 13 billion. The solution that must be developed must allow
for the consistent appropriate funding over a longer period of time of a system in dire
need of upgrading and modernisation.
The formula that is developed is, first and foremost, in the hands of the Irish
authorities but I would also draw the committee's attention to the following because it
has asked about the charge for excessive usage. We believe that one cannot
discuss only such a charge and one needs to discuss also the charge for normal use.
One needs to define the objective parameters based on objective criteria on the
basis of which one can establish what means normal use. We would draw the
committee's attention also to the fact that when one speaks about normal and
excessive, one needs to have a reference, that is, what would be the reference, tool
or instrument that would allow any careful public authority to identify who is
consuming excessively and who is consuming normally on the ground. We believe
that this brings into the discussion the problem of metering. We note that good
progress was made in past years by the Irish authorities, in particular, by Irish Water,
in advancing the problem of metering.
We are also aware of the public sensitivities and the concerns, and even protests,
that have been expressed in Irish society against this and this is why we appreciate
so much the reflection time and discussion that is being organised by the Irish
authorities. We believe that the discussion, if possible, can be run also based on
objective arguments. No public discussion is only based on objective arguments and
only on facts and figures. Emotions are also at stake and reactions and subjective
aspects are hugely at stake as well, but there must be a grain of truth and some
objective elements at the basis of it. There must be an awareness that when
discussing charges, as a short-cut we say, "water charges", in fact, it is not about
charges for the water itself but for the water services which every citizen must enjoy
to the protection of his or her health.
Of course, there is plenty of water in Ireland. It rains a lot and the ground of Ireland is
also rich in water resources, but few drink water straight from the collection of
rainwater. Nobody uses a straw to drink water from the ground. One needs
abstraction. One needs processing, filtration and elimination of carcinogenic
elements. We are aware that ever more chemical substances are identified as having
carcinogenic potential or are simply damaging to human health and the providers of
water services must be able to identify, select and eliminate from the water provided
such substances. The adequate processing of urban wastewater treatment is ever
more important for the economy and for the society as well. Drinking water, as I have
mentioned, and also other elements, such as compliance with the Nitrates Directives
and the relationship with agricultural activities, may come into play. I say "the
relationship with agricultural activities" because there must be no opposition between
the concerns for water quality and agricultural activities. Solutions are possible in
order to reconcile both interests.

The distinguished Deputy asked me also about the infringement procedures.

Certainly nobody would authorise a civil servant to say whether Ireland or whatever
member state would be in infringement if it proceeds in one way or another simply
because this is a prerogative of the political college of the Commission and I cannot
anticipate the judgment. Of course, there is a political judgment, but it will be based
on objective elements. I can tell the committee, because this is no matter of secrecy
and no matter of discretion, there are objective elements to say that currently Ireland
is not complying with the Water Framework Directive since it suspended the
application of the water charges. We believe also that as the situation evolves on
different fronts of the water infrastructure, the situation becomes tighter and tighter.
There are such objective elements to making such a decision.
I am bound by the committee to be honest and draw its attention to certain matters.
In the public perception, matters get mixed up. People say that if one sends a
member state to the Court of Justice then this is for fines. The first judgment of the
Court of Justice that will declare a member state in violation of a certain rule of EU
law is not a judgment that applies fines. The member state will have 18 months from
that judgment in order to present a programme of compliance and to comply with that
judgment in principle, and only a second referral by the European Commission of
that member state to the Court of Justice in Luxembourg will lead to fines. Therefore,
there is time before fines are applied and we believe it is in the vital interest not only
of Ireland and of Irish society but of any member state, not to waste time and to
litigate with the Damocles sword of the fines at the end of the road but rather to think
about and act on complying.
Of course, sometimes solutions are easier at hand. Other times a situation is more
complex and more delicate, and more investments are required or certain
deliberations are more difficult. The Commission, not because it is warm-hearted but
because it is its obligation to do so, understands these realities and understands the
differences between the member states. There is a single line or thread for all
member states, but there are also national specificities. We are ready to engage with
the Irish authorities on any compliance path and commitment leading to lasting
solutions to the water infrastructure that serve the Irish citizen. I will stop there.
Deputy Martin Heydon: I ask Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea for clarity.
He stated we are not in compliance with the Water Framework
Directive at present. Where do we stand on the derogation under
the directive that we previously held? Does that still apply to
Ireland?
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: We understand that in the first generation of the river
basin management plans - I am sorry for the technical language - in 2009, Ireland,
like other member states, filed with the European Commission, according to the
obligations in this directive, river basin management plans where it indicated that it
intends to apply water charges to fund the water infrastructure and the investment
and to secure the sustainability of the system. This means that the use of Article 9(4)
is no longer possible. We are aware that this is also a sensitive issue and polemics
are possible as well and we are also well aware that the committee has interviewed
or heard from authorities from Northern Ireland and Scotland.
Chairman: Scotland and Wales, but not Northern Ireland.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: Okay. Scotland and Wales. I would like to point out the
difference in situations between Ireland and Scotland.
Chairman: I am conscious of the time. In fairness, I want to
get other people in.
Chairman: I want to go ahead. I have an interpretation of it,
but I want to go ahead. If I may, will the witnesses be as tight as
they can with their answers? We want to get everyone in if we can.
I call Deputy Cowen.
Deputy Martin Heydon: The Irish public needs to know this.
Does the derogation apply
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: In principle, we believe the use of Article 9(4) is not
possible
Deputy Barry Cowen: I will be brief. I have specific
questions. If the witness could be likewise, we will get through all
we need to get through here today. To lead on from the previous
question, does Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea accept that we had a
derogation from domestic water charges under Article 9 of the EU
framework directive in 2000? That is the first question. Second,
what is his and the Commission's definition of "established
practice" as it relates to the delivery of water services and as
mentioned in the Water Framework Directive? I will move on to the
river basin management plan of 2010, which Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea
mentioned and which he believes constitutes the loss of the initial
interpretation - if he confirms it existed - of the directive dating
back to 2000. If that is the case, is Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea implying
that there is a shift in his interpretation of established practice?
What is his view on the legality of the suspension period that we
are in currently? We still feel we can meet the objectives of the
Water Framework Directive with the suspension in place. Has the
Commission been in contact with the CER or the EPA about its
contention, belief and opinion that we are in contravention of the
EU framework directive?
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: May I kindly ask Deputy Cowen to spell out the full
name of the entity?
Deputy Barry Cowen: It is the energy regulator, which has
been charged with the responsibility to act on behalf of the public
in the implementation of the framework directive.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: The Deputy's first question was whether Ireland had a
derogation. It is not for the European Commission to grant the derogation but for
each member state to demonstrate that it meets the elements to claim the application
of this derogation. Of course, if the Commission challenges
Deputy Barry Cowen: The Commission did not challenge it.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: -----in the past. We have accepted that it could have
applied. However, at that moment, before the filing of the first river basin
management plans, the problem of the derogation was not that actual. It became
actual for each member state when it filed its plans
Deputy Barry Cowen: Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea does accept that
we were not challenged in our interpretation of the derogation
based on the directive in 2000. Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea has answered
it.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: Yes, but-----
Deputy Barry Cowen: The Commission did not challenge it.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: Yes.

Deputy Barry Cowen: That is fine. That is all I wanted to

know. I do not mean to be confrontational. I just mean to establish
facts about the Commission's opinions and our opinions and how
they are implemented, and ultimately the courts will decide if they
are asked to arbitrate.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: Of course.
Deputy Barry Cowen: What is the Commission's definition of
established practice
Mr. Jorge Rodrguez Romero: Good afternoon. The term "established practice" is
only used in paragraph (4) of Article 9 of the Water Framework Directive and it has
certain conditions attached to it. It has a derogation from the obligations to establish
a water pricing policy as in Article 9(1). Among these conditions is the requirement
that the member states report the reasons for not fully applying paragraph (1) in the
river basin management plans. We consider that Article 9(4) is applied at the
moment when the river basin management plan is adopted. That is when any
recourse to this exemption should have been done, if appropriate.
Deputy Barry Cowen: Established practice in my mind and
that of the Irish Government and people at that time was that it
was paid for out of general taxation. The Commission decided to
change its interpretation of it on submission of the river basin
management plan, which is its right to do so if it so wishes. We do
not agree. If there is to be an adjudication on it, it is beyond our
control. That is all I will say on it.
What is the Commission's interpretation of the legality of the suspension period
considering that, in our opinion, it too relates back to the initial derogation and the
objectives in it and our establishment of an established practice based on it being
paid for out of taxation in 2000? The Commission would question the legality of this
period if it were to follow on from what Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea just said
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: Yes, and I have already replied to the Deputy's
question about the legality of the suspension when I said that currently we believe
that Ireland is not in compliance with the Water Framework Directive because of the
suspension of the water charges
Deputy Barry Cowen: We disagree on the implementation of
the directive and the basis by which the Commission arrives at that
conclusion and believe we are on solid ground in terms of the
basis for our conclusion. Finally, saying what he said and
interpreting-
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: I will briefly draw the Deputy's attention to the fact that
Article 9.4 allows member states to invoke an established practice where doing so
does not compromise the purposes and the achievement of the objectives of this
directive. The Deputy heard me pointing to a number of objective elements that show
the distance between the current situation and the purposes and achievement of the
objectives of this directive.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: As a matter of general co-operation that we have with
all the national authorities in the member states, we have been, but not on this
subject in particular.
Mr. Conleth Bradley: I appreciate Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea's answer, which was
interesting and useful. The objective of the Water Framework Directive, as he
outlined, is about quality, not quantity. The terms of Article 9.4 are interesting. The
reporting of the non-compliance or the derogation is in the report on the river basin
management plan, but the reference to an established practice is an important point.
I am sure that Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea is not that familiar with established practice under
Irish law. There are key dates for ascertaining the established practice. The
beginning was 1962, when the Public Health (Ireland) Act 1896 was amended. Other
keystone dates are 1983, 1997, 2013 and 2016. To ascertain established practice,
one must examine the range of the established practice. When the directive came
into force, the established practice was not to charge. As Members will know well,
the history of established practice in Ireland is tied into local government and the
responsibility of elected members versus the executive. In my respectful view, it is
clear that the established practice applies in the way that I have described, that
being, the established practice on the key date was not to charge.
Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea referred to the river basin management plans. That relates to
the reportage aspect of Article 9.4. The key phrase is "established practice
I wish to mention another matter relating to Article 9. Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea will be
aware of a recent decision of the European Court of Justice, ECJ, involving a
hydroelectric plan. The Commission took Germany to the ECJ in an infringement
action and lost. Important principles arose from that case. I accept that it was about a
hydroelectric plan, but it was the first challenge under the Water Framework
Directive. That decision has been recently upheld in a case taken by the Commission
against Austria, where the ECJ again confirmed what Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea has
correctly set out, namely, the margin of appreciation or discretion that is given to a
member state.
This is about quality, not quantity, and the margin of appreciation given to a member
state. It is important that the Commission be aware of this, which I am sure it is. That
margin of appreciation was emphasised in the ECJ decision.
Chairman: I thank Mr. Bradley. This conversation is important
to us, so I am fine with letting it flow because it is core to our
deliberation, but if possible, can the witnesses keep comments as
tight as possible? Next are Deputies Broin and Murphy, if that is
okay, but I would like Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea to answer that.
Deputy Colm Brophy: I do not know whether it is appropriate
to raise a point of order, but I have a problem with what is
happening. No matter how eminent or qualified, a legal person's
interpretation of something that the Commission is stating is just
that. We could
Deputy Paul Murphy: He will get a chance to come back in
Chairman: He wanted to come back in, so I will let him.
Deputy Colm Brophy: Excuse me, but this is an important
point and I would appreciate the opportunity to finish it. We could
have a whole bunch of legal opinions lined up one way or the
other. The Commission plays a role, which therefore gives its view
importance in the process. The only arbiter of that is the ECJ.
Deputy Colm Brophy: With due respect to every other legal
opinion, it would not be accurate to allow someone to attend and
equate the two as equal. We are not as a country under any
implication of Mr. Bradley's opinion. We would be under an
implication of where the Commission would go with its opinion, and
we would have to defend that. There is a question mark over the
work of this committee if we allow at every point legal opinion on
something on which we have asked the Commission to give its
weighted opinion. We are going down a wrong road.
Chairman: I did not interrupt you. I am not finished. It is
incumbent on me to do the best I can to provide for fairness,
balance and different opinions. It is for the committee to decide.
My role is to do my best, which I am doing, to facilitate that. I am
very comfortable with, and thank Mr. Bradley for, his contribution. It
is up to us as adults and individuals as to how we interpret it.
Deputy Colm Brophy: I am sorry, but I object. I am making
the point, which the Chairman is misinterpreting, that I have no
problem with legal representatives attending as witnesses, but we
should recognise the difference between the view being expressed
by the Commission and the view being expressed by legal or other
experts. Given the way in which the Chairman allowed the initial
interjection, my point was on the contribution, nothing else.
Deputy Barry Cowen: -----about the EU framework directive.
We have never publicised that. When this committee sought its
content, we made that available to it. We are here today to enforce
that in as best a way as we can because it is our belief that the
Dil may accept a recommendation from this committee to revert
to a non-charging regime and allow water charges and services to
be paid for by the customer, namely, the State. We have every
right to make this committee aware of the sound legal advice that
backs up the contention that we have held for some time. I did not
abuse that advice by making it public. I brought it to this
committee, where it deserves to be, in order that the committee
could make an informed decision and the Dil would ultimately
make the right decision.
Chairman: I am with Deputy Cowen on that. If Deputy
Broin waits one second, I will proceed. I am comfortable and
happy with the process that I have proposed and I am working
through it. I do not intend to offend or upset anyone, but this is the
process that we have always followed. I appreciate and am
grateful for everyone's contribution.
Next are Deputies Broin and Murphy. The witnesses should try to keep their
answers as tight as they can because I want to allow as many members as possible
to ask questions. As there are lots of really important questions members want to
ask, I urge everyone to be as succinct as possible.
Deputy Eoin Broin: One of the reasons Article 9.4 of the
water framework directive is so contentious is it has become a
central part of the public debate on whether discontinuing domestic
water charges is a viable policy option. There have been
newspaper articles arguing that if we abolish domestic water
charges, we will face immediate and very substantial fines from the
European Court of Justice and the European Commission.
Therefore, we understand all of this is important for ourselves and
the public. I have three sets of questions for the Commission and
Mr. Bradley and Mr. Kelly because I am interested in their
respective views.
What is really crucial is that Article 9.4, as outlined, sets out two criteria. The first is
the idea of established practice, while the second is the achievement of the
objectives of the directive as outlined in Article 1. I am a little confused as to the
Commission's position because between 2010 and 2014, in both public and on the
record comments, it seemed to have changed its position. I will outline what I mean
by that and then seek a response.
In 2010 when he was a Labour Party Member of the European Parliament Deputy
Alan Kelly asked a parliamentary question of the then Commissioner and was told
very clearly "where this is an established practice at the time of the adoption of the
directive". The interpretation of the part of the answer by many people is that
established practice, as per the water framework directive, means whatever the
established practice of the member state was at the time the directive was passed in
2000. There is nothing in that answer that relates to whether a member state chose
to invoke the derogation in its 2009 river basin management plan. That is reinforced
by a subsequent communication to Ms Lynn Boylan, MEP, from the Directorate-
General for the Environment in 2014. She asked whether it was possible to reinvoke
Article 9.4, despite the fact that it had not been used in 2009. The answer was as
follows: "On the basis of

Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: The response was from the European Commission.
Deputy Eoin Broin: Yes, absolutely. It read: "On the basis
of the information reported to the Commission, Ireland has not
made use of Article 9(4)" in its first river basin management plan,
as we know. It went on to state that should Ireland wish to rely on
the provisions of Article 9.4 in its second river basin management
plan, a justification would need to be provided in that plan,
including drafts, in order that the public could effectively comment
thereon. Like all member states, if Ireland invokes Article 9.4, the
Commission "shall carefully consider whether the conditions of this
flexibility provision are met at that stage". Let us fast-forward to
2016, bearing in mind that this had been the position of the
Commission in all correspondence with MEPs who had asked the
question between 2014 and 2016. In 2016 the Commission started
to insert a new argument. In a reply to Ms Marian Harkin, MEP, it
stated, as the representatives present have outlined, that if Ireland
did not invoke Article 9.4 in its first river basin management plan, it
could not do so in the second. These were three Commission
responses, in the first two of which it was very clear that
established practice was whatever it was when the water
framework directive was enacted and that member states could
apply to invoke the provisions of Article 9.4, although there was no
guarantee that its request would be granted because it would have
to be assessed in the context of the second river basin
management plan. Why did the Commission change its position in
2016 from that adopted between 2010 to 2014, as outlined in the
documents referenced?
I will pose my other two questions now to save time. The second issue concerns the
new position of the Commission. It does not involve invoking established practice but
talks about a "clear commitment" to introduce water charges in the river basin
management plan of 2009. I am interested in knowing, from a legal point of view,
whether established practice is the same as a "clear commitment" to introduce water
charges. Clearly, if this matter ends up in the European Court of Justice, that will be
a relevant question and the answer to it will be one this committee will need to
assess.
My third question relates to the other part of Article 9.4 which refers to the objectives
of Article 1 of the directive. The directive is really about these core objectives. That is
part of the point Mr. Bradley was making. If a member state, in its river basin
management plan and its accompanying investment plan for water infrastructure, is
demonstrating that it is meeting the objectives set out in Article 1 of the directive, how
could it be in breach of the directive and how could enforcement proceedings be
taken against it? That is why the German case is so important. If I understood the
ruling of the European Court of Justice correctly, it stated that, notwithstanding the
fact that there was not full-cost recovery or adherence to the polluter pays principle in
that particular water use case, because there was no evidence that the non-charging
for water use was having any negative impact in achieving the objectives of Article 1,
there was no case to be heard. As Mr. Bradley said, that decision has been upheld in
subsequent judgments. I would like to hear the views of the delegates in that regard.
There are two jurisdictions that do not have in place the type of domestic funding
regime the Commission clearly prefers, one of which is Scotland. Representatives
from that country outlined their rationale to the committee. As we know, the other
jurisdiction is Northern Ireland. Are there infringement proceedings pending against
either of these jurisdictions for not having the cost-recovery and polluter pays model
that the delegates have outlined? Does the Commission have any intention of
bringing proceedings against them? If not, how can it state they can do it but Ireland
cannot?
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: I thank the Deputy for his very elaborate set of
questions. In response to the contributions of Mr. Bradley and Deputy Eoin Broin -
I also said this at the beginning of my contribution - we should go beyond the legal
discussion. This is not just a legalistic issue between attorneys and lawyers; it is
about much more than that. I am not trying to relativise the objectivity of law and the
rules, but it is more than just a discussion about what is meant by established
practice. I hope my remarks will not be deemed inappropriate, but we must think
about the international custom, a concept lawyers understand well. Let us say we
have a rule that has been applied for a long number of years and we have behaviour
that has been repeated for a long number of years until it becomes a rule and it is
considered to be a consequence of application. If an actor or player intervenes and
changes the rules, this changes the established practice. One has it until one
changes the practice. One can then no longer claim the international customary law
and-----
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: We have not changed it, but I can see the point being
made. The Deputy is challenging us for being inconsistent, but, frankly, I do not see
where there is any inconsistency. We took note of the change in policy and think this
is sound. The second-
Deputy Eoin Broin: I am sorry; I want to interject because
this is very important and I want to provide clarity on where the
inconsistency lies. If the Commission had been applying the
principles it has been applying since 2016, the reply in 2014 would
have stated Ireland could not invoke Article 9.4 because it had not
included it in the 2009 river basin management plan and that,
therefore, it no longer had that entitlement. However, what the
Commission stated at that stage was that if Ireland was going to
invoke the article, it would have to outline the reasons for so doing
and that the matter would be considered in the context of the
second river basin management plan.
This Directive aims at maintaining and improving the aquatic environment in the
Community. This purpose is primarily concerned with the quality of the waters
concerned ... The ultimate aim of this Directive is to achieve the elimination of priority
hazardous substances and contribute to achieving concentrations in the marine
environment near background values for naturally occurring substances.
The directive recognises that member states can and should look at diverse national
considerations. When the derogation in Article 9.4 of the directive was introduced, it
was known colloquially as the "Irish derogation". It was introduced specifically to
meet conditions in Ireland where water had not historically been charged for in this
way. When the Commission first proposed the derogation, it also proposed full cost
recovery, but that was dropped during the conciliation process. That was recognised
in the German case as significant. It is. It is not about cost recovery. The purpose of
the directive is to improve the quality of water and deliver high quality water services.
It is not about cost recovery. It is up to Ireland or any other country to demonstrate
that it has an established practice to which large numbers of people are continuing to
adhere. That should be relatively easy in the case of Ireland because it has had this
established practice. In my view as a lawyer, a country does not cease to have an
established practice. Despite some of the comments made, I am not a member of
any political party here or anywhere else. I gave independent legal advice. The
established practice in a country will remain in place until it can successfully put
something else in place. Under the Irish system, it is subsidised from general
taxation. That is how it is seen from the point of view of the public. People are not
reaching into their pockets to pay for water. If that is to be changed, something else
has to be put in place, but nothing else has successfully been put in place. That is
why it is quite clear that the use of the derogation continues to be available to
Ireland.
As I set out in the note I was asked to prepare for the committee, an unsuccessful
attempt to change an established practice means the practice in question has not
been changed. By definition and as a matter of logic, it continues. While it is true that
the Commission may do A, B, C and D, we live in a system of democracy governed
by the rule of law. The Commission does not have its way. If, for example, the
Commission says "no" and means "no", we have a legal system to test this under
which certain procedures must be gone through. I know from my experience of
litigating before the court that it does not always agree - far from it - with the
Commission. The Commission regularly loses cases before the court. The mere fact
that the Commission is taking a particular view should not influence this committee to
believe this view will prevail - far from it - because it is a long process. The
Commission has to come back, set out its position fully, notify Ireland of it, hear what
Ireland has to say, take account of it and be satisfied that it impedes or compromises
the purpose of the directive. The Commission will have an uphill task on the latter
consideration alone. It is going to be rather difficult. It would then have to satisfy the
court that Ireland was in breach of the directive. As I said, this needs to be
considered in the context of basic principles and established practice. As a lawyer, I
would find it very difficult to understand how it could be said the established practice
was not still in operation, given what had happened. It is still in operation in Ireland.
Mr. Conleth Bradley: I will be brief. I accept Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea's emphasis on the
margin of appreciation given, but it has to be the margin of appreciation given to the
member state. It cannot be the Commission's, as it cannot have it every way. There
is either a margin of appreciation or there is not. I said the German case involved
hydroelectric issues. The points of principle established by the European Court of
Justice in that case are important. If anybody wants to read them, they are set out in
paragraphs 47 and 51 of the judgment. These important points of principle apply to
the discussion we are having. I will summarise them. Article 9 does not state there is
an absolute requirement to bring in charges. Article 9 which is about river basin
management has to be read in the context of Articles 4, 5 and 11. The committee
can look at this later because I do not propose to go into the details of it now. When
the European Court of Justice considers these matters, it looks at them from an
holistic perspective. Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea is absolutely correct when he says this is
about quality rather than quantity. When we consider Article 9.4 of the directive which
refers to "established practices", we must look at how Ireland dealt with water
services from 1962 to 2016. I will not go back to the Public Health (Ireland) Act 1878.
Everybody is looking at key dates. When the directive was in force, charging was
done by way of general taxation as an established practice. Everyone who has
worked in a local authority will know what went on between the elected members and
the executive in the case of service charges.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: I will be very brief. There needs to be a fair reading of
Article 9.4 in order that readers will not lure themselves into wrongful interpretations.
I draw the attention of the distinguished members of the committee and those who
are observing the meeting to the fact that Article 9.4 makes it clear that the concept
of established practice can come into play "where this does not compromise the
purposes and the achievement of the objectives of this Directive". I also draw their
attention to two additional simple and clear elements of the directive. The obligation
to introduce water charges was to be met by 2010. More importantly, the objectives
of the directive were to be attained by 2015. I want to see future river basin
management plans that will show how these objectives which have not been attained
were attained two years ago. I want to see those plans. I rest my case.
Deputy Paul Murphy: It sounds like we are at the European
Court of Justice already. It is nothing personal when I say I do not
believe the European Commission is respecting the political
process here. It is doing the very opposite. I refer to the letters sent
to the expert commission and the Minister, Deputy Simon
Coveney. I suggest Mr. Ciobanu-Dordea's presentation was
designed to state we did not have political choices. The message
is that the political choice not to have water charge made by the
people through boycott and protest and in last year's general
election is not legitimate and cannot be upheld without fines. I
fundamentally disagree with that.
I will go through questions one by one to try to make it more concise and in order that
we do not lose them. First, I return to the question of inconsistency. I think two
different questions were mixed up a bit in the witness's response. Let us forget about
what the Irish Government is doing in saying whether it has water charges or not.
That does not matter. Let us forget about what we define as established practice, etc.
The difference between the answers in 2010 and 2016 is very substantial. It does not
relate to anything that the Irish Government is doing. It relates to a different
interpretation of the European Commission on article 9(4) of the water framework
directive. I seek clarity on why this changed and an admission that it did change
The answer to Deputy Alan Kelly in 2010 was as follows: "Article 9(4) provides the
possibility for Member States not to apply the provisions of Article 9(1) to a given
water-use activity, where this is an established practice at the time of adoption of the
directive". That answer defines that article 9(4) kicks in "where this is an established
practice at the time of adoption of the directive". In other words, that was in 2003.
The answer given in 2016 to Marian Harkin, MEP, effectively said that the current
practice is to have water charges. We can get into a debate separately about that. In
2010, it clearly said "at the time of adoption of the directive". In 2016, it effectively
said at the current time. Why has that changed?
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: The Deputy said that the European Commission is not
respecting the political process. If I would like to be polemical with the Deputy, I
would say that the Deputy thinks that every opinion that is provided upon request of
the Irish authorities is an interference with the political process. However, I do not
want to be polemical and I cannot afford to be polemical with the Deputy.
Nevertheless, I still draw his attention to the fact that the Commission responded to
the invitation of the Irish authorities to state our opinion, to be here as witnesses and
to be interrogated. The second answer is that we did not change any interpretation of
the established practice element or of article 9(4). The situation has evolved in time
and the essential element is the fact that that concretely on the ground the practice
has changed.

Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea said he is available to the committee for further

consultation should we have any further questions later. If he is willing, I suggest
that, when we get to the point where we may have a draft proposal, we can ask Mr.
Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea some questions at that stage. If there are fines, they are
decided on by the European court but are based on objective elements. Can we run
by Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea the committee's recommendations to see, from the
objective facts, whether they would be in compliance with EU directives?
In his letter to the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government,
Deputy Simon Coveney, as well as in his letter to the expert group, Mr. Aurel
Ciobanu-Dordea referred to the principle of the polluter pays as being fundamental to
the directive. We have heard other interpretations around this, such as we can have
a derogation because of established practice. However, I am sure we also have to
comply with the fundamental intentions of the directive, part of which is the polluter
pays principle. Will Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea clarify if the polluter pays principle has
to be part of any solution we come up with? He has been clear that there is a certain
amount of discretion to the member state to comply. Ultimately, we all have to
comply.
The expert commission report stated excessive or wasteful use of water will be
discouraged by applying a tariff for such use and, therefore, is consistent with the
polluter pays principle. There is a general view in this committee, as well as in the
expert report, that there should not be a charge for normal use but that there should
be a charge for excessive use. In Scotland, there is a charge for water services. It is
taken in through the household tax which varies in accordance with the size of the
house. Does that protect a country like Scotland? Scottish Water was at the
committee recently and informed us it has district metering. It can use the information
from that to pinpoint where there may be excessive use in a particular district and
approach those who may be causing excessive use. Scottish Water has a system in
place to deal with excessive use and it also has a system of paying in place.
In my view, the Scottish situation is totally different from the Irish situation where we
are proposing to have no charge whatsoever. Is there any other way of charging for
excessive use if one does not have meters? If the outcome of this committee is that
there should be a normal household free allowance, paid by the State through central
taxation, but that excessive use should be paid for by the individual, then we are
obviously not adopting the Scottish model because we will not have a general
payment through local taxes. Maybe that will be an option. How can we actually
comply with the polluter pays principle if we do not have meters? Is there any other
way?
The expert commission report stated excessive or wasteful use of water will be
discouraged by applying a tariff for such use and, therefore, is consistent with the
polluter pays principle. There is a general view in this committee, as well as in the
expert report, that there should not be a charge for normal use but that there should
be a charge for excessive use. In Scotland, there is a charge for water services. It is
taken in through the household tax which varies in accordance with the size of the
house. Does that protect a country like Scotland? Scottish Water was at the
committee recently and informed us it has district metering. It can use the information
from that to pinpoint where there may be excessive use in a particular district and
approach those who may be causing excessive use. Scottish Water has a system in
place to deal with excessive use and it also has a system of paying in place.

In his letter to the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government,
Deputy Simon Coveney, as well as in his letter to the expert group, Mr. Aurel
Ciobanu-Dordea referred to the principle of the polluter pays as being fundamental to
the directive. We have heard other interpretations around this, such as we can have
a derogation because of established practice. However, I am sure we also have to
comply with the fundamental intentions of the directive, part of which is the polluter
pays principle. Will Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea clarify if the polluter pays principle has
to be part of any solution we come up with? He has been clear that there is a certain
amount of discretion to the member state to comply. Ultimately, we all have to
comply

In my view, the Scottish situation is totally different from the Irish situation where we
are proposing to have no charge whatsoever. Is there any other way of charging for
excessive use if one does not have meters? If the outcome of this committee is that
there should be a normal household free allowance, paid by the State through central
taxation, but that excessive use should be paid for by the individual, then we are
obviously not adopting the Scottish model because we will not have a general
payment through local taxes. Maybe that will be an option. How can we actually
comply with the polluter pays principle if we do not have meters? Is there any other
way
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea said he is available to the committee for further
consultation should we have any further questions later. If he is willing, I suggest
that, when we get to the point where we may have a draft proposal, we can ask Mr.
Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea some questions at that stage. If there are fines, they are
decided on by the European court but are based on objective elements. Can we run
by Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea the committee's recommendations to see, from the
objective facts, whether they would be in compliance with EU directives

In his presentation, Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea spoke about room for social tariffs.
Will he elaborate on this? Does that mean allowances could be made for households
with illnesses which require extra water?

Chairman: Yes, there is a list. I call Deputy Jan O'Sullivan

Deputy Jan O'Sullivan: I am next on the list. I thank the
delegation for attending the meeting.
Mr. Aurel Ciobanu-Dordea: We can confirm that the principle that the polluter pays
is mandated by European law and by the directive. It is normal in general in
environmental practice. It is among the environmental rules and should be part of the
solution. We would also like to point out the fact that in practice it is hard to imagine
how one would identify excessive use in the absence of metering. It would also be
difficult to identify for each individual whether his or her consumption is normal, is
excessive or is below the norm. One needs metering
http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/WebAttachments
.nsf/($vLookupByConstructedKey)/committees~20170215~FFJ/$File/Daily%2
0Book%20Unrevised.pdf?openelement

WHY THE 9.4 WATER

EXEMPTION CLAUSE ON
WATER CHARGES IS A GAME-
CHANGER, MISSING FROM
OIREACHTAS REPORT AND
SADLY GOING TO DISAPPEAR
July 25, 2017
This is another interview from OceanFM, NWT, June 23 2017 on
the issue of the 9.4 Exemption clause of the EU's Water
Framework Directive that gives Ireland an exemption on water
charges. Michael Mooney, a former election candidate in Donegal
with the Right2Change campaign speaks clearly and passionately
on the history and importance of the 9.4 Exemption clause. He
voices the disillusionment and shock that many in Ireland feel over
how we were led, how the campaign against water charges has
gone and about our fear that water charges are coming down the
line.

Michael Mooney on why the

9.4 water exemption clause is
a game-changer
June 26, 2017

Former election candidate in Donegal with the Right to Change campaign

Michael Mooney spoke on North West Today on the issue of the 9.4 clause
which gives Ireland an exemption on water charges:

https://soundcloud.com/oceanfm/nwt-michael-mooney-23rd-june-
2017

Brendan Ogle victory claim for water movement debatable

Apr 21, 2017
Brendan Ogle Right2Water Ireland claims victory for the water movement in Ireland in a
youtube video entitled 'Pow Wow with Dean Scurry #2 - Brendan Ogle & Frankie Gaffney'.

The video was published on April 14, 2017, 3 days after a final Oireachtas Report by the
Oireachtas Committee on Domestic Water Funding . This final report overturned a previous
'draft ' report on April 5th 2017.

However, we wonder when this video was made.

Some major issues arise. Was Mr Ogle's claim made prior to or after the release of a '
confidential draft report'? Or was it made after the 'final report'.

Depending on the timing there are major questions Mr Ogle needs to answer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4az4WFA2Nnc
Michael Mooney's facebook page where he is trying valiantly trying to
highlight water charges issues
OceanFM NWT, June 23, 14 mins
Exemption and being sold out
BUNCRANA TOGETHER
Charges coming down the line
Anyone interested can view the draft River Basin Management
Plan 2018-2021 on the Dept of Housing's website.
Click the link opposite to view the complete draft plan. Page 77
gives you an idea of whats coming down the line with regards
charging and structuring.
Imagine the importance of the River Basin Management Plan, a
fundamental building block of the Water Framework Directive
where all future structuring of our water is planned. Imagine after
it's importance and the 9.4 Exemption was highlighted in the
Oireachtas Committee and it didn't even get a mention in it's final
report.

What have we got really?

Having read the report from the expert Commission in particular
paragraph 2.1 'Water Charging in Ireland: Timeline of Key
Decisions', page 6, we came across the following;
"September 2014: the CER decided on the water charges tariffs
(taking account of the Ministerial Policy Direction) that came into
effect on 1 October 2014. The main aspects of the charging
regime were: a free household allowance of 30,000 litres; free
allowance for each child; exemptions for certain medical
conditions; charges for usage above the allowance; and
households without a meter would be charged on an assessed
basis, using occupancy as the criteria for assessment. More
details of the Charging Plan are listed in Appendix 2.
Expert Commission Report
Does that not sound all too familiar and that was back in
2014? Note also not a peep about Irish Water Ltd which is by now
well entrenched, politically and financially.

Draft Final Report of the Recommendations of the Joint

Committee on the Future Funding of Domestic Water Services
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55075f84e4b0f11bacb1b8d
0/t/59765a579f74569117dbfc7b/1500928601796/Draft%2BFinal%
2BReport%2Bof%2Bthe%2BRecommendations%2Bof%2Bthe%2
BJC%2BFFDWS.pdf
Right2Water delegation in European Parliament Feb2015
May 4, 2017
Members of the Right2Water Ireland incl trade unionists, Brendan Ogle, Unite, Dave Gibney
Mandate and Sinn Fin activists took part in a delegation organised by Lynn Boylan MEP in
Feb 2015

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KbjBI4PYRo

RT Prime Time, April 4 2017, Water Charges

Apr 6, 2017
RT Prime Time discusses latest political developments in the Water Charges controversy
after Fine Gael earlier today refused to agree with the Draft Oireachtas Committee's report on
water funding. Fianna Fil's John Lahart and Fine Gael's Kate O'Connell argue over their
agreement in the Confidence and Supply Arrangement to facilitate a Fine Gael led Minority
Government.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7dFBA9QBl0

DONEGAL MAN HITS OUT AT

TDS FOR FAILING TO
PROTECT A VITAL
EXEMPTION FOR IRELAND ON
WATER CHARGES
July 24, 2017
This article is taken from Oceanfm, June 21, 2017 where Enda
Craig, Buncrana Together, takes on Thomas Pringle a member of
the Right2Water TDs on the now defunct Oireachtas Committee
on Domestic Water Charges. Buncrana Together continue the
theme of the role played by the Right2Water TDs on that
committee and what we can only see as a terrible and serious
omission of any mention of the 9.4 Exemption in their report, draft
or final.
We published an article last year, that explained this exceptional
'Irish Exemption' clause and why it must be included in any river
basin management plan. It can be found here. However, the
relevant 9.4 section below is the main clause of Article 9 of the
Water Framework Directive 2000. We must emphasis that this
exemption was a hard won clause brought about by past anti water
charges campaigns in Ireland.
4. Member States shall not be in breach of this Directive if they
decide in accordance with established practices not to apply the
provisions of paragraph 1, second sentence, and for that purpose
the relevant provisions of paragraph 2, for a given water-use
activity, where this does not compromise the purposes and the
achievement of the objectives of this Directive. Member States
shall report the reasons for not fully applying paragraph 1, second
sentence, in the river basin management plans.

Oireachtas Committee members Thomas Pringle, Ind, and Eoin Broin SF,
center, flanked by Right2Water TDs on the Dil plinth on April 6th declaring a
premature victory.
A Donegel man has hit out at politicians involved in the campaign
against water charges as failing the Irish people.
Activist Enda Craig has hit out at TDs including Independent
Donegal TD Thomas Pringle for claiming victory on water charges
too soon.
Donegal community activist Enda Craig who also campaigned
against those charges says he was appalled to see the Right-to-
Water charge campaigners claiming victory on the plinth of
Leinster House In April, before the final report had been properly
considered and voted on.
Mr. Craig says a vital 9.4 clause in the EU Water Framework
Directive agreed years ago at a European level gives Ireland a
unique exemption from charging domestic water charges..
He told North West Today, that TDs like Deputy Pringle should
have fought harder to protect this clause which he says is not even
mentioned in the final report:
Joint Committee on the Future Funding of Domestic Water Services Report April
2017
http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/committees/futurefundingofdome
sticwaterservices/report/Recommendations-of-the-JCFFDWS-of-FFDWS---
Final.pdf

Report on the Funding of Domestic Public Water Services in

Ireland

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/media/committees/futurefundingofdome
sticwaterservices/Report-of-Expert-Commission-on-Domestic-Public-Water-
Services.pdf

The anti-water charges argument that we are already paying for it via general tax has won. But no
one is yet facing up to the consequences of this. Money spent on water means less spent elsewhere, or
more taxes raised. Guaranteeing money for water might mean less on housing, or hospitals, or for a
pre-election tax cut.
When our politicians return in the autumn, will this weeks events have focused minds on the need to
really address this? Or will they all get carried away in point-scoring over the water charges and
claiming credit for the repayment cheques?
It is said that to get too know a woman you must live with her.
To get too know a man you must work with him.
I've worked with hundreds of men over the years and i can say categorically that I could
count on the fingers of one hand those that were honest, straight and principled.
The jealousy, the begrudgery that exists within the working class is mind-blowing, we never
stick together, were always at each others throats and we inform on each other, and that's
the way the ruling class want it to stay.
Look at the left of centre politicians in the Dail, the different groups, mostly working class, the
can't agree on anything, they're always at each others throats, is it principle, no, it's trying to
get one over on the other.
That's the way the ruling class like it
They, the ruling class create and perpetuate divisiveness within the working class and we fall
for it, will we ever learn.
If we never learn, we will continue to be at the mercy of the ruling class like the FG, FF, and
Labour politicians who govern primarily for those at the top of this society.

It is said that to get too know a woman you must live with her.
To get too know a man you must work with him.
I've worked with hundreds of men over the years and i can say categorically that I could
count on the fingers of one hand those that were honest, straight and principled.
The jealousy, the begrudgery that exists within the working class is mind-blowing, we never
stick together, were always at each others throats and we inform on each other, and that's
the way the ruling class want it to stay.
Look at the left of centre politicians in the Dail, the different groups, mostly working class, the
can't agree on anything, they're always at each others throats, is it principle, no, it's trying to
get one over on the other.
That's the way the ruling class like it
They, the ruling class create and perpetuate divisiveness within the working class and we fall
for it, will we ever learn.
If we never learn, we will continue to be at the mercy of the ruling class like the FG, FF, and
Labour politicians who govern primarily for those at the top of this society.
Traitors in our midst. The IIEA are trying to get us involved with a EU army, an army the
Germans, French and others hope will rival the United States and Russian armies. We are
already being sucked into this imperial project, Varadkar is full square behind it. Coveney
went to the secret Bilderberg Group in 2013 and after he came back home started pushing
hard to get us involved, cheered on by the Irish Times. If they get their way, Irish men and
women will soon be invading countries in Africa (to plunder their natural resources) and many
will come home in body bags. The IIEA is working hard behind the scenes to scrap national
sovereign states in favour of a United Europe. But will Ruairi Quinn and Brendan Halligan
volunteer to fight on the battlefields when EU goes to war? Don't be silly.

Ireland's Climate Minister Just Approved a New

Offshore Oil Project
By John Gibbons Friday, July 21, 2017

Irelands first minister for Climate Action, Denis Naughten, quietly signed off this month on the
Druid/Drombeg exploration field off Irelands west coast which is eyeing an estimated five billion
barrels of offshore oil.
The department issued no press statement about the initiative and it didnt even merit a mention
on the departments website.

The news instead leaked out via an industry website, Proactive Investors, which revealed that
Providence Resources PLC had confirmed that drilling operations had begun for the exploration
well near Porcupine bank off the Irish coast.

As the website stated, it is expected to be a high impact exploration programme, if the well
successfully confirms the prospects seen in pre-drill analysis.

It explained that the Stena IceMAX deep-water drillship is contracted for the programme, and
operations have now begun after the (Irish) Minister of Communications, Climate Action and
Environment gave consent on July 11.

If recovered and burned, these five billion barrels of oil will result in some 1.5 billion tonnes of
new CO emissions.

Just weeks before approving the oil exploration licence, Naughten had travelled to Brussels
where he is threatening to delay EU-wide implementation of the Paris Agreement on Climate
Change by arguing that the 20 percent greenhouse gas targets for 2020 that Ireland itself signed up
to are now too onerous. Ireland, has, however, received little support among other EUstates for
its special pleading.

All of this comes as this week, Ireland published its first National Mitigation Plan (NMP) in over
10 years. However, the NMP has been widely criticised as it fails to set out any clear roadmap
whatever to show how Ireland can even achieve its EU-mandated emissions.

Irelands current total annual emissions from all sectors are around 60 million tonnes a year, and
this figure must drop sharply in the coming decade in line with its international commitments.

The Druid/Drombeg field alone could therefore potentially produce the equivalent of all Irelands
greenhouse gas emissions (at 2016 levels) for at least the next quarter of a century.

Ireland is one of only two EU states that is set to miss its 2020 emissions reductions targets.
Instead of the slated 20 percent cut, Ireland is currently on track to deliver instead a 6 percent
reduction compared to 2005 levels.

Since the offshore drilling is being conducted by a private firm, the carbon released will not be
tallied as the responsibility of the Irish government, but will end up instead being accounted in
Europes carbon market known as the EU Emissions Trading System.

Fracking Ban

The news of the offshore oil deal comes after an onshore fracking ban was passed in Ireland last
month. This means Ireland follows France and Germany as among the first EU countries to
introduce such a ban.

However, it seems this initiative happened despite, rather than as a result of, government policy.

The anti-fracking legislation is the first Private Members' Bill to be passed during the lifetime of
Irelands minority government. Green Party Senator, Grace OSullivan, unsuccessfully attempted
to add an amendment calling for the government to refuse to extend or renew exploration licences
for oil or gas.

OSullivan pointed out the contradiction between the Irish government signing up to international
climate treaties such as the Paris Accord while at the same time continuing to issue exploration
licenses for fossil fuel prospecting in Irish waters. Our current energy policy is nothing less than
a complete contradiction, a policy that can only lead to one conclusion: we should keep the
petroleum in the ground, she told the Senate in late June.

Naughten on Climate

Climate Action minister, Denis Naughten is an independent member of parliament, based in a

rural constituency where farming and turf cutting are among the major activities.

While Naughten himself has a scientific background, taking a strong position on climate action is
risky in rural Ireland, where the powerful farming lobby has taken a hostile position on climate
action. And so there is likely to be some political pressure from these carbon intensive industries.

Under the new National Mitigation plan, for instance, Irelands agriculture sector, accounting for a
third of all non-ETSemissions, has been given a political free pass on greenhouse gas cuts,
leaving a near-impossible situation where all other sectors would need virtually 100 percent
emissions cuts in order for Ireland to meet its legal obligations.

Speaking at the 2016 Energy Ireland conference, however, Naughten said: The simplest solution
to many of our challenges in the energy sector is to reduce the amount of energy we use. It is often
said that the cheapest barrel of oil is the one not burned.

But words arent matching actions.

Drilling Risks

Apart from the climate damage that will come from digging up yet more fossil fuels, there are
specific dangers inherent in this mega-drilling plan on the Porcupine bank that the climate
minister approved.

First, this region is a hotspot for whale and dolphin populations and these are severely threatened
by the seismic activity that goes hand in hand with oil drilling.

Second, in June 2015, an international team of marine scientists discovered a new cold water coral
habitat off the Porcupine bank, with coral extending to depths of up to 900 metres. This underlines
the regions rich and fragile ecology, all of which is now threatened.

Also, the proposed drilling on the Porcupine bank will take place in deeper and potentially
stormier waters than the Gulf of Mexico which experienced the Deepwater Horizon catastrophe in
2010. This led to the equivalent of five million barrels of oil leaking into the Gulf and leading to
an ecological disaster with an economic cost running into tens of billions of dollars.

There is deep scepticism about a small country like Ireland having the political muscle to make an
oil giant stay and clean up a future major oil spill along its Atlantic coast.

An Taisce, Irelands national trust, this week called on the government, in the light of the
unfolding global climate crisis, to implement an immediate moratorium on the issue of any
further licences for fossil fuel exploration or extraction within the national territory. Frances
Environment Minister Nicolas Hulot announced late last month that France is to stop granting new
licences for oil and gas exploration on the mainland and in overseas territories.

Within Irelands department of Communications, Climate Action & Environment, the Natural
Resources section appears to operate as an independent entity. Its section entitled Oil and Gas
(Exploration & Production) states that its aim is to maximise the benefits to the State from
exploration for and production of indigenous oil and gas resources.
Other than a vague comment about having due regard to the environment, this division doesnt
even pay the usual lip-service to addressing climate change or Irelands legally mandated
requirement to rapidly decarbonise our energy system. Paradoxically, this division operates within
the very government department charged with implementing Climate Action.

John Gibbons is a Dublin-based specialist writer and commentator on climate and environmental
issues. He blogs at ThinkOrSwim.ie You can follow him on Twitter here.

https://www.desmog.uk/2017/07/21/ireland-s-climate-minister-just-
approved-new-offshore-oil-project

Oil and Gas (Exploration &

Production)

Our role in the Petroleum Affairs Division (PAD) is to maximise the

benefits to the State from exploration for and production (E&P) of
indigenous oil and gas resources. In doing this we ensure that
activities are conducted with due regard to their impact on the
environment and other land/sea users. We are responsible for
licensing and regulating oil and gas E&P activities, both offshore
and onshore Ireland. Our role extends from policy development to
promoting the opportunity to invest in exploration in the Irish
offshore to licensing and the regulation of licensed E&P activities.
We also play a lead role in initiating and supporting research
directed at deepening knowledge of the oil and gas potential of the
Irish offshore.
There have been four commercial natural gas discoveries since
exploration began offshore Ireland in the early 1970s; namely the
Kinsale Head, Ballycotton and Seven Heads producing gas fields
off the coast of Cork and the Corrib gas field off the coast of Mayo.
There have been no commercial discoveries of oil to date.
http://www.dccae.gov.ie/en-ie/natural-
resources/publications/Documents/32/6%20Month%20Report%20ended%20
31%20Dec%202015.pdf

Interesting article about the DPP in The Phoenix magazine

The DPP's Office, along with far too many 'officers' in our
justice system (including senior Gardai and a number of
judges) operate to an agenda which has, as their top priority,
the protection of the status quo and the suppression of public
criticism or dissent. Justice is NOT a priority here - not when
evidence is fabricated, perjury by State witnesses goes
unpunished, and private prosecutions against State employees
just mysteriously 'disappear off the books' without trace or
explanation. The failures of Loftus & Co are symptomatic of
the endemic rot in our justice system. This is NOT mere
'incompetence'. This is purposeful and deliberate; it is
'criminal'; and it is time to name and shame those involved!
Well done Phoenix Magazine!
17th September 2016: Abolition not
suspension of water charges

Right2Water is hosting a National Demonstration against water charges

on Saturday, 17th September 2016.
Water charges are an affront to democracy
Two out of every three members of Dil ireann were elected with a
mandate to abolish unfair water charges in the 2016 General Election.
Despite this overwhelming majority, the Irish government is refusing to
listen to the electorate and scrap the charges. Instead, an expert panel
has been established hand-picked by a Minister who supports water
charges to deliver a report with the hope of giving Irish Water a
lifeline.
TELL OUR GOVERNMENT TO ACCEPT THE DEMOCRATIC WILL OF
THE IRISH PEOPLE
If its not about privatisation, where is our referendum?
An even larger majority were returned to the Dil stating they would
like a referendum to enshrine public ownership of our water in the
Constitution. Despite this, the government is refusing to allow that
referendum. If its not about selling our water over to private investors,
prove us wrong, give us the referendum.
DEMAND A REFERENDUM NOW
The EU
The EU Commission is on record as saying, The Commission believes
that the privatisation of public utilities, including water supply firms,
can deliver benefits to the society when carefully made. To this end,
privatisation should take place one the appropriate regulatory
framework has been prepared to avoid abuses by private monopolies.
Essentially, they are saying Irish Water should be privatised and the
sector should be opened up to other private companies. Under the
Water Framework Directive, Ireland is exempt from domestic water
charges but the EU Commission has decided to intervene in Irish
democracy stating that water should be paid for through domestic
water charges irrespective of the will of the Irish people. We know their
real agenda is privatisation.
TELL THE EU COMMISSION IT'S NOT THEIR DECISION, IT'S OURS
TTIP & CETA
Saturday, 17th September 2016 is European day against TTIP and CETA,
two international trade agreements that are currently being negotiated
between the EU and the US and Canada respectively. These
agreements are a danger to our water services along with our workplace
rights, health and safety standards, environmental protections, public
services and much more. The agreements have a private court where
corporations can sue sovereign governments for introducing measures
that protect their citizens.
REJECT TTIP AND CETA
Water poverty
Ireland is currently the only country in Europe with zero water poverty.
Our government want to change that and introduce this new form of
poverty to the Irish people. Remember, according to the governments
own figures, when the cap ends in 2018, the costs of water will probably
have to double in order to meet the EU market corporation test. And
thats just the beginning

Bailout terms force water

utility sale in Greece, Portugal
Timothy Spence
Oct 11, 2012
EU leaders are under fire for pressuring troubled eurozone governments to sell
public water utilities as part of their bailout deals, with environmentalists and
rights activists saying that privatisation will only feed public anger.

Criticism of the bailout conditions set for Greece and Portugal by the European
Commission, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund troika call for
shedding state-owned companies, including public utilities, as a condition for billions
of euros in funds to stave off insolvency.

Greece came under renewed pressure this week from eurozone finance ministers to
approve a fiscal overhaul in order to receive 31.2 billion in an aid instalment that is
already two months overdue. German Chancellor Angela Merkel made a one-day visit
to Athens on Tuesday to give cautious support to the austerity plan backed by her
Greek counterpart, Antonis Samaras.

David Hall, who heads the Public Services International Research Unit at the
University of Greenwich, says water privatisation is a mistake both politically and
operationally, leading to higher prices and disgruntled customers.

In terms of operating efficiency, there is really no visible difference between public

and private sectors, Hall said in a telephone interview, adding there is no evidence
at all to support the widely asserted view that the private sector is more efficient.

There is actually very strong public resistance to the idea of water privatisation, and
indeed even stronger resistance to the experience of it, he said, noting that some city
and regional governments have reversed course and resumed control over water
services.

Greece hopes to raise 3.5 billion from the privatisation of energy and utility
companies, while efforts to sell state and locally owned water services are gaining
speed in Portugal and Spain.

Commission denies pressure

A European Commission lawyer familiar with the bailout provisions denied that the
EU executive was stepping beyond its authority. The lawyer, who spoke on condition
of anonymity citing the sensitivity of the financial talks, said decisions on the sale of
water utilities and other public assets were made by national, not European, officials.

But the Commission lawyer acknowledged that it was a cumbersome political issue,
noting that at one point in 2010, the sale of stakes in the Thessaloniki and Athens
water companies was blocked when Greeces Socialists reversed the previous
conservative governments privatisation deal.

Supporters of public water companies include the utilities themselves, trade unions,
consumer groups, environmentalists and human rights activists who insist that water
is a public asset. They have used a variety of tactics to defend their turf.

In May 2011, a coalition of activist groups and public suppliers pressed Commission
Vice President Olli Rehn, who oversees economic affairs, to back off the water
privatisation as a condition for aid. Joo Ferreira, a Portuguese MEP from the
European United Left group, earlier this year urged fellow lawmakers to halt the trend
in his country and others, claiming that untamed privatisation will lead to a disaster.

In March, trade unions and environmentalists opposed to the sale of Spanish,

Portuguese and Greek utilities organised an alternative to the World Water Forum in
Marseille, claiming the meeting was dominated by corporate interests. The protest
event, known by its French acronym FAME, or Forum Alternatif Mondial de lEau,
billed itself as offering a democratic choice to the other Marseille gathering.

At the previous water forum in Istanbul in 2009, police battled protestors opposing
private management of water utilities.

FAME organisers also backed a European Citizens Initiative on water and sanitation
rights to pressure the European Union to halt the liberalisation of water works.

Millions invested in private companies

Hall urged the EU to reconsider its support for privatisation. He and colleagues at the
Public Services International Research Unit published a report in August noting that
despite the promoted advantages of private operations, many end up tapping the
public purse for financing and investment.

The study shows that private companies received 496 million in financing from the
Europe Bank for Reconstruction and Development, which underwrites public
improvement projects in Central and Eastern Europe and former Soviet states. The
report says 272 million came in the form of equity investments in private companies.

Hall said the European Commission, as member of the international troika, should
reconsider its policies towards indebted eurozone countries.

The IMF can and does do and say what it likes, he said. But there has been a long
argument over the years with the EU about privatisation policies and the EU has
always been very clear that the Treaty allows it to promote liberalisation in various
sectors, but the Treaty requires the EU itself to be neutral on public or private
ownership.
BACKGROUND
The World Water Council, a Marseille-based group that includes the water industry
and government representatives, has organised the World Water Forum every three
years since 1997. The event, last held March 2012, includes a red-carpet list of
industry, ministers and international representatives. The 2009 meeting was marked
by divisions over whether to back a resolution to make the right to water and
sanitation a fundamental international right a year before the UN adopted water and
sanitation as fundamental human rights under international law.

The Alternative World Water Forum known by its French acronym FAME, or
Forum Alternatif Mondial de lEau says it offers a democratic choice to the
competing forum they say represents an lite that puts corporate interest ahead of the
need for affordable water. FAME organisers used the March 2012 event to gather
signatures for a European Citizens Initiative on water and sanitation rights.

TIMELINE

18-19 Oct.: EU summit to debate "interim report" on deepening integration in

the Economic and Monetary Union.
Mid-Nov.: Commission expected to table its Blueprint to Safeguard Europes
Water Resources
26-27 Nov.: Conference on the water blueprint scheduled in Nicosia
13-14 Dec. 2012: Final report and roadmap for further economic and
monetary union to be adopted by EU leaders at Brussels summit

https://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/letter_to_the_commis
sion_on_water_privatization_conditionalities.pdf

letter_to_the_commission_on_water_privatization_conditionalities

https://corporateeurope.org/sites/default/files/letter_to_the_commis
sion_on_water_privatization_conditionalities.pdf

Trade Unions and Civil Society Welcome the

Introduction of the Human Right to Water into the
Constitution of Slovenia
Brussels, November, 18th 2016

Last night the National Assembly of Slovenia passed an amendment to its Constitution to include
a new article that recognizes the Human Right to Water. The amendment affirms water should be
treated as a public good managed by the state, not as a commodity, and that drinking water must
be supplied by the public sector in a non-for-profit basis. It is a great success for Slovenian
activists and people.
Citizens from across the EU and Europe have successfully mobilized to have the right to water
and sanitation recognized as a human right as decided by the United Nations and have this put
into EU law. The European Commission continues to ignore nearly two million voices of the first
ever successful European Citizens Initiative. Commissioner Vella should listen to citizens and
follow the Slovenian example as soon as possible, said Jan Willem Goudriaan, EPSU General
Secretary.

Water is a controversial topic in Slovenia, as foreign companies from the food and beverage
industry are buying rights to a large amount of local water resources. The Slovenian government
has raised concerns about the impacts of free trade agreements like CETA in its capacity to
control and regulate these resources [1].

Trade agreements and investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms can limit the ability of states
to take back public control over water resources when foreign investors are involved, as it is the
case in Slovenia. To guarantee the right to water and the control over this key resource, the
European and the Slovenian Parliaments should reject CETA when it comes to a vote in the
coming months, said David Snchez, Director of Food & Water Europe.

The amendment is the result of a citizens initiative that collected 51.000 signatures to propose a
constitutional amendment [2].

We welcome the introduction of the human right to water in the Slovenian constitution, as the
great result of a citizens initiative. Now civil society should be vigilant to guarantee a democratic
and transparent management of the integrated water cycle founded in the participation of citizens
and workers, said Jutta Schtz, speakperson at the European Water Movement.

------
Notes
[1] The Slovenian government raised concerns about the ambiguity of terms like commercial use
of a water source in CETA, how the agreement applies to existing water rights and the future
ability of national governments to put limits on concessions already granted without being subject
to claim under ICS, among others. The document can be found here
http://europeanwater.org/images/pdf/Slovenia-questions-on-Water_14-9-2016.pdf
[2] More information about this citizens initiative can be found at their website
http://voda.svoboda.si/
Contact:
Jutta Schtz, Speakperson, European Water Movement, +49 (0) 157 390 808 39 (mobile),
juttaschuetz(at)gmx.de

David Snchez, Director, Food & Water Europe, +32 (0) 2893 1045 (land), +32 (0) 485 842 604
(mobile), dsanchez(at)fweurope.org

Guillaume Durivaux, Policy officer, EPSU, +32 (0) 22501041, gdurivaux(at)epsu.org

Slovenia-questions-on-
Water_14-9-2016
Questions of Slovenia relating to provions on water in CETA.
Delegations will find attached SI letter to Mr. Jean Luc Demarty on the above-
mentioned subject

http://europeanwater.org/images/pdf/Slovenia-questions-on-Water_14-9-2016.pdf

Bailout terms force water utility sale in Greece,

Portugal
1. Anonymous says:

11/10/2012 at 09:41

This is about control by the NWO banking elite and all the more reason not to sell off
water supplies.

Log in to Reply

2. Anonymous says:

12/10/2012 at 20:59

I live in a quasi bankrupt country. I am 100% for privatization. However, in times of

poverty, privatizing water is just taxing the already poor. Besides, the matter has some
foul play. Suez (and Veolia) have been in the news as trying to buy the Athens and
Salonica water utilities (which have been merging with countryside utilities) since 1999!
Their employees have appeared as advisors to the Pasok officials (Pasok is rapidly
becomnig synonymous with corruption). A deal did not materialize then, because of
some accounting issues and the request by the French (through their local emlpoyees) that
the Water Companies first undertake major network revampings.
If the EC or the Troika pressure for this privatization (and that of the electricity company)
they are regretably becoming a party to improper and possibly corupt transactions, and in
a period of financial depression, people will remember and they will talk. And in the
mind of the frustrated citizen, the EC will appear as just a tool for 4-5 Northern European
companies. EDF is already b lacklisted here for its wind shenanigans in Crete in a totally
preposterous project that will wreck the island so that Mr EDF Renewables and a couple
of local politicians can improve their portfolios. In Crete, that is playing with fire. Enough
already with predatory transactions!

Log in to Reply

3. Anonymous says:

15/10/2012 at 14:56

I use the term fictitious capital to describe what the Big Bankers, public and private, are
attempting to inflict on the ordinary 99% people who through their entrepreneur led
labour create ALL REAL value, capital included.
In the middle of the 19th century Karl Marx coined this term to describe the notes and
loans that governments and gentry used to finance wars, luxuries, estates and otherwise
living beyond their REAL means.
At that time such paper would accrue during Boom times as the economy expanded and
would usually max out at around 10-12% of a countries GDP. As long as the good times
 rolled on it was not a problem, but came a crisis of over production (of all the wrong
things) there would be the day of reckoning. Ergo, the bill collectors came and cash not
paper promises was the order of the day. This resulted in a variety of ways to settle; some
were paid in part or in full but more often bankruptcies and swindles resulted. Then the
stage was set for the next cycle boom bust.
Today though the situation with fictitious or counterfeit capital is vastly different.
100 years of pumped up growth for growths sake first based on the now discredited ideas
of John Maynard Keynes has produced a situation where some 20 times the worlds gross
product exists as fictitious capital, a counterfeit collection of deficits, bills, bonds,
exchanges, derivatives, swaps and the latest fraud, quantitive easing. (Le Monde
Diplomatique puts it at 50 times)
Every day we read of new Central and private bank meetings, Increasing capital base is
their current fad.
OFF THE WALL! There is not a farthing of REAL capital in all of this rat-bag of lies,
swindles and manipulations.
REAL capital is ONLY accumulated labour dedicated to enhancing future production.
Ergo entrepreneur led LABOUR (of the 99%) is the only source that can augment
existing capital or create new.
The banksters, led by the IMF, USA FED, and British financial services are well aware
of this fact but that will not stop them from attempting to download this fraud onto the
REAL product of Labour in the form of bailouts of sovereign debts, to be serviced by
taxes on the REAL producers.
RIGHT NOW AS PER ABOVE THEY ARE READY TO POUNCE AND PREY ON
GREEK PUBLIC UTILITIES!
The 99% will be robbed of (much prepaid) social services and benefits to service debts.
Austerity it is called when those who had NO hand in running up this fraud are required
to pay interest that will amount to 40-60% of the future product of their labour. Gone will
be pensions, good schools, decent medical care, infrastructure (e.g. utilities that work
reliably); even adequate diets will be history.
Let them eat cake! exclaimed La Royale Marie Antoinette.
Let them eat garbage, implies La Grande Dame Christine LaGarde, of the International
Monetary Fascists(IMF)
So Greece, you are the front line today, Italy and Spain may be next, but do not think that
any country, including the relatively well off Germany or the resource rich Canada and
Australia will be forever exempt. Ms Merkel, beware!
The poor little ones are but appetizers; they will whet the appetites of these financial
service vultures and jackals. For certain if they succeed in the beginning the taste of
financial carrion will make them hunger for more, and they will finish only when the 99%
of humanity is subject as debtors to enslavement by the 1%.
But this does not have to be!
Greece you can repudiate the fraud! Lead the way! DEFAULT is the way to go!
99%; be inclusive! Support Greece today, Italy Spain, , &c. tomorrow and/?/ the
world in future.
Hold on to your souls! Hang tough!
You have a WORLD to WIN!!

https://www.euractiv.com/section/sustainable-dev/news/bailout-terms-force-
water-utility-sale-in-greece-portugal/
The European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) brings together trade
unions from across Europe. We influence the policies and decisions of employers,
governments and European institutions that affect public service workers, their
families and communities. We mobilise for action and change and are committed to
achieving another, social Europe.

The European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU) represents 8 million

public service workers across Europe. We are the strong trade union voice that
workers need, whether thats with employers, the European Parliament, the
Commission or national governments.

EPSU is the European region of the global public services federation PSI and is also a
member of the European Trade Union Confederation.

EPSU works hard to deliver better working conditions, improved health and safety
and enhanced rights for our members. By sitting down with employers at a
European level, we negotiate best practice agreements that improve the working
lives of public service workers and ensure quality services for citizens.

Women represent the majority of our members and gender equality is at the heart
of everything we do. From negotiating with employers on womens rights in the
workplace to exposing the scandal of the gender pay gap, EPSU is taking action for
real equality.

Public services are affected by the big issues facing our societies and are under
increasing strain from budget cuts, liberalisation, austerity, low pay and poor
working conditions. EPSU is fighting against tax avoidance by multinationals to
ensure sustainable public finances. We are making the case for cast-iron exclusions
of public services from trade deals like TTIP, CETA and TiSA. We are standing up for
the rights of migrants, both in the workplace and in the services our members
deliver.

EPSU provides a platform for our members to regularly share good practices in
organising, recruitment and campaigning. We share information, research and
experiences to improve the quality of jobs and services and to deepen solidarity
within our family of trade unions.

We campaign for well-funded public services and better rights at work. Our vision is
of a Europe with public services at its core. Good jobs in our sectors mean quality
services for citizens.

Our members know that the services they deliver are not a cost to society but an
investment in our communities. Were taking that message to the heart of Europe.

President: Isolde Kunkel-Weber, Ver.di, Germany

Vice-Presidents: Dave Prentis, UNISON, UK - Franoise Geng, CGT Sant
Action Sociale France - Mette Nord, Fagforbundet Norway and Mikhail
Kuzmenko, HWURF, Russia.
 EPSU General Secretary: Jan Willem Goudriaan

UNHAPPY MEAL
1 Billion in Tax Avoidance on the Menu at McDonalds

http://www.epsu.org/sites/def
ault/files/article/files/enUNHA
PPYMEAL_final.pdf

WATCH The EU investigates

McDonald's tax regime and working
conditions
Jan 22, 2016
A significant proportion of McDonald's profits is suspected to be hidden every year thanks to
secret tax deals. The European Commission is taking this matter seriously and has opened
an investigation to examine if the company received improper state aid from Lumembourg.

Besides McDonalds possible tax avoidance, the social practices of the company have also
raised questions from workers associations: zero hour contract and low ages build upon the
list of complaints. The European Parliament will soon investigate these bad working
conditions imposed by the enterprise upon its European subsidiaries.

Interview with Peter Simon, S&D spokesperson on the TAXE committee Peter Simon, with
Thomas Woodruff, Executive Director at Change to win, with Patrick Orr, Policy Assistant at
the European Public Service Union (EPSU), with Lawanda Williamson, worker at Mc Donald,
Detroit, USA and with Jutta Steinruck, S&D spokesperson for employment and social affairs.

https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=mMxolyn-Yto
Inside Story - Has Ireland given illegal tax incentives to Apple?
Published on Sep 1, 2016
The European Commission orders the U.S. tech giant to repay billions of dollars in tax.
It's the biggest tax demand ever imposed by the European Union.
The Irish government's been ordered to recover almost 15 billion dollars of unpaid taxes from
Apple.
The world's richest technology company has its headquarters in California and its European
base in Ireland.
The European Commision says the Irish government granted illegal state aid by helping
Apple to artificially lower its tax bill for more than 20 years.
Both parties deny tax evasion and are planning appeals. What does it all mean for doing
business in the European Union?

Presenter: Jane Dutton

Guests:
Conor McCabe, University College Dublin
Tove Maria Ryding, European Network on Debt and Development.
Liza Lovdahl-Gormsen, British Institute of International and Comparative Law.

- Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe

- Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish
- Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera
- Check our website: http://www.aljazeera.com/
This whole thing is because of a loophole in Irish tax laws. Basically the Irish apple
headquarters were accounting for profit from outside Ireland which Irish tax laws doesn't
cover. The 15 billion is the taxes that would have been applied to sales abroad that weren't
taxed at all because it's an Irish seller so, let's say, China can't tax the profit because it's Irish
and Ireland can't tax it because it happened in China. The US gets all the taxes it should from
Apple because it doesn't have a loophole like Ireland.
Let me answer your question Al Jazeera. Yes. Apple, and the nation of Ireland made an
agreement that, according to the European Union's laws, NOT the US or Ireland. Remember
the European Union? The one that Britain left? The one that France and Spain are getting
ready to leave? Because the EU is making them stand down while they bus in millions of
muslim colonists every year? What is Al Jazeera again? Oh it's a state-run media outlet of
Qatar! Wow! Down with the EU God save Ireland!
Im irish citizen , please spread these facts among community as my corrupt country is
currently in a propaganda war on its own people...........only 10% of all employed people of
Ireland are employed by multinationals. the remaining 90% hold up the country as all 90%
pay tax (small to medium business 1.8million employed)....... As of now 6,000 people work for
apple in Ireland and the Irish gov are defending them, however at the start of our recession
350,000 people became unemployed and 250,000 emigrated , the Irish government defended
the banks in this case , took a loan from IMF and gave it to the banks charging population to
do so.We are still in the fallout of this action, Homelessness at crisis record levels, Hospitals
are overcrowded and UNICEF declare Ireland one of the most unsafe places on earth for
children and mothers down to there anti abortion laws, even in critical fatal normalities
abortion are illegal and women must serve prison term. Forget Africa, or south American
countries as weve been brainwashed that these countries are corrupt. In reality its the white
skin suit wearing irish elite doing whatever they can to keep there power. I have lost all faith in
my government along time ago, this weeks revelations enforce my opinions . Please spread
this mesage,FB ,Twitter, and TAKE CONTROL BACK

https://www.youtube.com/wa
tch?v=6RvPRWm0zf4

Battle to oppose water

privatization returns Greece
to frontlines of E.U. crisis

Posted Jul 25, 2017 by Eds.

Topics: Ecology
Places: Europe , Greece
Originally published at Occupy by Maria Paradia (July 20, 2017)
In late September 2016, the Syriza administration laid the
groundwork to begin Greeces water privatization,
achieving a majority of 152 parliamentary votes and
enacting series of new measures to transfer the state-run
water companies of Athens (EYDAP) and Thessaloniki
(EYATH) into a privatization superfund.
The duration of the governments participation in the
superfund was set at 99 years, with lenders promising the
Greek government a bailout of barely 2.8 billion euros
far lower than the projected 50 billion euros estimated
earlier in the year. While Greece was forced to privatize its
water sources, however, other countries like Germany
were undergoing the opposite: a phase of de-privatization.
In Berlin, after 12 years of poor management and
exorbitant price hikes, the local government several years
ago reclaimed its water resources. This turn of events
caused a series of similar de-privatization initiatives
across the country, revealing that the projected economic
outcomes via privatization werent viable in the long term.
In fact, the re-established state-run services were proven
to be far more efficient, better organized and capable of
providing higher-quality services than their privatized
counterparts.
European water service companies have had a long
history of corruption, made all the more pronounced due
to the backing and participation of cartels across the E.U.
According to research by the IMF and Word Bank, such
privatization attempts have always led to worse working
conditions, lower water quality and arbitrary overcharging
placed on that essential resource, all with the goal of
reducing costs for companies.
Projected conclusions about the Greek water privatization
scheme are predictably dire: poverty-stricken households
will be hardest hit by the price hikes, while a lack of
financial motives could lead private companies to cut back
costs on maintaining water supply and sanitationin Athens
and Thessaloniki, the countrys largest cities. All this will
be further compounded by the lack of a concrete
regulatory framework in Greece, which has failed to
control employers abuse of power over the years.
Yet despite the overwhelming evidence, the E.Us
institutions have remained steadfast in their attempt to
push for further Greek privatization, reflecting a misguided
economic policy sorely in need of reconsideration. To
many Greeks, it is further proof of the distancing that has
been taking place between Greece and the E.U since the
early years of the economic crisis. Since 2010, the
administrative and legislative bodies on the continent have
held to their guns, in some cases even ignoring the outcry
of the overwhelming majority as they pushed ahead a
largely unworkable agenda. In 2012 alone, the European
Bank for Reconstruction and Development invested
almost 500 million euros to encourage the first wave of
public sector privatizations in some of the Unions more
vulnerable countries.
Now, 2017 will mark the third year since more than 2
million citizens petitioned via the European Citizens
Initiative Platform to support the Human Right To Water.
To support this effort, citizen-led activist groups earlier this
year established the Right2Water campaign. According to
its mission statement, the purpose is to ensure that E.U.
legislation recognizes the human right to water and
sanitation and enforces quality standards in accordance
with UN Article 31.
Despite the overwhelming public support for this initiative,
those voices have mostly been ignored providing further
evidence that the E.U. appears more interested in
ensuring the survival of its economic policies than
the well-being of its citizens. (In Portugal, where the first
wave of water privatizations took place, end-user costs
quadrupled within a few years after implementation.)
According to Christa Hecht, Managing Director for the
Allianz der ffentlichen Wasserwirtschaft (AeoW), which
represents the re-municipalized water services in
Germany: Pricing [water] cant be left to profit-seeking
boardroom managersit is a vital public asset and the
Greeks are right to want to keep it that way.
During the recent 20th Water Conference, members of the
German trade union Ver.di mirrored the opinions of the
AeoW by supporting Greek water activists in their effort to
maintain control of their own publicly available resources.
Along with the European Public Service Union (EPSU),
they are now attempting to create a pressure group that
will force the E.U. to establish a more sustainable water
policy.
The battle for the right to water, in Greece and elsewhere,
isnt stopping anytime soon. But a resolution may require
a more essential shift in the way the European Union does
business: not simply addressing the economic situation of
the E.U. itself, but reevaluating its capacity to truly provide
for its people.

The grab for water is global...so is the resistance. Stay in the game!

"Projected conclusions about the Greek water privatization scheme are predictably dire:
poverty-stricken households will be hardest hit by the price hikes, while a lack of financial motives
could lead private companies to cut back costs on maintaining water supply and sanitationin Athens
and Thessaloniki, the countrys largest cities. All this will be further compounded by the lack of a
concrete regulatory framework in Greece, which has failed to control employers abuse of power over
the years.

Yet despite the overwhelming evidence, the E.Us institutions have remained steadfast in their attempt
to push for further Greek privatization, reflecting a misguided economic policy sorely in need of
reconsideration. To many Greeks, it is further proof of the distancing that has been taking place
between Greece and the E.U since the early years of the economic crisis."

Established four years ago this week,

Irish Water is a complete failure as
Meath / Louth crisis continues
The Workers Party has described the Louth / Meath area
water crisis as a national disaster and the party has
called for local authority resources from other counties to
be brought in to assist in restoring the water supply as a
matter of urgency.
July 25th, 2017

WP Meath representative Seamus McDonagh

Meath Workers Party representative Seamus McDonagh
said the situation of up to 100,000 people in the North
East was intolerable and he accused Irish Water of gross
incompetence.
McDonagh said that the company had been a complete
waste of public money which should have been given to
local councils over the years to forestall exactly this type
of crisis through timely repair and upgrading of water and
sewerage infrastructure.
He said: In 1983 the then Fine Gael / Labour coalition
increased PRSI by over 4%, with similar increases in VAT.
This, we were told, would be partly used to fund local
authority services including water. However it was from
the same period that major spending cuts on infrastructure
began. This left us with the legacy of leaking and
deteriorating pipes that we have today.
The Workers Party have been calling for the upgrade of
water and sewerage infrastructure for decades. We and
others warned of the consequences of deliberate neglect.
Local people in Meath and Louth, including council
workers, warned about the condition of pipes yet they
were ignored. Now Irish Water is singularly unable to deal
with the situation and their primary response has been a
public relations one. They should be stood down so that
the local authorities can get on with the job., said
McDonagh.
This week marks the fourth anniversary of the
establishment of Irish Water. In that time the company has
soaked up anything up to 4 billion of public money. It has
concentrated on installing unwanted water meters and has
failed utterly to reach targets for upgrading the national
water supply system,
The lives and health of our citizens are too important to
allow this farce to continue. The sole purpose of Irish
Water has been as a vehicle for water charges and
privatisation. Thanks to people-power it has failed utterly
in this and thanks to its own ineptitude it has failed as a
water utility. With 4 billion of taxpayers money and 11
billion worth of local authority infrastructure, Irish Water
has been the greatest drain on this economy apart from
the banking crisis. It is time for it to go, said the Workers
Party representative.
http://workersparty.ie/established-four-years-ago-this-week-irish-water-is-a-
complete-failure-as-meath-louth-crisis-continues/
This week marks the fourth anniversary of the establishment of Irish Water. In that time the
company has soaked up anything up to 4 billion of public money. It has concentrated on
installing unwanted water meters and has failed utterly to reach targets for upgrading the
national water supply system,
The lives and health of our citizens are too important to allow this farce to continue. The sole
purpose of Irish Water has been as a vehicle for water charges and privatisation. Thanks to
people-power it has failed utterly in this and thanks to its own ineptitude it has failed as a
water utility. With 4 billion of taxpayers money and 11 billion worth of local authority
infrastructure, Irish Water has been the greatest drain on this economy apart from the
banking crisis. It is time for it to go, said the Workers Party representative.
The Question: Will the Irish
ever accept water meters?
Historians will one day wonder why it was the provision of
water services that spurred revolt

Water meter: the ill-fated installation programme installed meters at 873,000

households. Photograph: Alan Betson

Davin O'Dwyer
Sat, Dec 3, 2016, 00:01

The Expert Commission on Domestic Public Water

Services report finally arrived this week, and the big
takeaway was clear: while consigning the toxic utility
known as Irish Water to the dustbin of history, the State
will need to devise a mechanism for charging for excessive
water use. It will be up to the Independent Senator
Pdraig Cidigh and his cross-party committee to
examine the report and come up with recommendations
for the Oireachtas next March.
Average water usage, the commission suggests, should be
paid for out of general taxation, but excessive use should
be charged for separately. Nothing unreasonable there, as
such charges are the only way to curb wasteful use of
water. But, whatever calculation is used to determine
average usage, the only way to determine above-average
usage effectively is through meters.
While the report tiptoes around the water-meter issue,
that poses a problem. The report points out that the ill-
fated installation programme that came to an end last
summer had installed meters at 873,000 households.
As Irish Times political correspondent Harry McGee put
it: There are still some 500,000 homes without meters.
Even at a conservative estimate, it would cost at least a
further 300 million to fit meters in all of them.
Future historians will probably be a little mystified that it
was the provision of water services, of all things, that
convulsed the usually passive people of Ireland into
passionate resistance. The water-meter installers were at
the front line, stormtroopers imposing the will of an over-
reaching empire in the view of anti-water-charge
protesters.
That the meters were being installed by a subsidiary of
Siteserv, already the focus of controversy, didnt help
matters.
Which leaves us at a difficult juncture: given the lack of
trust over the matter, an already sceptical public is
unlikely to believe that a further 300 million could be
spent installing meters except as a precursor to the return
of water charges in the future.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/the-question-will-the-
irish-ever-accept-water-meters-1.2889397?mode=amp
Extract from an Article in this morning Journal by FG "Family
Lawyer"?
""Throughout the trial #JobstownNotGuilty was trending on Irish
Twitter. This was accompanied by marches and ongoing social media
commentary on the trial from Deputies Paul Murphy and Ruth
Coppinger among others.
We do not and cannot know if the social media campaign had undue
influence on the jury, but it is apparent that we need to protect jurors
from attempts to influence them through social media.
The use of social media throughout the Jobstown trial prompted me
to begin drafting a Private Members Bill to legislate for contempt of
court and to address the challenges presented by social media."""
Still NO mention of Joan Burton's Barrister daughter "Twittering"
during the last trial? :-( :-(

Jobstown defendants could be jailed

tomorrow if the don't accept gagging
order #jobstownnotguilty
Defence- A wide range of constitutional rights of defendents to ensure fair reporting of public
courts and right to constitutional campaign. #jobstownnotguilty

They feel it's so unfair because if it wasn't for social media the Garda lies may have been believed .....this is the warped
thinking of an unjust undemocratic state whose regressive justice system is loaded against the ordinary people and in
favour of the wealthy and powerful elite...we can be sure they will do everything in their power to curb free though,
expression and most importantly the truth on social media...the people must never know the truth because it's lies deceit
and corruption that binds this rotten and undemocratic system together.
Williams -unchallenged lies (vid evidence). Establishment attack after 2 huge wins for
working class. 3rd win Freedom of speech #jobstownnotguilty in court today. Keep it trending.
https://video-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t42.1790-
2/20445019_506873783007076_2659832839360479232_n.mp4?efg=eyJybHIi
OjMwMCwicmxhIjo1MTIsInZlbmNvZGVfdGFnIjoic3ZlX3NkIn0%3D&rl=300&vab
r=111&oh=b454badda6c91dd5d29d4a4bc97fa105&oe=597E05EE
#jobstownnotguilty no further bail conditions needed. 1- 0 to defence. Newstalk Paul Williams
interview on newstalk being presented to the judge now. Paul williams will be summons
before court if this contempt continues and while DPP is considering the matters
correspondance must be sent straight away to Paul Williams to prevent further outburst like
Newstalk interview yesterday. #jobstownnotguilty . If DPP dont bring it the defence will file
neccesary documents, as this is an actual contempt taking place now
The Irish Times HATES water protesters.
So much so that when the #JobstownNotGuilty verdict was arrived at
by a jury of their peers, the Irish Times couldn't handle it and
scrambled to find a reason they were acquitted...because they simply
couldn't be innocent! So it's the fault of social media, apparently.
It's not like the mainstream media (including the Irish Times) or
establishment politicians had tarnished water protesters in the run
up to the trial by referring to them as 'dissidents', 'a sinister fringe',
'thugs', 'the equivalent of ISIS' or anything. How dare ordinary people
express the opposite opinion to their elitist nonsense.
We can thank our lucky stars that juries are selected from our peers,
and not from well-to-do politicians, journalists, editors, judges or
former journalists, judging by the reaction on Twitter and in the Irish
Times today.
Congratulations to all of the defendants for the courage, patience and
dignity shown over the last two and a half years when the full force of
the state was thrown at them. Dawn raids, constant trial delays,
attacks by the media and politicians, millions spent on a ridiculous
prosecution claim...the effect on their mental and physical health
must've been enormous.
While the #JobstownInnocent verdict does give some level of
satisfaction, justice has not been done. This trial and the intimidation
that went with it should never have taken place. We need all other
charges dropped immediately and stop wasting vital taxpayers'
money on this show trial and we need an investigation into the
biased and deeply worrying synchronised claims made by Gardai
against the accused which were contradicted by actual evidence.
Lesson of the day: when in a difficult situation or at a peaceful
protest, keep your phone and video camera handy. It just might
protect you from facing a life sentence in prison.
Im on my way to the ccj to support the
next group of #jobstownnotguilty
Working-class activists, in the tradition of Connolly & Larkin, have been vindicated today.

Let's remember who was on which side in this class battle. #JobstownNotGuilty

Puppy face just got her ass kick let get a new government now for the people
Judge in #jobstownnotguilty says she will not tolerate the social media comments by
defendents( and by implication others) And we're are off. The Irish police state! JnG Back
Friday to argue bail conditions and stop gag on #jobstownnotguilty. These trials should be
thrown out of court. But it's there machine. Jury of peers is what saved the last 6 defendants.
Yesterday an activist was jailed for commenting about his trial on social media. The role of
the state, police force and courts being exposed.
A special report to bring you shocking new video evidence from Joan burton's phone shown
in court last week.
Pleas LIKE, SHARE and COMMENT to show your support and help us get the truth out.
The videos are from Joan Burton's own phone and show her chatting with her assistant
about how to spin the story to damage the water charges movement.
The footage also shows her assistant referring to the protesters as 'f*cking dregs' and discussing the
political chants which Joan, under oath, claimed she didn't hear.
Please share this footage to get the truth out. #JobstownNotGuilty
Stand with Jobstown - Come to the protest May 6th
People think she's only into shoes and shit. Posting pics of herself in a new frock well now you all know. She's heading
off to standing rock her outfit will be a coat with no arms no zip and 5 hoods that's 5 foot long at the back but only comes
down to the midriff in the front a pair of Nordstrom jeans with fake mud retailing at the bargain price of $425 and a pair
of outdoor hiking hi heels. You can be a victim of police brutality but there is no excuse being a victim of your own bad
fashion.
The show-trial of the second group of #JobstownNotGuilty
defendants is fast approaching, we call on everyone to come down to
the CCJ on July 25th at 10am for the pre-trial hearing. The first part of
this joke of a trial has already exposed the lengths the State and its
rotten institutions will go to silence anyone who challenges them.
The Gardai have always been a private army for the rich and
powerful ever since it's inception in 1922, but its shameless effort in
trying to frame community activists for peacefully protesting has
alerted hundreds of thousands to its true purpose, that is to defend
the State and its powerful puppeteers at any cost. #irg calls for...
1. Dropping All charges immediately.
2. Overturning the conviction in the children's court.
3. A Full Public Inquiry.

PAUL WILLIAMS REFERS TO

DEFENDANTS AS THUGS, ASSHOLES,
A RABBLE & BULLIES. CONTEMPT OF
COURT? ABUSE OF
MEDIA? #jobstownnotguilty

Justice not silence

Make sure #jobstownnotguilty trending all day tmw- there is
contempt of court laws available to judge - What Judge Greally and
the press are trying to do is to shut down our freedom of speech.
Attempting to crimnalise protesting, now they are attempt to
crimnalise our "true reporting of the upcoming trials". Purgery of
witnesses in last trial should have these trials thrown out of court.
Judge in #jobstownnotguilty case more worried about social media than the fact cops proven
to be lying and will repeat lies in the witness box in the second trial
The judges spouting on about fair trial and social media- Redherring.OJ Simpson, Oscar
Pristarious trials ran in public arena. If there that bothered about integrity run them in public.
Put the full facts out there. The defendents still 100% not guilty, however Joan, Zappone and
garda wouldn't be coming out to well in public
arena. #socialmedia #ourmedia#freespeech #jobstownnotguilty
OJ Simpson, Oscar Pristarious trials ran in public arena. If there that
bothered about integrity run them in public. Joan, Zappone and garda
wouldn't be coming out to well in public arena. #socialmedia
#ourmedia #freespeech #jobstownnotguilty

The administration of justice is being threatened by the use of social media in the courts, the
States top judge has said.

Chief Justice Susan Denham said concerns over social media were
widespread and real and that new laws were needed.
Her comments follow concerns during the Jobstown trial over the use of
social media by supporters of the seven defendants and the use of
Twitter by defendant Paul Murphy TD, who even received a warning
about his tweets from the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Speaking at the launch of the Courts Service Annual Report 2016, Ms
Justice Denham said the fundamental right to a fair trial needed to be
protected.
She is sending a draft discussion paper this week to the presidents of
the various courts in a bid to draw up rules on the area.
Concerns over social media are widespread and real, said Chief Justice
Denham. There are genuine concerns over the dissemination of false
claims.
She said, to date, it had been rare for courts in Ireland to use contempt
of court laws to curb inaccurate and disruptive online communications
about cases.
Speaking days before her retirement, she said it would be naive not to
plan for the future in this area.
There are several areas we need to address in protecting the right to a
fair trial of an individual in this era of social media.
The fundamental right to a fair trial does not change in the face of any
new means of communication. Rules can and must reflect the new
reality of same.
She highlighted three stages to the process:
Consider draft guidelines regarding the who, when and what of using
social media in courtrooms;
Discuss with those who use social media in and around courts about
the guidelines;
Look at legal reform to take cognisance of the reality of social media.
In this regard, she said, I will this week send to the presidents of each
court a draft discussion paper on guidelines on the use of social media in
the courts.
I will ask the Courts Service to engage with the media and legal
profession on this issue.
Also speaking at the launch, Justice Minister Charlie Flanagan
welcomed the review and said it would support a similar examination he
had initiated after the Jobstown trial.
Fianna Fail TD Darragh O'Brien made a disgraceful attack
on Solidarity & #jobstownnotguilty saying we ran a campaign
around the jury selection and that social media use
effecively 'intimidated' the jury. They just can't accept the
verdict.
What he forgets and leaves out is that we did have to run a
campaign around jury selection because the DPP was
seeking to stack the jury against us by banning whole
groups of people off the jury - if we hadn't ran the campaign
and the DPP got their way, the outcome could have been
totally different.
Fianna Fail TD Darragh O'Brien made a disgraceful attack
on Solidarity & #jobstownnotguilty saying we ran a campaign
around the jury selection and that social media use
effecively 'intimidated' the jury. They just can't accept the
verdict.

Boom! #jobstownnotguilty
https://video-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t42.1790-
2/16556497_296205304116019_695745793843265536_n.
mp4?efg=eyJybHIiOjM5OSwicmxhIjo1MTIsInZlbmNvZGVfd
GFnIjoic3ZlX3NkIn0%3D&rl=399&vabr=222&oh=58e36cf37
a64693647b6a2885b4c1584&oe=597E0431
#jobstownnotguilty about time the truth was out they should never had been in court in the first
place Labour Party are finished coming out with a statement to say it was the Garda that
brought the charges JOANIE IN YOUR IVORY TOWER THIS IS CALLED PEOPLE POWER

What he forgets and leaves out is that we did have to run a

campaign around jury selection because the DPP was
seeking to stack the jury against us by banning whole
groups of people off the jury - if we hadn't ran the campaign
and the DPP got their way, the outcome could have been
totally different.
Judges put us back til 2pm. In her opinion its quite simple
but she'll humour our legal team. Legal team quite a
different opinion around freedom of speech and right to use
social media #jobstownnotguilty If only they were as
worried about main stream media bias

This is an issue that has arisen on a number of occasions in recent

times, he said. I want to acknowledge the importance of what the
chief justice has said and I am keen to have a review with a particular
reference to the applications of social media in civil law on the matter of
contempt of court.
A couple of days after the trial ended, Mr Flanagan said he was keen to
review the area, saying courts must operate without any undue
influence or duress.
Yesterday, he added: I look forward to working closely with the Courts
Service in order to ensure any recommendations that may be
forthcoming will be acted upon and Im reviewing the law at the
moment in that area because I think its important that the law keeps
pace with advances in technology and we ensure that everybody is
entitled on all occasions to a free and fair trial without outside
influence.
Legal sources said that guidelines have been produced in the UK and
the US, including on directing jurors regarding their use of social media
and controlling usage in the courtroom.
One of the issues is who can or should use social media in court, said a
source. If they can use it, when they can use it, and what they can say.
In some countries, only bona fide members of the press and lawyers are
allowed to use social media everyone else is prohibited.
Since 2011 in England and Wales, if a member of the public wants to use
live text-based communications, such as email and social media, in
court, they must make an application to a judge.
The rule does not apply to the media.
Last year guidelines were issued by the Lord Chief Justices office in
Northern Ireland that members of the public could not use social media
or email from court.

Just like they tried to re-run the #JobstownNotGuilty trial in the media, because they didn't get
the result they wanted, they're trying to do the same on water charges. Somehow those of us
who opposed and together defeated water charges are responsible for the disaster that is our
water infrastructure. Never let the facts get in the way of a good propaganda point! The truth
is that Solidarity-PBP was the ONLY party to include a call for increased investment in water
infrastructure in our budget statement last year. Even if they had charges, they wouldn't be
investing. If they got away with privatisation then the evidence from Britain suggests
investment would fall even further. This is from the Solidarity (then AAA) statement.
I thought Williams was going to blow a gasket live on air this morning, poor lil puddin' was apoplectic about all
you left wing bastards. Ne'er a whisper of his own alleged collusion though... ah shur.
The thing no one in ff or ff labour want to acknowledge is the fact for years a percentage of our motor tax
charges was ear marked for water infrastructure costs, because central and local government squandered
this money is the reason pipes are rotting not because we refuse to pay another tax to fund a quango
Fair play to Brendan Ogle
#JobstownNotGuilty
Fabricated evidence and false testimony by Gardai in the Jobstown Protest trial.

These transcripts, the book of evidence and the video evidence contain the
evidence of a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice involving a series of
Gardai lying in a co-ordinated way in their statements and under oath in
court.
#JobstownNotGuilty has called for a public inquiry into this conspiracy, a
call which has been supported by over 100 TDs, Senators, academics and
trade unionists. Unfortunately, the government has so far dismissed the call
and large sections of the media seem to prefer to engage in attempts to re-
run the trial or suggest that the defendants must have been guilty of some
trial.
We have therefore decided to publish all of this material so that journalists
and activists are able to look at it themselves, speak out about what took
place and by so doing, to increase the pressure on the government for an
inquiry, the dropping of all charges against other Jobstown protesters and to
support the appeal of the 15 year old to have his conviction in a judge-only
court of false imprisonment to be overturned.
Below we list just four of the highlights of false and inaccurate evidence
given by the Garda Siochana, as well as evidence of a completely biased
investigation designed to stitch up protesters for false imprisonment. There
are other instances not referenced here.

1. 'Job No. 4' interviewing of non-suspect Garda witnesses

It emerged in evidence in trial, in cross-examination of Gardai by Michael

O'Higgins SC that at the first case conference on the Saturday of the protest,
Job No. 4 was created which was to call door to door to interview those
who may have witnessed or participated in the protests, but weren't suspects.
On the following Monday, in a second case conference chaired by Chief
Superintendent Orla McPartlin, this job was dropped. The result was that
while over 180 statements were taken from Garda witnesses, no statements
were taken from any protesters who weren't suspects. This was illustrative
that the investigation was biased from two days after the protest. It was no
longer devoted to uncovering the truth about the protest, it was about
finding evidence to convict protesters.

2. Will we keep her here all night? - heard by three Gardai, yet never said.

A Garda Superintendent, a Garda Inspector and a Garda Sergeant all

claimed in court that, on the occasion of a vote on the Fortunestown Road
on what course of action to take with the protest, Paul Murphy asked the
protesters in relation to Joan Burton, Will we keep her here all night? They
were Superintendent Flavin, the most senior Garda present, Inspector
Maguire, the second most senior Garda on the protest and Sergeant Phelan.
However a video emerged, and was shown in court of that episode, which
showed categorically that Paul Murphy did not say that, nor did anyone else.
The video showed Solidarity Councillor Mick Murphy urging the protest to
avoid any conflict with the Gardai and to march to the Tallaght Bypass in
front of the Garda jeep in which Ms Burton was. It then showed Paul
Murphy and Mick Murphy voting to march to the Bypass. It showed
multiple Gardai standing around, while this took place yet none of them
saw this.
How did these these three Gardai hear a critical question that was never
uttered by Paul Murphy but gave the false impression that he was arguing to
keep Joan Burton detained indefinitely? How did they, during the same
incident, fail to hear Mick Murphy arguing for the protest to march to the
Bypass. How did they fail to see Paul Murphy twice raising his hand in
support of marching to the Bypass?
3. Garda seeing defendant 'Directing protesters where to stand' when couldn't have seen it

Garda Cooke fabricated his statement when he said that Paul Murphy was
on a megaphone in the ground of St Thomas Church, Jobstown directing
people where to stand implying that he was instructing them to surround an
Avensis car, the first Garda car into which the Garda put Joan Burton.
He said in his written statement and in the District Court case that in the
church grounds, Paul Murphy was on the megaphone and directing
protesters where to stand. This never happened. The import of this is that
Paul Murphy was getting people to stand where they could see the Avensis
and have people ready to surround the car when Joan Burton was brought
out from St Thomas Church and put into it. This would strengthen the
alleged false imprisonment case.

The video evidence shown in court proved this to be fabricated. It was

obviously designed for the purpose of framing Paul Murphy with
responsibility for orchestrating and organising the protest at which Joan
Burton was supposedly falsely imprisoned when it is blatantly obvious that
the protest was unorganised and somewhat chaotic as a result. For the full
time that this Garda and Paul Murphy were in the church grounds, Paul
Murphy never used a megaphone nor directed anybody to do anything.
In court Garda Cooke changed his version of events to say that Paul Murphy
by gestures and body language rather than verbally was directing people
where to stand. This was also contradicted by the video evidence, to which
Garda Cooke responded that he stood over his statement.

Sean Guerin SC challenged him: The reason you made your false statement
was because you wanted to establish that Mr Murphy was guilty of an
offence . . . and you wanted him responsible for the behaviour of other
people . . . . . .because you wanted to fix him with responsibility in law for
their behaviour.

4. Superintendent attempts to fix responsibility for 'violence' on defendant

In his written statement, Superintendent Daniel Flavin the most senior

Garda at the Jobstown protest - accused Paul Murphy of fomenting violence.
He backed away from this position in evidence and cross examination.

His Statement made a week after the Jobstown protest: Mr Paul MurphyTD
addressed the crowd of protesters now numbering several hundred through
a megaphone. He was chanting and as a consequence of what he was saying
the protesters became more animated and aggressive. Missiles began to be
thrown at Gardai. I observed sticks, stones and eggs hitting Gardai and the
Garda jeep.

In his direct evidence to the court, Superintendent Flavin backed away from
his claim that Paul Murphy caused violence. In relation to this Sean Guerin
Senior Counsel for Paul Murphy asked the Superintendent: I take it that
you will understand readily Superintendent, that the priority for this jury is
finding the truth of what happened that day, and that's why you came to
court, and you refreshed your memory with your statement so that you could
tell them the truth.
So why did you not tell them that the violence was the consequence of what Paul Murphy was saying
to the crowd?

A.I suppose in one respect if - - it's trying to be fair to him. . . .

Sean Guerin, Senior Counsel for Paul Murphy, in cross examination put it to
Superintendent Flavin: This is not the first time in this case that a
prosecution witness has come to court and failed to make an allegation in
their evidence which is contained in their statement concerning Paul
Murphy. You may not know that because you weren't in court. I take it you
would accept and understand that what you said in your statement about the
violence being a consequence of Mr Murphy's address to the crowd, you
would understand that the legal significance of that is that Mr Murphy
would bear responsibility for what the crowd did at his urging. You
understand that, don't you?
Supt Flavin Yes, Judge, yes.
S. Guerin. Yes. So the statement - - that part of your statement would have
the consequence in law of extending Mr Murphy's criminal responsibility for
what happened on the day to the actions of other people; isn't that correct?
S. Guerin: Superintendent Flavin, when you made a statement alleging that
Mr Paul Murphy was the instigator and the fomenter of violence, an
allegation which you were not willing to come to court and repeat until it
was put to you by the defence, were you attempting to pervert the course of
justice?
Superintendent: No, Judge.
S. Guerin: Were you trying to get a charge preferred against him by the
DPP in circumstances where you feared that if he were not tied to the
violence, a charge might not be preferred?
Superintendent: Absolutely not, Judge. . . . . . .
S. Guerin: And if the ladies and gentlemen of the jury come to the view that
what you did by making a serious allegation, which would have the legal
consequence of making Mr Murphy responsible for the violence of others,
which you were reluctant to
make on oath, was part of a pattern evident also in the behaviour of other
garda, is that because you were in fact part of a conspiracy to pervert the
course of justice?
HIS IS NOT A COURT REPORT, but oooooooops, someone should have watched this
video back of their appearance on Vincent Browne on 7th of October 2015 and re-read their
own book called "Our Lives Out Loud" in relation to amongst other things the significance of
the Stonewall Riots (yes RIOTS) in Greenwich Village New York in 1969 for the Gay Rights
Movement. As for attending and therefore presumably supporting the tactics of the Anti
Nuclear Arms Campaign in Greenham Common in Britain in the 80s check
out https://www.theguardian.com//greenham-common-women-taught-#jobstownnotguilty
DENHAM DISLIKES DEMOCRACY OF FREEDOM
OF SPEECH
July 28th 17
Chief Justice Susan Denham said concerns over social media were
widespread and real and that new laws were needed.
Her comments follow concerns during the Jobstown trial over the use of
social media by supporters of the seven defendants and the use of
Twitter by defendant Paul Murphy TD, who even received a warning
about his tweets from the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Speaking at the launch of the Courts Service Annual Report 2016, Ms
Justice Denham said the fundamental right to a fair trial needed to be
protected.
She is sending a draft discussion paper this week to the presidents of
the various courts in a bid to draw up rules on the area.
Concerns over social media are widespread and real, said Chief Justice
Denham. There are genuine concerns over the dissemination of false
claims.
She said, to date, it had been rare for courts in Ireland to use contempt
of court laws to curb inaccurate and disruptive online communications
about cases.
Speaking days before her retirement, she said it would be naive not to
plan for the future in this area.
There are several areas we need to address in protecting the right to a
fair trial of an individual in this era of social media.
The fundamental right to a fair trial does not change in the face of any
new means of communication. Rules can and must reflect the new
reality of same.
She highlighted three stages to the process:
Consider draft guidelines regarding the who, when and what of using
social media in courtrooms;
Discuss with those who use social media in and around courts about
the guidelines;
Look at legal reform to take cognisance of the reality of social media.
In this regard, she said, I will this week send to the presidents of each
court a draft discussion paper on guidelines on the use of social media in
the courts.
I will ask the Courts Service to engage with the media and legal
profession on this issue.
Also speaking at the launch, Justice Minister Charlie Flanagan
welcomed the review and said it would support a similar examination he
had initiated after the Jobstown trial.

The Jobstown defendants were declared not guilty last month.

This is an issue that has arisen on a number of occasions in recent
times, he said. I want to acknowledge the importance of what the
chief justice has said and I am keen to have a review with a particular
reference to the applications of social media in civil law on the matter of
contempt of court.
A couple of days after the trial ended, Mr Flanagan said he was keen to
review the area, saying courts must operate without any undue
influence or duress.
Yesterday, he added: I look forward to working closely with the Courts
Service in order to ensure any recommendations that may be
forthcoming will be acted upon and Im reviewing the law at the
moment in that area because I think its important that the law keeps
pace with advances in technology and we ensure that everybody is
entitled on all occasions to a free and fair trial without outside
influence.
Legal sources said that guidelines have been produced in the UK and
the US, including on directing jurors regarding their use of social media
and controlling usage in the courtroom.
One of the issues is who can or should use social media in court, said a
source. If they can use it, when they can use it, and what they can say.
In some countries, only bona fide members of the press and lawyers are
allowed to use social media everyone else is prohibited.
Since 2011 in England and Wales, if a member of the public wants to use
live text-based communications, such as email and social media, in
court, they must make an application to a judge.
The rule does not apply to the media.
Last year guidelines were issued by the Lord Chief Justices office in
Northern Ireland that members of the public could not use social media
or email from court.
Sue is retiring shortly and handing over the duties of the Benchers to Fine Gael/Leo
appointed Frank Clarke. The Benchers are a secret society who hang out in the Kings Inns
and who take part in rituals and wear funny clothes before trundling down to the Four Courts,
the Criminal Courts of Justice and other courts, where they wear funny horsehair hats and
look down on dregs. Sue and her posh pals, who earn sizeable salaries - nay, HUGE
salaries are having a bad year - in Latin, their secret language, it's called Annus Horribilis -
basically, a SHIT year. Jobstown. DPP blunders. Garda malpractices/lying under oath ...
And with two more Show Trials coming up, Sue and her Kings (no Queens?) Inners are hoping to
restore justice. Melania might have to jail a few Tallaght Twitterers for contempt to keep the riff raff in
their place.
Paul Williams?
"Mr Williams, please show some respect! Now off you go".
PSYCHOPATHS IN GOVERNMENT
Psychopaths, Human Rights Ireland, William Finnerty:
https://www.google.ie/search
===
WHAT IS A PSYCHOPATH?
"The psychopathic personality has become a very successful adaptation
in our society. Yet they remain hidden in plain view from most people,
who may be troubled as to why there seems to be so much turmoil and
political infighting going on around them, until that is, they have that
first chilling run in with one, and realize that they just might be dealing
with a psychopath.
"Psychopaths look normal, and appear to react like everyone else. But
such reactions are feigned or simulated to appear normal. Their actions
however, actually have no emotional content behind them.
"The majority of psychopaths are not serial killers. They may not be
violent at all. There are many white collar psychopaths who use
manipulation, deceit, and charm to perpetrate non-violent crimes like
fraud and embezzlement. Some even rise so far in the workplace that,
surrounded by loyal and steadfast friends who are in powerful places,
they become untouchable.
"Psychopathy is a disorder of the mind, where the person is able to
function in society without any moral scruples, no guilt, no worries, no
doubts about himself or herself, no reservations or self-reproach. In
other words, no conscience. They have a chameleon quality that allows
them to blend seamlessly into whatever setting they are in. The person
with this disorder has no idea that there is anything wrong with them.
Whats more, most people dont notice anything wrong with them
either.
"Because of the damage a psychopath can inflict on those around him
or her, understanding this personality style is imperative to avoiding
becoming victimized by one. The more aware you are, the better
chance youll have, of noticing the signs of psychopathic behaviour. This
will alert you to the danger before they can catch you off balance, and
insinuate themselves into your life.
"The Difference Between a High Functioning and Low Functioning
Psychopath
"High functioning psychopaths, by definition, are adept at concealing
their dysfunction outside the home, behind a friendly and likeable
persona that appears sincere and unquestionable. They participate
convincingly in the workplace, in social groups, churches, and
organizations where they may hold high office.
"The Case of Jimmy Savile A High Functioning Psychopath
"Sir Jimmy Savile, was a notorious predatory psychopath and
pedophile, who moved easily through British society for over 50 years
from the 1950s to 2001, protected by the rich and powerful. He was
able to cultivate the favour of royalty, Prime Ministers, the Pope, the
police, media personalities, school and hospital administrators, and
prominent leaders in many walks of life, all of whom thought of him as a
likeable eccentric, who was completely selfless in his philanthropic
efforts to help the poor and disadvantaged.
"The reality, which only came to light in 2012, a year after his death, is
that he raped and assaulted thousands of children, and was given an
open door to the most vulnerable of the sick, the youth and the poor in
British society those who had no voice. Even after his death, in the
face of clear evidence and the testimonies of hundreds of victims, many
of those powerful people with whom he had curried favour, found it
extremely difficult to believe that he was anything other than the
exceptional man they had always believed him to be.
"During his reign of depravity, four police forces tried to investigate him.
But nothing could ever be proven. He even threatened the police who
investigated him, by suggesting that, if the charges did not disappear,
they could lose their jobs, because he had friends in high places who
could cause them a lot of trouble."
"Low Functioning Psychopaths
"Low functioning psychopaths, on the other hand, are unable to hide
their dysfunctional behaviour from public display, and are frequently in
trouble with the law, chronically depressed, even reclusive. They cannot
maintain a positive or professional facade. You are likely to know
immediately when you come into contact with them, by their
appearance, and the way they interact with others, that something is
not quite right.
"With a high functioning or successful psychopath, only the family and
those who are very close to them are aware of their underside.
"What complicates things, even for the family and those in relationship
with them, is that this disorder is not always clearly identifiable,
because in some individuals, it is illusive and not always consistently
present.
"It may be part of a combination of disorders which is confusing and
crazy-making for ordinary normal people. For example, the
psychopathic personality can appear as part of a Multiple Personality
Disorder (also called Dissociative Identity Disorder), so it is present only
part of the time, while another different personality takes over at other
times.
"It can also appear in the form of Bipolar Disorder, where the person can
suddenly switch between an upbeat, fairly normal persona and a low
functioning psychopathic personality.
"Some psychopaths can split their personality being high functioning
in some situations, and in other environments they become low-
functioning. When dealing with these Jeckyll and Hyde aspects of the
psychopath, the thing to remember is that it is not your fault, you are
dealing with a very sick individual psychopath or not, and its time to
extricate yourself from the relationship, the best way you can.
The above text has come from a considerably longer article at the
following www location:
http://quantum-healing-hypnosis.com/understanding-the-psy/
===

Gene Kerrigan: Welcome to the Republic of Opportunism

Heaney is handy. If you're a political leader with a featherweight image, and you need some gravitas, it helps to flick
through a volume of Seamus Heaney's poetry.
INDEPENDENT.IE
July 30, 17
Love ya Gene Kerrigan!
"This country has been broken by the politics of greed - the schools and the hospitals, the
social services, from ambulances to cancer services, from cancer facilitates to the pipes from
which we get our water. At the same time, great wealth has blossomed for some. This is not,
as we are asked to believe, some accidental imbalance. It's how it works in the Republic of
Opportunism".
"It's amusing, in a slightly bitter way, to see the sons and daughters of privilege now uneasy
with political instability, trying on various pseudo-democratic costumes, to check how they're reflected
in the mirror of public opinion".
"For decades, while the politicians were making the public health system what it is today (dangerous,
according to some hospital consultants), the same eejits left the water infrastructure to literally rot.
Last week, the new Minister for Watching Water Leak into the Earth, Eoghan Murphy, tried to float
the notion that burst pipes are mostly the fault of those nasty people who refused to pay their water
bills.
"It would have opened a new revenue stream..."
Eoghan, I think, fancies himself at the spoofing game".
The vultures circled, Nama became a huge sweetie jar for the rich, the Government voted against
tackling vulture funds at a United National level and the mainstream parties became always alert to
new ways to facilitate a Republic of Plunder".
Gene Kerrigan on how the establishment continue to put very expensive tax funded lipstick on
that rather garishly gelatinous pig while the walls of their delusion continue to crumble in the face
of an increasingly aware public...
"Heaney is handy. If you're a political leader with a featherweight image, and you need some
gravitas, it helps to flick through a volume of Seamus Heaney's poetry.
Take a line or two from Heaney's collected works and carefully adapt it to your political needs.
So, you maybe check out the one about digging with the squat pen, as you spoon a bowl of high-
protein low-carb muesli into your gob.
Read on a bit. Potato mould, milk bottles corked with paper - sorry, Seamus, not quite the image
we're looking for. Bin that one.
Here's a poem about a child in a... four-foot box. Oh, God, that's gloomy. Move on.
Aha, decides our ambitious politician, here's a nice one: From the Republic of Conscience.
Lovely line, the Republic of Conscience. Two strong, positive words: Republic, Conscience.
Politicians like to use strong, positive words.
Can't just rip it off, of course - you have to spin the line sideways a bit.
And that's how Mr Varadkar came up with his catchphrase - the Republic of Opportunity. (Him,
or one of the highly paid consultants we employ to fluff his image.)
Great word, opportunity. Conscience is all very well, but it's a bit wimpish, to be honest, Seamus.
Conscience demands something from you. Conscience can slow you down. Conscience is a bit
nanny state.
Opportunity, though - it offers you something. It's a good, upbeat word with a smell of the Market
about it.
The Republic of Opportunity. That's a concept even a vulture property investor can get behind,
while jacking up rents and repossessing apartment blocks.
Last week, Taoiseach Varadkar spoke to Vincent Browne about the terrific plans he has for his
Republic of Opportunity.
And former Taoiseach Brian Cowen spoke of how the EU stopped him from being quite as terrific
as he might have been.
Poor Brian, getting his doctorate, in his ceremonial robes, looked like a lesser-known Roman
emperor. One of the ones whose name you could never remember, so you wrote it on the inside of
your wrist before you went into the exam. Brianus Flopperoonius.
Last week, of course, while vainglorious politicians were assuring us of their true greatness, a lot
of people were thirsty in this Republic of Opportunity. They couldn't wash, they couldn't flush.
Water from burst pipes was leaking into the ground.
Get used to it, citizens.
There are miles and miles of fraying pipes, every yard of them a potential water burst.
For decades, while the politicians were making the public health system what it is today
(dangerous, according to some hospital consultants), the same eejits left the water infrastructure to
literally rot.
Last week, the new Minister for Watching Water Leak into the Earth, Eoghan Murphy, tried to
float the notion that burst pipes are mostly the fault of those nasty people who refused to pay their
water bills.
"It would have opened a new revenue stream..."
Eoghan, I think, fancies himself at the spoofing game.
Instead of fixing the mains (and domestic leaks are a small part of the problem), Fine Gael,
Labour and Fianna Fail came up with a plan to install water meters in every household in the
country, at a cost of - well, half a billion here, half a billion there, never mind the total cost, check
out the Big Idea.
At that stage, FG/FF/Labour were unashamedly arrogant. They began their water privatisation
project even as they were hitting us with austerity.
They had no fear of the people. They'd grown used to being obeyed. Vote as we tell you, or we'll
make you vote again.
In the past we caught them taking money, we caught them in tax scams - they said, ooops, that
was an accident.
We caught them saying one thing in public and the opposite in private - but they looked us in the
eye and denied it - and we just shrugged.
We didn't make a fuss when they cut services galore; we sat surly-faced as they directed Revenue
and Social Welfare to threaten to take the money at source if we didn't pay levies and charges.
Then, from 2014, we fought them.
Their need to keep Irish Water off-the-books meant they couldn't use Revenue against us - they
were vulnerable.
The results of the 2016 general election unsettled them.
They're now readjusting their approach. The arrogant do-as-we-say attitude can't be counted on,
not for a while, at least.
They must emphasise the all-in-this-together aspect. Thus, the Republic of Opportunity. Thus the
ever more widely inclusive "squeezed middle". Thus the insistence that any dissent will lead to
petrol bombs and tanks on the streets.
The past must be turned into a blurred picture. Thus, the decades of ignoring water infrastructure
didn't happen. The times that engineers warned there would be a bigger price to pay if we didn't
fix the pipes - never happened.
Last week, Taoiseach Varadkar complained that too few municipal houses had been built.
As though this was a flaw, a mischance, an error - something that happened when someone took
their eye off the ball.
In truth, from the 1980s, local authority housing came into the sights of the right wing. They sold
it off, they eventually stopped building. This wasn't an error, it didn't happen when no one was
looking, it was part of a long-term plan.
Taoiseach Varadkar complains of the lack of house building, as though he hasn't been ten years in
the Dail, and a Minister for six of those years.
And, while the likes of Brid Smith and Richard Boyd Barrett were demanding that the State ease
the housing crisis, Varadkar and his chums contented themselves with smartarse quips about
people who don't want to take the responsibility of government.
Today, mock fights must be arranged, enemies of the "squeezed middle" identified, and heroes of
the Republic of Opportunity must be decorated.
Last week, Minister for Housing Eoghan Murphy tweeted, "I will fight in cabinet for
funding/investment" in Irish Water.
Really?
Who will he fight? Who, in the Cabinet, is against fixing damaged pipes?
You see what I mean by spoofing - Murphy sets up a mock fight, in which he is the hero,
combatting imaginary enemies of the Republic of Opportunity.
Murphy has been in the Dail for six years. He and Varadkar and the rest of the crew have presided
over an Ireland of trolleys in the hospitals and sleeping bags in shop doorways.
They have protected the obscenely wealthy against such measures as financial transaction taxes,
they've kissed Apple's ass, they've been stalwart protectors of the Republic of Privilege.
The vultures circled, Nama became a huge sweetie jar for the rich, the Government voted against
tackling vulture funds at a United National level and the mainstream parties became always alert
to new ways to facilitate a Republic of Plunder.
It's amusing, in a slightly bitter way, to see the sons and daughters of privilege now uneasy with
political instability, trying on various pseudo-democratic costumes, to check how they're reflected
in the mirror of public opinion.
This country has been broken by the politics of greed - the schools and the hospitals, the social
services, from ambulances to cancer services, from cancer facilitates to the pipes from which we
get our water. At the same time, great wealth has blossomed for some. This is not, as we are asked
to believe, some accidental imbalance. It's how it works in the Republic of Opportunism."
You are being played, just as you have always been played. Only this time by an increasingly
desperate political class worried about seat retention...
The Institute of International & European Affairs, a Europhile quango whose chairman is Ruairi Quinn
of the Labour Party and whose President and founder is Brendan Halligan, also of the Labour Party are
located at 8 N Great George's St, in Dublin 1. This little elite club are receiving large sums of taxpayers
money while also pocketing corporate donations and funds from the EU. What is their agenda (apart
from enriching former Labour Party TD's)? Well, they are working hard to create a United States of
Europe and getting Ireland involved with an imperial EU army. This article from the Phoenix
Magazine gives you an idea of the the kind of rotten things that taxpayers money is being spent on by
our government. Build social housing? Nah - lets give the Labour Party dominated secretive quango a
MILLION EURO instead.
http://www.iiea.com/general-contact-form

Fianna Fil planned

water charges before
Troika bailout
Brian Cowen

July 28 2017

Fianna Fil drafted legislation for the introduction of water charges two weeks
before the Government was forced into a Troika bailout, which included a
provision for establishing a State-owned water company.

But current Fianna Fil leader Michel Martin reacted to the revelation by
insisting the last Government did not introduce water charges during its time
in office.

Cabinet papers show the Fianna Fil-led Coalition expected the charges to
cost every household 500 a year.

As it turned out, Irish Water charges households with two adults a flat rate of
260 a year, if they do not have a water meter.

Brian Cowen's government estimated that the installation of water meters

would cost 500m over five years.

The Coalition - also comprising the Green Party and the Progressive
Democrats - wanted to create a national water agency, which would employ 25
staff and cost 4m a year.

It was expected that the metering programme would lead to the creation of
between 1,200 and 1,800 jobs.

But Fianna Fil leader Mr Martin said: "That never happened. That -
Government did not introduce water charges. In fact we went two-thirds
through the fiscal correction as laid down by the Troika and it was in our four-
year plan and never went near water charges."

The Cabinet documents, released to RT's The Week in Politics, show the then
Environment Minister and Green Party leader John Gormley wanted a
referendum held to constitutionally protect the country's water system from
privatisation.

However, this was rejected after his party colleague, former Communications
Minister Eamon Ryan, highlighted the complexities involved. The Cabinet
agreed a referendum could be pursued separately with the Attorney General.

Mr Gormley was against the option of introducing a flat-rate water charge as

he believed there would be no incentive for households to conserve water. -
Former Finance Minister Brian Lenihan was in favour of a flat-rate charge to
cover the costs of installing meters.
He considers it imperative that the programme is commercialised and that
households pay for the cost of the meter installation through a charge in their
water metering bill," a briefing document stated.

There was an agreement that every household would be given a 40,000 litres
free water allowance under the scheme. There is currently 30,000 litres free -
allowance per household and an additional 38,000 for every child in a family.

At the time, the then Tourism Minister Mary Hanafin, who is seeking to be re-
elected to the Dil, welcomed the fact that charges would lead to greater water
conservation.

Ms Hanafin suggested that the Government should include a free water

allowance for B&Bs.

Fianna Fil has since proposed abolishing Irish Water and water charges if
elected to Government. Instead, a national water agency would build new
infrastructure.
Just a reminder that you never really know those who you elect...
And the public want to put these con men back into Government?
"Fianna Fil drafted legislation for the introduction of water charges two weeks before the
Government was forced into a Troika bailout, which included a provision for establishing a
State-owned water company."
Really? Both Fine Gael AND Fianna Fail wanted Irish Water and water charges...
Both of them, the two of them, in coalition together, thick as thieves!
https://www.thejournal.ie//general-election-voting-262022/
Wake up!

No honorary doctorates for the many thousands who suffered.

Full marks, not to 'Dr' Brian Cowen, but to the National University of Ireland. What was the
pressing urgency into honouring a man who presided over the slide into chaos of a noble
nation? Mr Cowen was at the helm when we lost our sovereignty.

His Fianna Fil permitted our banking industry to earn the sobriquet of "The Wild West of
Banking" in the 'New York Times'.

And NUI thought it a good idea to honour gross failure.

Any honour for the thousands of young people forced out?

Any recognition to those who lost their homes, businesses and, in some cases, took their
own lives thanks to cannonball economics presided over by the likes of Cowen and Bertie
Ahern. 'Dr' Cowen? No, more like Dr Who.

John Cuffe

Dunboyne, Co Meath

CLOUDS OF SUSPICION OVER

OMISSION OF 9.4 EXEMPTION
IN OIREACHTAS WATER
COMMITTEE REPORT
July 30, 2017
by Enda Craig and James Quigley

European Commission and Senior Counsels on 9.4 Exemption and River

Basin Management Plans Feb 15 2017
Oireachtas report omits any mention of crucial European Law
session
In this article we will again return to the question of Irelands 9.4
Exemption, the River Basin Management Plans and their
inexplicable omission in the draft or final report of the Oireachtas
Committee on Funding Domestic Water when it concluded
business in April 2017.
 Conleth Bradley, SC legal opinion
Anyone not acquainted with the importance of the above topics
can read our article Michael Noonan 'Water Charges Required
Under European Law' is a Lie or listen to the 30 mins video below
or read the excellent legal opinions by Irish Senior Counsels,
Conleth Bradley and Matthias Kelly, who, by the way, were invited
to present submissions to the Committee by Fianna Fil and Sinn
Fin, respectively.
This article zones in on the Oireachtas Committee on the Future
Funding of Domestic Water debate on the 15th February,
2017. We draw your attention to the fact that the subject of the
debate i.e the 9.4 Exemption and the River Basin Management
Plans are of the utmost importance to the anti water charges
campaign, that the debate lasted for a complete session and it
somehow never got included in the final draft report or the
subsequent final report of the committee. This final report was
passed by the Dil on the 13th April 2017 and will form the basis of
any future legislation.
 Matthias Kelly, SC, legal opinion
Report procedures and inconsistency
It could be the case thatits the way they do business down in
Dil, as we were informed by a R2W TDs on the Oireachtas
Committee, however, as ordinary citizens, we can only take the
explanation found on the Oireachtas website itself at face value
where it says
On an ongoing basis Committees publish reports based on the
meetings and hearings they have held.
Ordinary citizens would instinctively know that any chairperson
would include in their report such important matters that were
debated for a complete session, especially one with top opinions
from senior counsel.
However, this was not the case here. One would think that the
Committee members, those opposing water charging, including
Fianna Fil and Sinn Fin, would be up in arms over such an
omission, especially since they were responsible for inviting legal
submissions in the first place.
Significantly, there wasn't even a whimper after the draft report
was presented to the committee member on the 5th April, 2017,
(sans any hint of 9.4 Exemption or the RBMP).

Understanding the sequence of events for reports

Pdraig Cidigh, Chairman
After all the meetings of the Oireachtas Committee had ended, it
was up to the chairman Pdraig Cidigh and his team to furnish
a " confidential draft report". This report should have included and
reflected the various topics that had been discussed during the
committees private and public sessions. This procedure allows
committee members to scrutinise the contents and then agree or
not to a final report.
In this case a draft report was duly compiled and circulated to each
committee member on the 5th April, 2017. After reading that report
it would have immediately been obvious that any mention of one of
the most important sessions, namely, the 9.4 Exemption and the
River Basin Management Plans was not included.
Now would that not raise alarm bells?
If the R2W members or for that matter Fianna Fil members had
been genuinely fighting for the 9.4 Exemption as they professed
during the 15th February session , they would have immediately
taken steps to remedy the situation and insist that the draft report
be rewritten to include the vital information.
This did not happen and as we have witnessed, when the draft
report (without 9.4 Exemption) was circulated, unbelievably, Paul
Murphy, Richard Boyd-Barrett, Mick Barry and Brid Smith headed
for the media and claimed a great victory. This was followed the
next day by a crowd of R2W TDs who again claimed exactly the
same 'victory'. Fianna Fil and Fine Gael then rejigged a few
words in the draft report during the following week and came up
with a final report that again never mentioned the 9.4 Exemption or
the River Basin Management Plan.
What are we to make of it
Flabbergasted at the short shortsightedness, appalled at the
double-cross and wonder at why the wastefulness of the elaborate
legal opinions especially in defense of the 9.4 Exemption.
However, such is our paranoia, we can not rule out that Cidigh
did include the February session, as per protocol, but for some
reason it was removed by agreement of the Oireachtas members.
Such was the secrecy of some parts of the committee sessions
and the scarcity of information about what was going on especially
from R2W that we are really at a disadvantage.
If we take it that Cidigh and his team omitted the February
session, then we might look at that as grounds for calling for a
mismanagement of committee protocol and ask for the final report
to be deemed null and void.
Another aspect of members not objecting or saying anything is
how can R2W hold Fianna Fil, or vice versa, accountable if
neither objected to the omission or worse colluded in it.
That is depressing enough but what is worse is the lack of any
credible answers from R2W, Sinn Fin, Fianna Fil and the Left
despite being asked.
One response we came across is worthy of a mention though.
That can be found in an unaccredited Right2Water Ireland
revisionary article where, in relation to the victory claim, it referred
to R2W Oireachtas members as Naive.
Now if there is one description we would never use to describe
Sinn Fin, it would not be naive. More like seasoned, wily,
cunning, ruthless establishment politicians, cut from the same cloth
as the rest down in the Dil..

Oireachtas Ctte on Funding Domestic Water Ireland - EU

Compliance, Feb 15, 2017

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l6wDv2JpEE
Revenue should refund
Irish Water customers,
Fianna Fil insists

Philip Ryan and Niall O'Connor

March 3 2017

Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government Simon

Coveney

Fianna Fil has called for the Revenue Commissioners to

be tasked with refunding Irish Water customers who paid
their bills over the last two years.
In its submission to the Oireachtas Committee on the
Oireachtas Committee on the future funding of Domestic
Water Services, the party insists bill payers who have
proof of payment should be able to avail of refunds from
Revenue.
Refunds of water charges paid to date should be issued
via the Revenue Commission once proof of payment is
provided. This should be cross referenced with
Department of Social Protection Water Conservation
Grant payments information to ensure there is no over
payment, the document states.
Fianna Fil is also sticking to its demand for the complete
abolition of any charges for water. The party is insisting
that those who waste or abuse water can be penalised
under the existing Water Services Act 2007.
Read More: Households to get 325 in water bill
refunds
In the submission, the party says contrary to media spin
it has always been in favour of curbing excessive use of
water.
The current Domestic Water charges regime should be
abolished in full. However, we accept the Expert
Commission view on the need to curb excessive water
usage, it states. It also notes the committee heard no
evidence of wide scale abuse of water in Ireland. It also
insists no more meters should be installed.

Fianna Fils Barry Cowen speaking outside Leinster House.

Photo: Tom Burke
Meanwhile, Fine Gael has softened its stance and has
asked the Dils legal advisors to determine whether a
Fianna Fil proposal on water charges is compliant with
EU law.
In documents circulated to TDs and senators today, the
party says it will also request that the chairman of the
water committee, Senator Pdraig Ceidigh, meets the
Attorney General to discuss the various legal advices
received.
But the Fine Gael submission states that the party will not
support any Committee recommendation that calls on the
Government to bring forward legislation that runs
contrary to the advice of the Attorney General.
The Fine Gael document states that in order to comply
with EU law, a charge for excess usage should be
introduced.
While the party says it would prefer if those who did not
pay their bills were pursued, it admits that that such an
approach could result in an administrative costs.
The approach taken must reflect the commitment in the
Confidence and Supply arrangement that those who have
paid their water bills to date will be treated no less
favourably than those who have not.
The Fianna Fail submission is also especially critical of
Housing Minister Simon Coveneys intervention on the
debate earlier this week.
We are disappointed and surprised that Minister
Coveney, who is not a member of the Committee,
prematurely intervened by outlining advice he had from
the Attorney General. This unprecedented move came
before the Committee had even completed its own
deliberations, the document states.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/water/irish-water-crisis/revenue-
should-refund-irish-water-customers-fianna-fil-insists-35499350.html
Explainer: Rejoice! The
water war is over... but
what happens next?
Niall O'Connor
April 12 2017

Barry Cowen and Simon Coveney

So, the politicians have struck a deal?

Yes. After 22 meetings of the Oireachtas water committee, 13 members of the

committee voted to scrap the billing system introduced by the Fine
Gael/Labour coalition.

In its place will be a new regime that centres upon penalising those who
engage in "excess use" or the "wilful waste" of water.

It is estimated that 8pc of households will fall into this category, meaning the
vast majority of households won't pay bills whatsoever.

The committee agreed that the regulator would determine what constitutes
normal usage. But crucially, the threshold for wastage will be set at 1.7 times
this level, based on the calculation that the average person uses 133 litres per
day.

Allowances will also be introduced for "extraordinary circumstances", such as

medical conditions and larger households that use water beyond the threshold
level.

But if I do find myself straying into 'excessive usage', will I be prosecuted?

No. You'll be formally warned by Irish Water and will be given a number of
months (yet to be defined) to clean up your act.
So, if charges are gone, is that the end of meters, too?

Not quite. Any meter that has been installed by Irish Water will remain in
place.

And after plenty of to-ing and fro-ing, Fianna Fil consented to Fine Gael's
demands to introduce meters for all new-builds. Such a provision was
removed from last week's draft report.

This came after the legal advisor to the Oireachtas, David Nolan SC, said that
compulsory metering for new-builds would leave Ireland better-placed to
meet its EU obligations.

Ah, the EU - what will they have to say about this deal?

That remains to be seen. The Government will now introduce legislation that
must not only reflect the recommendations of the committee, but ensure that
the new regime passes what is known as the Water Framework Directive.

Any failure to do so will cause another political crisis and open up the
taxpayer to hefty fines.

You mention fines, but what about refunds?

The committee has recommended refunds for households that have paid some
or all of their bills. But it will be up to the Government to decide how, and
when, these refunds are paid.
There has been so much politics at play. Who is claiming victory?

Fine Gael and Fianna Fil say the package agreed represents a fair
compromise. The deal has come as a particular relief for Fine Gael, whose TDs
feared a general election was on the horizon.

But left-wing TDs who are aligned to the 'Right2Water' campaign say the
report agreed represents a dramatic U-turn and paves the way for water
charges to be re-introduced in the future.
Are we now braced for a Dil vote on a new water bill?

Not quite. One of the key compromises relates to how this new regime will be
introduced.

Despite initial dismissals from Housing Minister Simon Coveney, Fine Gael
has agreed to strengthen the 2007 Water Services to introduce this new
system of levies and allowances, rather than draft a new piece of legislation.

TDs will vote to formally amend the act in the coming weeks.
What does this mean for Irish Water?

The public utility will remain - however, the report recommends a referendum
to bring it into public ownership.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/water/irish-water-crisis/explainer-
rejoice-the-water-war-is-over-but-what-happens-next-35615918.html
Excessive water usage
charge' among key
proposals in water
committee draft
document
Niall O'Connor
February 28 2017

padraig o ceidigh
The Water Charges debate has created a political storm.

Here are the key proposals contained in a draft document prepared by water
committee chairman Pdraig Ceidigh, which have been seen by
Independent.ie.
 The key proposal about excessive water usage is the subject of a row between
Fine Gael and Fianna Fil.

An excessive water usage charge under the polluter pays principle to comply
with EU law
Refunds for households which have paid their bills
Domestic meters already installed to be retained and requirement for all new
builds to have meters installed
Tax/welfare benefit for those who voluntarily take up a domestic meter
Waivers for users with high consumption who have certified medical
conditions
Tax relief for the installation of systems that reduce water consumption
Consideration for those on group water schemes
All new buildings must incorporate water conservation fittings
Referendum to keep Irish Water in public ownership
Establishment of a Drinking Water Inspectorate, similar to the UK
Make the Public Water forum an advisor to the Commission for Energy
Regulation (CER)

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/water/irish-water-crisis/excessive-
water-usage-charge-among-key-proposals-in-water-committee-draft-document-
35491307.html
Fine Gael claim Fianna
Fil are seeking to expose
the taxpayer on water
charges
Niall O'Connor
February 28 2017

FINE Gael and Fianna Fil have become embroiled in a bitter standoff on the
issue of water charges.

The two parties are at loggerheads over whether water charges should be
scrapped in their entirety in a row that has once again raised the prospect of
an early General Election.

At a tense sitting of the Oireachtas water committee today, Fianna Fil said it
would not support a proposal by the Expert Commission for the return of
charges for excessive usage.
Fianna Fil TD Barry Cowen told the committee, which sat in private session,
that his party wants charges completely scrapped.

He said the countrys water system should be funded through general taxation
and within the parameters of the so-called fiscal space.

Mr Cowen also said his party stands by its legal advice that says scrapping
charges is in line with the EU directive governing water.

Significantly, Mr Cowen said he does not accept the proposed excessive

usage principle.

This was recommended by the Expert Commission that said households

should pay water bills if their usage is above a certain point.

But tonight, a Fine Gael spokesman accused Fianna Fil of pursuing a policy
that is not budgeted for. Party sources have also accused Fianna Fail of
seeking to vote for a proposal that is illegal.

"Fianna Fil are trying to buy off the issue with taxpayer's finances without
saying where it will come from. This has not been budgeted for, the
spokesman told Independent.ie.

"The advice the committee has received is if we don't have, at a minimum,

charges for excessive usage, we could be liable to lengthy court battles and
massive EU fines."
Fianna Fil is siding with Sinn Fin and left wing TDs - meaning the prospect
of water charges returning seem highly unlikely.

If a compromise is not reached, the committee may end up producing

separate reports.

One will be a minority report authored by Fine Gael deputies.

Both reports could then go to the Dil for a vote after St Patricks Day.

At todays meeting, its understood ten members expressed opposition to the

idea of charges.

This includes the five Fianna Fil members, two Sinn Fin members,
AAA/PBP TD Paul Murphy and Independent TDs Seamus Healy and Thomas
Pringle.

Those in favour of a charging regime include the six Fine Gael

members,Labour Party TD Jan OSullivan and Green Party senator Grace
OSullivan.

Two members have not expressed a preference, Independent TD Noel

Grealish and Independent senator Padraig O Ceidigh, who is the committee
chairperson.
 Meanwhile, refunds for those who have paid their water bills will be offset
against the 100 conservation grant, Independent.ie understands.

This means that in excess of 800,000 that received the grant will not profit
as a result of being issued with a full refund by the State.

THE KEY PROPOSALS

Here are the key proposals contained in a draft document prepared by water
committee chairman Pdraig Ceidigh, which have been seen by
Independent.ie.

An excessive water usage charge under the polluter pays principle to comply
with EU law
Refunds for households which have paid their bills
Domestic meters already installed to be retained and requirement for all new
builds to have meters installed
Tax/welfare benefit for those who voluntarily take up a domestic meter
Waivers for users with high consumption who have certified medical
conditions
Tax relief for the installation of systems that reduce water consumption
Consideration for those on group water schemes
All new buildings must incorporate water conservation fittings
Referendum to keep Irish Water in public ownership
Establishment of a Drinking Water Inspectorate, similar to the UK
Make the Public Water forum an advisor to the Commission for Energy
Regulation (CER)

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/fine-gael-claim-fianna-fil-are-
seeking-to-expose-the-taxpayer-on-water-charges-35490740.html
Water Refunds for households -
but only if you didn't claim
conservation grant
Niall O'Connor
February 28 2017

Refunds for those who have paid their water bills will be offset against the
100 conservation grant, Independent.ie understands.

This means that in excess of 800,000 that received the grant will not profit
as a result of being issued with a full refund by the State.

The news comes as a major standoff has developed between Fine Gael and
Fianna Fil at todays meeting of the water committee.

Fianna Fil TD Barry Cowen told the committee, which sat in private session,
that his party wants charged completely scrapped.

He said the countrys water system should be funded through general taxation
and within the parameters of the so-called fiscal space.

Mr Cowen also said his party stands by its legal advice that says scrapping
charges is in line with the EU directive governing water.

Significantly, Mr Cowen said he does not accept the proposed excessive

usage principle.
This was recommended by the Expert Commission that said households
should pay water bills if their usage is above a certain point.

But Fine Gael has been left isolated as it insisted that the recommendations
from the commission should be followed.

Fianna Fil is siding with Sinn Fin and left wing TDs - meaning the prospect
of water charges returning seem highly unlikely.

If a compromise is not reached, the committee may end up producing

separate reports.

One will be a minority report authored by Fine Gael deputies.

Both reports could then go to the Dil for a vote after St Patricks Day.

At todays meeting, its understood ten members expressed opposition to the

idea of charges.

This includes the five Fianna Fil members, two Sinn Fin members,
AAA/PBP TD Paul Murphy and Independent TDs Seamus Healy and Thomas
Pringle.

Those in favour of a charging regime include the six Fine Gael members,
Labour Party TD Jan OSullivan and Green Party senator Grace OSullivan.

Two members have not expressed a preference, Independent TD Noel

Grealish and Independent senator Padraig O Ceidigh, who is the committee
chairperson.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/water-refunds-for-households-
but-only-if-you-didnt-claim-conservation-grant-35490433.html
EIB funding in the
pipeline to improve Irish
supply network
Sarah Collins in Brussels
December 1 2016

The EIB says it is ready to fund water upgrades in Ireland once

the Government decides what to do about charges.
The European Investment Bank says it is ready to fund water upgrades in
Ireland - once the Government decides what to do about charges.

EIB vice-president Andrew McDowell said that "assuming Ireland comes to a

consensus on the best way to fund water infrastructure, if that involves
looking for EIB financing to help address the infrastructure deficit through
Irish Water, we're certainly happy to work with the Irish authorities".

Mr McDowell, a former economic adviser to Taoiseach Enda Kenny, was

speaking to the Irish Independent after the water commission advised that
households should pay only for "wasteful usage" and not regular water
consumption.

But it remains to be seen whether the system the Government chooses will
comply with EU rules.
A spokesman for environment commissioner Karmenu Vella said the
European Commission "has made its position clear" in its official submission
to the report - which said that "disapplying" water charges would breach the
EU's water framework directive.

"We will now have to evaluate the report, in light of the recommendations of
the Expert Commission," the spokesman said.

He said he "notes the Irish Parliamentary Committee established to examine

the report will now start its work with a view to concluding by March of 2017".

Meanwhile Mr McDowell, who took up his role with the bank in September,
didn't express an opinion on water charges, but said it was "an awful lot
easier" to deal with Irish Water than the previous decentralised set-up.

"Previously, trying to discuss water investment with 34 different local

authorities was just not feasible," he said.

"Now we have a single national utility that we can talk with, and discuss their
overall investment programme, and what role we can play in financing that."

The EIB, the EU's long-term lender, has approved 200m in loans to Irish
Water since 2012, half of which was never drawn down, given the controversy
over water charges.

The bank has also announced a bid to step up lending in Ireland post-Brexit.

"We are looking to develop a new, stronger institutional relationship between

the EIB and the Irish authorities," said Mr McDowell.

"The best thing the EIB can do to support Ireland and to help protect its
economic recovery against the uncertainty that's been generated by the UK
referendum outcome is to increase our levels of lending into Ireland."

He said the bank wanted to help Ireland address "infrastructure deficits" and
improve financing conditions for companies impacted by the drop in the value
of the pound.

"There's a whole range of mitigants that I'm sure the Irish authorities will be
looking for from Europe, in the context of the Brexit negotiations, and
obviously the EIB has a role in that," added Mr McDowell.

He made the comments as diplomats were meeting with the European

Commission's lead Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, to discuss "the issues at
stake" in future divorce proceedings with the UK.

A Commission spokesman said this would "contribute to building a common

understanding of the process to come".

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/water/irish-water-crisis/eib-funding-
in-the-pipeline-to-improve-irish-supply-network-35258802.html
BREAKING : Fine gael and Fianna Fil announce they are to amalgamate from August 8th
2017

They will be known as the ( PBPP )

PROFIT BEFORE PEOPLE PARTY
Ervia, the parent company of Irish Water have appointed a new chief executive and the poor
man has to make do with a salary of a measly 225,000. To soften the blow for the new CEO
Mick Quinn, there's health insurance thrown in for himself and his spouse and dependent
children - at the company's expense. Oh .. and there's the use of a car also included with the
job (wonder if it's a Ford Fiesta?). Mr Quinn is going to be a busy man fixing all those leaky
asbestos pipes. Then there's the matter of converting the country's gas network to "smart"
metering, a project that was kept under the radar by his predecessor in the post Michael
McNicholas.
RIGHT2WATER SITE SHOULD
NOT BE USED TO PROMOTE
FAKE NEWS IN UNITE
ELECTION
July 27, 2017
This article is from www.socialistdemocracy.org/ published
on 10 April 2017. It concerns how Right2Water Ireland's
official site is used for 'Fake News' by unnamed authors and
noright of reply.

An article has appeared on the Right2Water site from a Unite

official in Ireland stating; Lets be clear, without the support of Len
McCluskey, there would be no Right2Water or Right2Change.
The author here is not giving due credit to the many Unite
members who tramped the streets and blocked access to
communities as part of the great mass of water protesters and who
did play an important practical role in the movement.
Instead the credit for a determined struggle, in which victory is not
quite yet achieved, has been snatched from the people that faced
down the goons on their own doorstep and handed to the leader of
a British trade union. This is an absolutely shameless piece of
biased electioneering in the Unite leadership contest. Worse still, it
is clear that official involved considers the Right2Water site his
own private playpen. There is no open access to the site and no
right of reply. Supporters of Right2Water are not being invited to
discuss, but used as targets for "fake news" in a titled election.
This eclipsing of the role of the people who were the real backbone
of the water protests entirely mirrors the election taking place in
Unite. It summarises perfectly the trade union leadership's attitude
to its own rank and file membership. By presenting these laurels
to McCluskey the author ignores one of the candidates completely,
Ian Allinson, failing to even mention his name.
Allinson was a member of the Unite NEC for 10 years and, unlike
the others, is in full time employment outside the union. He is a
workplace activist who has effectively unionised a traditionally hard
to organise sector at Fujitsu UK and has been on strike and on the
picket line during the election nomination and campaigning period.
He has to apply to his employer for leave from work to campaign
and does not have the vast resources that is at the disposal of
McCluskey and the reactionary right winger Coyne. In spite of this
difficulty his supporters ensured he was on the ballot.
As with the previous leadership challenge of Jerry Hicks, Ian
Allinson has had to rely on a network of rank and file trade
unionists and supporters and appeal for funds to produce leaflets
and information on his candidacy. Despite the obvious difficulties
the Hicks campaign achieved second in the last election. Allinson
hopes to emulate this record, and make his rank and file driven
campaign a viable left opposition to McCluskey and the potential
basis for a rejuvenated trade union movement that reflects the
needs of its membership.
Allinson, like the anti water charge protesters, is part of the real
struggles of working classpeople. He is from the shop floor and
this connects him with those struggles in a way the others cannot
match. Yet this does not merit a mention on the R2W article. Just
as the author writes the people who struggled against the water
charges out of history he also erases the candidacy of the only
rank and file candidate in the election.
This should not be allowed to pass. The leadership's
condescending attitude to the mass of the protesters is a reason
why the anti water charges campaign needs to be democratised.
Only by drawing in representatives from local activist groups and
communities and rank and file trade unionists can the threat to
privatise water be conclusively ended. Through such a process
the campaign can also begin to address health, education,
transport and all the issues generated by austerity which face the
Irish working class. For the the same democratic reasons Unite
members in Ireland should vote for Ian Allinson and a union that is
driven by the interests of its rank and file members.

IRISH WATER PARTY TILL THE

COWS COME HOME
April 10, 2017
Original article by Mark O'Regan, Irish Independent April 10 2017
entitled;
IRISH WATER STAFF SHARE 3M BONUS
DESPITE 'OVERLY HIGH COSTS' AT UTILITY

Image: Irish Independent - click to enlarge

Abridged article
In January, the Commission for Energy Regulation, which
oversees Irish Water, said overall costs at the utility remained
excessively high.
Following the suspension of water charges last year, the
Government is compensating for this loss of revenue by allocating
funds from central taxation to the company.
This will pay for a major capital investment programme up to 2021.
Overall, the modernisation of our water system will cost billions
over the next five years, according to expert analysis. Irish Water
was projected to collect around 275m this year and next in
domestic charges.
The scrapping of charges will mean the shortfall must be met from
general taxation.
The 275m figure equates to almost 60 being taken from every
man, woman and child in the country to replace the unpopular
charge. The State already pays around 500m a year to Irish
Water to fund day-to-day -operations.
Meanwhile, figures also show 382,110 has been spent on
engineering and environmental services, linked to controversial
proposals by Irish Water to build a 170km pipeline from Shannon,
Co Clare, to Dublin. There are about 500 landowners along the
route, which will pass through Clare, Offaly, and Kildare, before
ending in Peamount, west Dublin.
Both construction and operational costs are expected to top
1.2bn. Roughly 85pc of the pipeline runs through agricultural
land. The company has insisted this scheme is necessary to
service the greater Dublin population, which will rise from 1.5
million, to around 2.1 million by 2050.
Irish Water has received 524 submissions on the plan following
consultations with relevant stakeholders. The utility needs funding
of 8bn between 2017 and 2021, made up of 3.9bn to complete
the 5.5bn capital investment programme, and the remainder to
fund operating costs.

Time for political class to

show a bit of altruism on
water
Mistakes were made but the fact remains
that within nine months, 65pc of the
population had paid their water bills, writes
Alan Kelly

Alan Kelly
July 30 2017
PIPE DREAM: Niamh, Oisin and Cillian Reilly collecting water in
Drogheda last week. Photo: Stephen Collins/Collins
An "Article" by Liebours Alan Kelly, repeatedly saying that 65% paid their bills?
& lastly a "Veiled threat"??? Perhaps???
"Will it take the Vartry pipe to fail and ensure hundreds of thousands of people in Dublin have
no water in order to do that?""
I am a dad to Aoibhe and Senan, who are seven and five. I love them more than the world. Every day I
wake up, I think of their future before I think of my own. Why? Because that's what parents do
everywhere across the world every day.

When someone enters political life in Ireland, I believe that the majority do so for the right reasons; to
help people and to improve the lives of their communities, and this is true across the political spectrum.
The vast majority do not enter politics for personal gain.

I also believe that politicians, when they begin their individual political journeys, believe in providing
for future generations. Political electoral requirements often get in the way, however, and we all lose
much of that ethos. The issue of how we as a country are managing our future water and sewerage
infrastructure requirements is the greatest modern example of this.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/time-for-political-class-to-show-a-bit-of-
altruism-on-water-35981129.html

Ireland Act 19491

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/12-13-14/41/data.pdf
Garda Whistleblowers
and innocent people
being framed and
intimidated by Top
Gardai for exposing
corruption
Posted on August 2, 2016 by

Garda Whistleblowers and innocent people being

framed and intimidated by Top Gardai for
exposing corruption
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/garda-
whistle-blower-claims-suffered-7192798
Gardai who whistle blow on corruption, sexual
assaults involving senior gardai and the justice
department are being intimidated , harassed,
bullied, falsely arrested, falsely accused of
trumped up charges by High Ranking Officers, so
as to ruin their reputation and make people
believe they are criminals, when in fact its the high
ranking officers that are corrupt. Hundreds of
gardai are suffering appalling intimidation at the
hands of these high ranking political appointed
bullies.These whistle blowers are being forced to
retire, resign, take a care break etc
Senior gardai get NBCI to investigate and stitch up
the members who are whistle blowing so as to
drive them over the edge and drop their
complaints of corruption. More then 20
gardai/sergeants have reported corruption and
have been bullied and intimidated so badly, some
even contemplated suicide.
Below a few recent bullying cases all of them
covered up by the justice departments
Garda Whistle blower who reported a murder
abused while senior gardai cover it up
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/daly-tells-dail-
of-garda-ordered-to-claim-he-did-not-witness-
shooting-671968.html
http://www.independent.ie/irish-
news/politics/gardai-covered-up-murder-of-civilian-
by-member-of-force-claims-independent-td-
31146559.html
https://www.sundayworld.com/news/gardai-
covered-up-murder-of-civilian-by-member-of-the-
force-says-td
Whistle blower assaulted and falsely imprisoned
by Ass Comm Derek Byrne
http://www.rabble.ie/2014/02/18/silencing-the-
garda-whistleblowers/
Gardai have no where to turn to, to report sexual
assaults, harassment by corrupt senior gardai,
their last resort is to send letters and emails
around.
A witch hunt was set up by NBCI and senior
gardai to catch the gardai who were reporting the
true corruption being committed by commissioner
Fintan Fanning , Derek Byrne and John O
Mahoney.
http://www.sundayworld.com/news/crimedesk/pois
on-pen-letter-rocks-garda-siochana
A number of gardai have committed suicide as a
result of senior garda bullying and it is not getting
any better for garda whistle blowers. The
continued abuse of garda whistle blowers has to
stop by corrupt political appointed senior gardai.
Garda whistle blower John Wilson
http://www.rte.ie/radio1/doconone/2014/0110/6475
99-documentary-podcast-garda-limped-
whistleblower-john-wilson/
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/gardai-took-
action-against-us-because-we-spoke-out-say-
whistleblowers-255832.html
http://www.northernsound.ie/news/claims-that-
judge-pressured-whistleblower-to-drop-complaint/
https://soundcloud.com/oceanfm/i-have-no-
regrets-garda-whistleblower-john-wilson-nwt-tues-
10th-
nov?utm_source=soundcloud&utm_campaign=wts
hare&utm_medium=Twitter&utm_content=https%3
A%2F%2Fsoundcloud.com%2Foceanfm%2Fi-
have-no-regrets-garda-whistleblower-john-wilson-
nwt-tues-10th-nov
Every garda and sergeant that reported senior
garda corruption to Oliver Connelly was warned
off or ignored and then isolated and
bullied/intimidated/harassed on the orders of
senior garda management.
John Wilson said he made a formal complaint on
April 4th, 2012 to the then confidential recipient,
Oliver Connolly, but he received no response
ignored just like a numerous other gardai.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-
news/john-wilson-found-high-number-of-pulse-
entries-on-ian-bailey-1.2041434
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-
news/crime/whistleblower-john-wilson-reveals-
hes-3412696
http://www.thejournal.ie/garda-whisteblower-john-
wilson-allegations-corruption-1413664-Apr2014/
http://www.herald.ie/news/gardai-got-rid-of-100k-
penalty-points-for-pals-28963540.html
Dont forget my proximity to the minister, and
dont think I didnt have a word in his ear.
He said Mr Connolly told her to play the political
game and she might get preferential treatment
elsewhere.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/garda-
warned-to-drop-her-sex-attack-complaint-
260225.html
Whistle blower Garda Keith Harrison
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-
law/courts/high-court/garda-whistleblower-claims-
disciplinary-inquiry-malicious-1.2038725
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/new-garda-
whistleblower-claims-drinkdrive-coverup-
30278877.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rtBuKzDtmM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUUNX9wIC0k
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-
law/garda-inquiries-were-an-insult-to-
whistleblowers-td-says-1.2334231
https://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0830/724497-garda-
internal-inquiry/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drv5ZDtyN-8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlwbCq51LfY
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/garda-
sexual-harassment-claims-investigated-by-force-
369164.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApCNE0puIG0
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/ireland/
article1644634.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-
2015_12_12
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/ireland/
article1641711.ece
refusing to co-operate and would not supply
documents he was looking for, or comply with his
requests.
Management needs reform
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/recommendati
ons-to-be-made-regarding-the-management-of-
an-garda-siochana-709997.html
Whistle blower Garda Nicky Keogh
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/flanagan-
claims-whistleblower-links-high-ranking-gardai-to-
heroin-dealing-268000.html
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-
news/politics/mick-wallace-garda-whistleblower-
being-4701691
Sergeant whistle blower Michael Buckley
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/gardai-face-
probe-over-allowances-29821078.html
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/probe-into-
fraudulent-pay-claims-by-gardai-252070.html
http://www.thejournal.ie/gardai-overtime-1211823-
Dec2013/
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/cold-
case-unit-garda-gets-injunction-blocking-transfer-
29208727.html
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-
law/courts/woman-admits-sending-valentine-s-
card-and-g-string-to-garda-1.1924464
Sergeant whistle blower Christopher Power
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-i-was-
bullied-after-exposing-phonetape-abuse-
30147067.html
Sergeant whistle blower Maurice Mc Cabe
http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnis
ts/michael-clifford/maurice-mccabes-noble-
attempt-to-police-gardai-256419.html
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/whistle-
blower-harassed-by-fellow-gardai-265174.html
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/mccabe-
gardai-falsified-hundreds-of-crime-records-
266638.html
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/garda-
whistleblower-maurice-mccabe-makes-3496288
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/garda-
whistleblower-destroyed-29944120.html
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/gardai-are-
allegedly-illegally-wiping-penalty-points-from-their-
work-and-personal-cars-711631.html
Garda whistle blowers who reported more illegal
phone Taps
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/ex-
gardaiacute-claim-they-saw-bugging-315445.html
http://www.independent.ie/irish-
news/politics/garda-commissioner-noirin-osullivan-
sends-bugging-allegations-to-gsoc-31031531.html
http://www.thejournal.ie/state-surveillance-ireland-
gardai-wiretapping-email-monitoring-gardai-
2099537-May2015/
http://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-state-surveillance-
wiretapping-gardai-crime-transparency-2105584-
May2015/
GSOC Bugged by senior gardai
http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/analysis/
gsoc-controversy-highlights-the-joke-of-a-
democratic-ireland-258710.html
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/ombudsman-
investigates-claim-that-gardai-sought-sunday-
world-reporters-phone-records-626137.html
Garda whistle blower John Kelly
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/supreme-
court-overturns-gardas-dismissal-248647.html
Garda whistle blower William Browne
http://www.independent.ie/irish-
news/courts/leading-garda-awarded-85000-
damages-after-intimidation-and-harassment-
28943262.html
Garda whistle blower Jack Doyle
http://www.irishexaminer.com/election2014/electio
n2014-news/whistleblower-senior-garda-beefed-
up-finds-268885.html
http://www.missingpersons-ireland.freepress-
freespeech.com/primetimeonurlingforddrugs.html
http://www.rabble.ie/2014/05/16/serpico/
Garda whistle blower Andrea Fitzharris
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-
288575327.html
Garda Whistle blower Christine Kehoe
http://www.wexfordpeople.ie/news/former-
wexford-garda-brings-bullying-case-to-the-high-
court-27709132.html
Garda whistle blower Kieran Jackson
http://www.donegaldemocrat.ie/news/donegal-
news/former-garda-claims-dismissed-
superintendent-bullied-him-1-2004797
http://www.derryjournal.com/news/garda-claims-
bullied-and-harassed-by-senior-officer-1-2146058
Garda whistle blowers reported embezzlement
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/two-
gardai-embezzled-hundreds-thousands-5113437
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas
/clare-daly-alleges-garda-embezzlement-case-not-
investigated-1.2093184
A number of female Gardai/sergeants whistle
blowers e.g Mary T O Connor, reported false
arrests, corruption, sexual assaults,perjury,
forgeries, fraud,destruction of evidence, theft,
perverting the course of justice and conspiracy
within the justice departments, all by senior garda
officers and DPP officials.
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/garda-
whistle-blower-claims-suffered-7192798
Sergeant whistle blower E. Doherty
She wrote to the confidential recipient and TD s
reporting serious garda corruption and fraud by
senior garda management and instead of
investigating them they raided her house. This
witch hunt against her as with all garda whistle
blowers, by Top senior management has been
going for years. While falsely accusing her of
harassment .
Dublin Garda Roisin Farrell
Reported bullying, harassment and intimidation,
she had a number of miscarriages as a result of it,
she
was paid off by senior garda management and
resigned on medical grounds.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/whistleblowe
rs-garda-warned-off-pursuing-claim-of-sexual-
harassment-260251.html
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/dail-
hears-female-cop-told-3187770
http://wellbeingfoundation.com/bgarda.html
Garda whistle blower Maire O Reilly
https://thepeninsulairelandblog.wordpress.com/20
12/09/13/behaviour-in-tribunals-an-garda-
siochana-v-ms-marie-oreilly/
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/garda-quits-
force-because-of-bullying-campaign-235653.html
http://article.wn.com/view/2006/05/14/Garda_claim
s_he_was_bullied/
Garda whistle blowers in Athlone
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas
/serious-garda-malpractice-in-athlone-claims-td-
mick-wallace-1.2160333
Garda whistle blower
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mick-wallace-
claims-fg-backbencher-has-penalty-points-
quashed-669835.html
This is what corrupt senior gardai cause and get
away with it
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ombudsman-
probes-suicide-of-young-garda-26674123.html ;
Garda Brian Canavan, stationed at Pearse Street
in Dublin, was suspended from duty on May 23,
2014, for allegedly failing to prosecute cases in
2012 and 2013, two days after he had informed a
Garda Inspector he wished initiate a grievance
procedure against two other superior officers.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-
news/courts/garda-under-investigation-
suspended-from-duty-two-days-after-indicating-
he-wanted-to-make-complaint-against-superiors-
court-hears-34183814.html
Joe Doocey and others like Ian Bailey,Pascal
Dolan, Stephen Manning, Mc Brearties Stephen
Kerr, Cathriona Barker, John McDonald
intimidated , harassed, bullied, falsely arrested,
falsely imprisoned by corrupt detectives from
NBCI Harcourt square for exposing corruption in
the justice departments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1ELHruY7hg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVH678HEQT
c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p848CPN0VW
s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GJdxegjtM8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLecGywCcpU
&spfreload=10
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntdyh3CL25o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPM7eT16-
wM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOrKZSEIgIk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVC6OSi2VW
0
http://www.thejournal.ie/teenager-whipped-
1464799-May2014/
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=425_1434573501
&comments=1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXZttLqEehI
www.irishinjustice.com
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/11m-in-
payouts-for-55-victims-of-donegal-garda-
corruption-26469346.html
https://thepressnet.com/2015/03/19/allegations-of-
police-brutality-made-by-dr-richard-oflaherty/ ;
Ian Bailey considered suicide after arrest over
murder
High Court hears claim death threat made to
journalist by
Garda as he was driven to station
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-
law/courts/ian-bailey-considered-suicide-after-
arrest-over-murder-1.1990707
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-
law/courts/high-court/farrell-says-garda-asked-her-
to-accuse-ian-bailey-of-harassment-1.2025602
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-
law/courts/high-court/marie-farrell-family-left-
schull-after-garda-bullied-children-1.2027087
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas
/wallace-in-new-claims-of-garda-harassment-over-
kilkenny-pub-1.1950976
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-
law/courts/high-court/farrell-says-garda-asked-her-
to-accuse-ian-bailey-of-harassment-1.2025602
http://irishinjustice.com/index.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB5wCjL-Sl8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sizTnK4MGig
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-
law/mick-wallace-claims-garda%C3%AD-involved-
in-drugs-trade-1.2034029
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/104668
http://www.swp.ie/content/new-garda-allegations-
expose-rotten-system
https://foolscrow.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/cops-
charge-irish-government-with-treason/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=58&v=B5ItE4B
5rWQ
Hundreds of people assaulted, raped and abused
while in Garda custody even a young disabled boy
http://www.thejournal.ie/teenager-whipped-
1464799-May2014/
http://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/health-
news/outrage-politicians-hear-special-needs-
3540134
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3K1ZTnszNY
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/104668
http://www.swp.ie/content/new-garda-allegations-
expose-rotten-system
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UZ4_TZQTj3Y
http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/irelan
d/brendan-smyth-victims-to-take-gardai-to-court-
683754.html
http://www.thejournal.ie/gsoc-garda-rape-
2212171-Jul2015/
Senior gardai Commissioner Derek Byrne, John O
Mahony and Fintan Fanning try to shut gardai up,
with assaults, intimidation, harassment, bullying
and ruining their character by reporting a false
allegation to their drinking buddy journalist Paul
Williams to publish.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/end-leaks-
to-media-judge-tells-gardai-317684.html
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/graham-
dwyer-trail-information-was-leaked-like-a-sieve-by-
gardaiacute-318372.html
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/dwyer-
defence-claims-gardai-were-leaking-like-a-sieve-
667433.html
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/bailey-asks-
for-garda-malice-documents-224717.html
http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2005/en/act/pub/002
0/sec0062.html
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/judge-
received-garda-leaks-on-private-citizens-
30136859.html
Nothing has changed in 10 years for whistle
blowers
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/garda-
corruption-laws-useless-says-whistleblower-
316065.html
Corruption at the Top being ignored because they
are all political appointments
http://www.anarkismo.net/article/1006
http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/columnis
ts/michael-clifford/strange-tale-of-shatter-and-
whistleblower-258830.html
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/75873
http://article.wn.com/view/2006/05/14/Garda_claim
s_he_was_bullied/
Gardai have no where to turn to, to report corrupt
senior gardai, their last resort is to send letters
and emails around.
A witch hunt was set up by NBCI and senior
gardai to catch the gardai who were reporting the
true corruption being committed by commissioner
Fintan Fanning , Derek Byrne and John O
Mahoney.
http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/garda-quits-
force-because-of-bullying-campaign-235653.html
How whistle blowers are treated by this corrupt
justice system
http://www.tv3.ie/3player/show/276/90644/1/Speci
als
The area of procurement corruption in AGS is so
rotten with cronyism, its unbelievable, this is just
one there are hundreds
of cases like this in the same situation.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-
news/courts/translation-service-brings-legal-
action-against-garda-commisioners-after-
interpreter-contract-awarded-to-rivals-
31138930.html
The People of Ireland and whistle blowers need a
public inquiry into corruption .
Every serving, retired,gardai on career breaks,
resigned and suspended Garda member needs to
be asked to talk about the corruption that is
epidemic in the force, but it needs to be totally
independent of senior gardai.
https://justiceforpanelreviewvictims.wordpress.co
m/2015/02/14/a-number-of-gardai-have-
committed-suicide-as-a-result-of-senior-garda-
bullying-and-it-is-not-getting-any-better-for-garda-
whistle-blowers-please-share-and-help-expose-
this/
No reform for senior gardai who are corrupt they
are just moved to another area, just like the priests
that were moved. Corruption continues in the top
ranks of the garda force.
http://www.villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2015/04/
get-on-with-it/
How many more suicides does this justice system
want on its hands?
http://awaken-longford.com/2015/07/30/i-believe-
the-irish-public-have-shown-huge-restraint-in-the-
face-of-all-this-hypocrisy-letter-to-the-irish-times/
Six people in the garda have died by suicide in
the past 12 months alone.
https://www.thejournal.ie/gardai-pay-and-
conditions-2547557-Jan2016/
https://goodpointsite.wordpress.com/articles/d-
ring-block/
Blueshirt Belle, Josepha Madigan who hails from posh Foxrock and is
the Fine Gael TD for the leafy suburbs of Dublin Rathdown was given
free space in today's Irish Times newspaper to pen an election
manifesto to her constituents. Her article, dressed up as an "opinion"
piece was to let her Blueshirt supporters know that Josepha was going
to fight Leo and Paschal hard on their behalf to save them from huge
increases in their Property Tax due the rising value of their homes.
Qualified solicitor Josepha would be doing something useful if she was
soliciting for the ABOLITION of this unfair tax. The Property Tax was
brought in by Fine Gael/Labour to pay bondholders and bankers
gambling debts and is a regressive tax that punishes people on low
income, because it does not take account of a persons wealth or their
ability to pay. It taxes a home and a person's home may be valuable on
paper but is not a tangible asset that can be counted in "pounds,
shillings and pence". Sinn Fin and the parties on the left are calling for
it's abolition but the Centre Right parties - Fine Gael, Fianna Fil and the
Labour Party (and the 2% Greens) are happy to support the tax that is
supposed to fund the provision of services by local authorities, but has
been used by the government as a slush fund to support Irish Water and
pay Noonan's favourite pals the bondholders. Already Varadkar has
signalled that he will protect the Fine Gael base - i.e. the Upper Middle
Class - as distinct from the New Middle Class that he has invented.
Josepha is obviously privy to the plan to limit the increases for the
wealthy and the super rich (like Dinny) so she decided to write her piece
now so that she can claim the credit later.
The damage done to this country by the traitors Enda Kenny and Michael Noonan is
impossible to quantify, but it runs into tens of billions of Euro in monetary terms and a truly
enormous human cost - the full extent of which we may never know. Noonan was given the
finance portfolio by Kenny when he formed a coalition government with the Labour Party in
2011 and this incompetent and clueless Fine Gael politician, who was already a political
failure all his life, proceeded on the orders of the hated Troika to foist enormous debt on the
shoulders of the Irish people - 42% of all European banking debt in fact. Our children and our
grandchildren will be paying back this debt, which was never ours, for decades to come. If
Noonan's grovelling in front of the Troika and Merkel resulting in our humiliation was not bad
enough, this man for reasons we can speculate on then went on, with the help of an equally
clueless duo who were in charge of NAMA to give away our country's wealth brick by brick
for peanuts to foreign vulture funds.
With the damage done, Noonan and his pal Kenny slithered off into retirement with huge
retirement lump sums and vast pensions.

But their legacy will live on in the form of home re-possessions, businesses forced to close
and their assets stripped and families evicted on to the streets of our cities and towns.
Already Noonan's vulture friends are flipping the assets gifted to them and raking in massive
fortunes. The NAMA duo of Daly and McDonagh in spite of the damage they have done
through Project Eagle and others are still in situ, enjoying big salaries and pocketing
generous expenses. As revealed in the article in my collage taken from Village magazine the
Commission of Enquiry into Project Eagle will crawl along for a few years, but Kenny and
Noonan are well gone - just as they had planned. Only one word describes these people.
TRAITORS.
Water issues keep coming to the surface
Monday, July 31, 2017
Sadly, warnings to politicians on the huge costs of years of under-
investment have not been heeded and Irish Water needs to get its ducks
in a row financially, writes Kyran Fitzgerald

After an aged water pipe gave up the ghost last week, bringing havoc
into the lives of 70,000 people in the North East, the website Waterford
Whispers suggested that the burst main was too rural to fix quickly
while advising those affected to seriously think about moving closer to
Dublin.
The website predicted that a new pipe could be in place by the time the
TDs and Senators return from their holidays in September.
Flippancy has its place. Laughter is good for the soul but, really, after
decades of neglect of this most basic of services, the joke is surely on all
of us.
Irish voters have really been slow on the uptake when it comes to
politicians who come calling, offering freebies.
We think we are sophisticated. Those politicians are all the same!, we
scream. In reality, all too often, we will fall for any electioneering
medicine man with a magic tonic in his knapsack.
The debate on water charges is over for the foreseeable future. Those
who sought to argue for a system of household charges based on
consumption have been shouted down, but the underlying issues
cannot be shoved so easily away.
Now comes the day of reckoning as the bill for the neglect of
investment in our water supply starts really to fall due. Jerry Grant, the
managing director of Irish Water, has provided little in the way of
comfort.
He acknowledged that the Louth-Meath emergency was a real failure,
telling RT that all we can do is offer an apology.
There could be many more on the way to other communities around the
country. Mr Grant warned that there are simply no guarantees. A
generation of asbestos pipes that came onstream since the 1960s are
reaching the end of their lives. Many are brittle and could fail suddenly,
he warned.
This state of affairs is the consequence of bad planning and neglect, as
well as base political cowardice.
Politicians queue up to cut ribbons on roads and buildings. No-one
wishes to be seen near a sewer.
Such work is best left to lowly types with hard hats. But take a trip back
to the 19th century and you will discover that the groundwork for huge
improvements in mass health was laid by the planners and engineers of
our water and sewerage systems.
Our ancestors left us a grand capital investment legacy which has been
largely frittered away. There is now real concern about the prospect of
major failures in our water infrastructure as many reservoirs reach the
end of their useful life.
Irish Water is planning a 80m investment in a new reservoir but that is
only the start. Ageing lead pipes are badly in need of replacing.
According to Mr Grant, 860km of pipes have been replaced in the past
three years. There are 25,000km of water pipes in Ireland.
As Irish Water itself acknowledges, the average age of water pipes here
is much older than across Europe, while we are losing half of our clean
water through leaks.
The equivalent leakage figure for the UK is 23%. The superior
performance is due to an investment of over 145bn in the period since
privatisation in 1989.
Water companies plan to invest at least 5.65bn a year over the next
five years.
Of course, there is a downside in that households in England and Wales
pay on average almost 400 (447) a year in charges whether as owners
or tenants. What this means is that there is a guaranteed flow of income
into water companies, an income stream which can be used to attract
further investment from the private sector.
Irish Water published a seven-year business plan, in October 2015, in
which it committed itself to an investment of 5.5bn over the period
2014 to 2021.
Critics suggest that this is less than a half of what is actually required.
However, Housing Minister Eoghan Murphy, who lucky man is
charged with tackling this issue, has not provided much in the way of
reassurance.
He told Morning Ireland that Irish Water is getting the funding it
requires this year.
As for the 640m it seeks for 2018 and the 700m in 2019, this will have
to be fought for in cabinet, he warned.
One has to wonder about peoples senses of priorities when ministers
prattle on about building new cities from scratch and plan for metros on
the rather shaky basis that almost every other EU big city has one.
It may be time for Mr Murphy, admittedly fresh to the cabinet table, to
display a bit of mettle.
The problems do not end with rusty pipes and aged reservoirs. Irish
Water has warned that raw sewage is being pumped into 44 locations,
including at the Lower Harbour in Cork.
As a top official at the Irish Water holding company, Ervia, once put it:
This is ridiculous.
The country is already faced with EU infringement proceedings across
four fronts over breaches of waste water directives.
Irish Water has taken over from 44 local authorities and has moved to
make annual operational savings that it hopes can reach 272m by
2021. But, as the infrastructure expands, new costs, in turn, will be
incurred.
The company has called for the establishment of a UK-style drinking
water inspectorate. It could be making a rod for its own back. Think of
the HSE and Hiqa.
The health and safety issues are very real, with rural consumers faced
with pesticide contamination while city dwellers cope with accumulated
lead in ageing pipes. The Government needs urgently to ring fence
money while stepping up the level of accountability and transparency in
relation to the ongoing spend.
Outside investment can be leveraged through the pension and savings
industry.
Already, water has been identified by many in the investment as a good
source of long term financial return.
Other jurisdictions are taking action as water shortages grow. The State
of California, faced with long term drought, has approved 890m in
incentives for recycled water projects.
In the City of London, investors scent opportunity. The Pictet Water
fund has produced some spectacular returns as worldwide demand for
water and decent waste treatment outstrips supply.
The United Nations has warned that by 2025, two-thirds of the worlds
population could be experiencing water stress.
Irish Water could be a reliable outlet for investors seeking a steady
return and, these days, money is available at cheap rates by historical
standards.
But Irish Water needs to get its ducks in a row financially if it is to attract
such long-term funding.
In 2012, Engineers Ireland cautioned that financial burdens should not
be placed on Irish Water which will effectively kill it at birth. It added
that the legacy costs of years of under-investment in basic
infrastructure should be recognised in its financial model.
Sadly, this warning has not been heeded.
http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/water-issues-keep-coming-to-the-
surface-456027.html
This is Ireland 2017. Where homelessness has become an epidemic. Where there are no
solutions in place to tackle this huge problem which is only sure to worsen.
The DPP's Office, along with far too many 'officers' in our justice system (including senior Gardai and a number of
judges) operate to an agenda which has, as their top priority, the protection of the status quo and the suppression of public
criticism or dissent. Justice is NOT a priority here - not when evidence is fabricated, perjury by State witnesses goes
unpunished, and private prosecutions against State employees just mysteriously 'disappear off the books' without trace or
explanation. The failures of Loftus & Co are symptomatic of the endemic rot in our justice system. This is NOT mere
'incompetence'. This is purposeful and deliberate; it is 'criminal'; and it is time to name and shame those involved! Well
done Phoenix Magazine!
Extract from Oireachtas Ctte on Funding Domestic Water Ireland -
EU Compliance, Feb 15, 2017
Jul 26, 2017
30 mins extract from the Oireachtas Committee on Future Funding of Water in Ireland. Members spent
one and half days in public and private sessions debating the most important question about Ireland's
obligation to and compliance with EU legislation especially the Water Framework Directive 2000 and
it's implementation through the River Basin Management Plans. Crucially for Ireland as the video of
the debate shows Ireland has availed of the 9.4 Exemption clause in the past and can do so into the
future.

The Committee was made up of 20 members that included an 'independent' chairman, Pdraig
Cidigh. The 10 members who professed opposition to Irish Water Ltd, water charges and household
metering and advocated funding of Ireland's water infrastructure through general taxation included five
Right2Water TDs, two Sinn Fin, one Solidarity/PBP, two Independents and five Fianna Fil.

Two Senior Counsels gave excellent opinions, Conleth Bradley invited by Fianna Fil can be heard
approx 9 mins and Matthias Kelly invited by Sinn Fin approx 12 mins.

Although Sinn Fin and Fianna Fil mentioned many times that they sought legal opinion over the Irish
Exemption, this was the first time it was published, albeit only in part. We would like to hear more.
You would think that such an important debate would have formed a major part of the chairman's final
draft report.

In fact there wasn't one mention about it, both the River Basing Management Plan and the 9.4
Exemption never seen the light of day.

In the first place this omission was a serious remiss by the chairman. Secondly there wasn't a whimper
from any of the Right2Water members, incl Sinn Fin and Solidarity/PBP or Fianna Fil about the
omission in the draft or final reports.

https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=1l6wDv2JpEE

The Institute of International & European Affairs, a Europhile quango whose chairman is
Ruairi Quinn of the Labour Party and whose President and founder is Brendan Halligan, also
of the Labour Party are located at 8 N Great George's St, in Dublin 1. This little elite club are
receiving large sums of taxpayers money while also pocketing corporate donations and funds
from the EU. What is their agenda (apart from enriching former Labour Party TD's)? Well,
they are working hard to create a United States of Europe and getting Ireland involved with
an imperial EU army. This article from the Phoenix Magazine gives you an idea of the the
kind of rotten things that taxpayers money is being spent on by our government. Build social
housing? Nah - lets give the Labour Party dominated secretive quango a MILLION EURO
instead.
Garda protection 24/7 for Nirn friend. Why? How much is it costing? Us.
Fianna Fil hostility toward Sinn Fins electoral ambitions led Bertie
Ahern to accuse the party's leaders of knowing about plans to rob the
Northern Bank in December 2004, Gerry Adams claimed today.
According to the latest WikiLeaks disclosures of secret US cables, both
Sinn Fin president and Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness were
fully aware of the IRAs plans to carry out the Northern Bank robbery in
December 2004.

The leaks reveal that then taoiseach Bertie Ahern was convinced Mr Adams
and Mr McGuinness whom he also believed to be IRA leaders held
critical peace process negotiations with him when they knew the IRA was
planning the 26.5 million robbery.
In a joint statement this morning, Mr Adams and Mr McGuinness rejected
accusations that they knew the robbery was going to take place.

We both absolutely rejected these unfounded allegations at the time and

do so again today. We publicly and privately challenged Bertie Ahern to
produce evidence to support his allegations. He didnt. We told him they
were groundless and untrue," it said. "It was and is our view that this had
more to do with the electoral rivalries between Sinn Fin and Fianna Fil".

Asked on RTEs Morning Ireland programme whether or not he convinced

Mr Ahern that he knew nothing about the robbery, Mr Adams said that was
a matter for him to answer. Youll have to ask him. Bertie has a very
peculiar relationship with the banks which is now a matter of public
history, but this was part of an ongoing smear".
Both the Minister for Justice Dermot Ahern and the Minister for Health
Mary Harney confirmed today that it was the belief of the Government at
the time that Mr Adams and Mr McGuinness had prior knowledge of the
raid.

Speaking in Dundalk today, Mr Ahern said discussions with Sinn Fin were
dramatically restricted as a result of information that we had that people
were aware and had prior knowledge of these events.

Ms Harney said the raid had a "huge effect" on the development of the
peace process.
Taoiseach Brian Cowen refused to answer questions on the allegations
today. I am not commenting on any of these Wikileaks issues. Those
matters were dealt with at the time I see no reason why I should add to any
of
that, he told The Irish Times in the Isle of Man.

The disclosure on the bank robbery also revealed the Government believed
British intelligence agencies had a senior informant at a high level within
the republican movement.
Then US ambassador to Dublin James Kenny reported in February 2005
that a Department of Justice official told the embassy of Mr Aherns
concerns about Mr Adams and Mr McGuinness.
The official, according to the cable, told the ambassador that the GOI
[Government of Ireland] does have rock solid evidence that Gerry Adams
and Martin McGuinness are members of the IRA military command and
for that reason, the taoiseach is certain they would have known in advance
of the robbery.
Mr Adams and the IRA insisted at the time that the IRA did not carry out
the robbery.
Mr Adams, set to run in Louth in the forthcoming general election, insists
he was never an IRA member. Mr McGuinness has admitted IRA
involvement, but long in the past.
The robbery was raised in another cable in June 2005. Mr Kenny reported
the taoiseach had expressed his concerns to then special US envoy to
Ireland Mitchell Reiss. The Taoiseach . . . believes Sinn Fin leaders were
aware of plans to rob the Northern Bank even as they negotiated with him
last fall, it said. Publicly, he has been unprecedentedly critical of Sinn
Fin and, until recently, [there were] greatly reduced private contacts as
well.
A Sinn Fin spokesman last night said there was not a shred of evidence
that ever linked the IRA to the robbery. It is no surprise that political
opponents of Sinn Fin at the time such as Bertie Ahern should have been
trying to smear Sinn Fin . . . and they are still doing it.
The context of the cables was that in late 2004 there was real hope of a
powersharing deal between the DUP and Sinn Fin, which later collapsed.
A separate WikiLeaks disclosure on fallout from the murder of Northern
Ireland solicitor Pat Finucane revealed that MI5, Britains internal security
service, offered to hand over sensitive files on the case to inquiries into his
death. The disclosure was described last night by supporters and relatives
of Mr Finucane as highly significant.
Heard TV3 are going to replace Vinnie B with .... Brendan O'BOC-N-CONNOR. Are they off
their stupid little heads? Who wants to see this EGO spouting his Right Wing views every
week night? One of Denis O'Brien's favourite lick-arse propagandists sitting in Vin B's chair
doesn't just bear thinking about, I for one will be switching off. In fact if I see this gobshite
appearing on the screen I will likely get a hammer and smash up the TV, so BOC off you
Blueshirt bollix
Daniel McConnell who is the Political Editor at the Irish Examiner ran a story in today's
edition about Irish Water's burst pipe fiasco. Daniel runs a story almost every day defending
the love of his life Irish Water and today's rant was no different from his usual output. Daniel
is a bit of a sleuth and has found out who is to blame for the pipe fiasco - the left .. sorry, the
HARD LEFT and "populists" according to Detective McConnell in today's paper. But our
Daniel doesn't just write a story - he becomes part of it (this style of reporting was made
famous by Charlie Bird). So Dan the Man told us in his article how he went online and
tweeted how quiet the anti-water charge brigade had been about the burst pipe. Daniel the
Fearless went where even Irish Water feared to go and took on the .. eh .. BRIGADE. Seems
some people were upset though and "Cue pourings of outrage from the online crazies who
took grave umbrage" sobbed Daniel. Oh dear, I hope his bosses at the Examiner and Irish
Water can protect Danno from those wicked online crazies.

Anyway, lets look forward to tomorrows episode of the adventures of Fearless Mc Connell in
the Examiner as he bravely takes on hard lefties and populists and fights tooth and nail for
water charges and the privatization of his beloved Irish Water.

The "independence"of individual journalists has been bought by the owners of the print, radio and TV media.
The single biggest threat to the "establishment" is the fact that the "internet" is open ,free & currently
uncensored ...the great unwashed ...the dregs ...the bastards can now have their say ...express their opinion
& essentially make up their own mind without being told ....that terrifies the establishment ....so much so every
utterance from them concerns censorship & in particular censoring social media .

Take a sniff....It's happening right under your nose.. #SaveNinePointFour

Scratched record at this stage R2W didnt put us in this predicament FG/FF/LAB/Greens did and the silly feckers who
keep voting em in , Wake up pull together point the finger in the right direction might poxy help . No wonder the feckers
keep getting in and everyone & i mean everyone pays we always have through tax for water & everything else they keep
bringing out new ones. So let it carry on instead of actually trying to talk with a bit of reason and come up with ideas . I
didnt go out there for bloody fun i went out there cos i believe in the people . 9.4 Exemption we all have to do our bit .
stop blaming R2W they are not the ones who are in the poxy Dail .
there's really no time to waste on who is to blame. The priority has to be saving the exemption and if there is
any chance of that happening, then everyone should be encouraged to raise awareness of the exemption
and that it will be gone unless there is public support for the exemption.
Now people. We're having a meeting on the Draft river basin management plan in Ballyvolane next Saturday.
I'm providing tea, coffee, biscuits, parking, expert advice and biros. I cannot make it easier.
https://www.facebook.com/events/118607242102281/?ti=cl
When people in Ireland accuse those in the hallways of perceived power over us of not
upholding "the" "constitution" are we to be sure they have sworn that oath they allegedly took
about Bunreacht na hEireann or is there a different constitution they refer to.

"The" = Definite article

"Constitution" = Noun

Meaning of Constitution = a body of fundamental principles or established precedents according to

which a state or other organisation is acknowledged to be governed.

there are many constitutions operating in Ireland at least 5 that we know of

Could all those Judges be referring to this constitution which came into being in or around 1118 to
1127, which in their world is regarded as the definite article
EU Water Directive does not force imposition of
water charges FF
Any claim that the EU Water Framework Directive will force any new government to
retain water charges is entirely false, according to Fianna Fil Spokesperson
FIANNAFAIL.IE
29th March 2016

Any claim that the EU Water Framework Directive will force any new
government to retain water charges is entirely false, according to Fianna Fil
Spokesperson on Public Expenditure and Reform Sean Fleming.

Deputy Fleming has said the polluter pays principal in the directive does not
bind Ireland to the imposition of domestic water charges.

We absolutely contest the legal advice being put forward by Irish Water. Its
important to recognise that this legal advice was commissioned by Irish
Water, and it should be examined with caution in light of this. Its extraordinary
to see Irish Water quoting EU rules as sacrosanct considering they failed to
meet the key Eurostat market test last year, said Deputy Fleming.

Under Article 9 of the Directive, Member States are required to ensure the
price charged to water consumers, both domestic and non-domestic, for the
distribution of fresh water and treatment of waste water reflects the true
costs.

However Member States have a clear opt-out clause (Article 9.4) from
domestic water user charges, which allows that Member States may take
account of the social, environmental and economic effects of water usage in
recovering the costs of water services.
Even without the opt-out clause in Article 9.4 of the EU water directive, the
governments own flat-rate water charges would not be compliant with the
principle of incentive water pricing included in the directive. We do not believe
there is any basis for concluding from the directive that any future Irish
government is tied to water charges. In fact, we believe it is entirely possible
for the next government to suspend water charges and invest in our water
infrastructure.

The Fianna Fil position on water charges has not changed. We do not
support the continued imposition of water charges on households. It remains
Fianna Fils position that priority must be given to investing in our water
infrastructure, repairing leaks and improving water quality.

https://www.fiannafail.ie/eu-water-directive-does-not-force-imposition-of-water-charges-ff/

MEDIA CENSORSHIP IS NOW AT 3RD REICH

LEVELS AND YOU SHOULD BE VERY AFRAID
BECAUSE YOU ARE NEXT TO BE GAGGED:
July 31st 17
First Hopkins and now Myers. The 2nd punishment in as many
months meted out to a journalist in Britain for expressing an opinion
which does not meet with fascist left/liberal approval, happened over
the weekend. It matters little whether we agree with what is written or
what is said by a journalist or broadcaster. In Ireland, Joe Duffy and
Paul Williams regularly parrot the Irish government and Irish law
enforcement narrative and people are sick and tired of their shite. But
we have a choice. Nobody is forcing us to listen to or read about their
opinions because at the end of the day they are only opinions. Which is
why those of us mature enough to boycott such individuals just move on
without getting butt hurt in the process.

The same applies to any other journalist or broadcaster whose opinions

we do not like. We just ignore them and move on. So what gives any of
us the right to judge what is offensive and what is not offensive? Who
decides what is or what is not offensive? Who has the right to decide on
such matters and where did they get their powers from? What LAW
justified Katie Hopkins's dismissal from London's LBC Radio for her
"final solution" comment? What LAW did Kevin Myers actually break
in his Sunday Times article at the weekend? The answer is they broke
no laws. But their bosses have capitulated to the thug mentality of
media censorship which now forms left wing and liberal group think
and this is dangerous if we value a democratic society. Which means
that in today's world any opinion not pre approved by the left wing and
liberal mindset is not tolerated and will be censored ruthlessly.
The Real Irish Media will be 2 years old tomorrow, 1st August. There
have been attempts to close our page down on a number of occasions
since August 2015 and our admins have served many 1 month facebook
bans. But we will not be censored. We will keep coming back.

Do not believe for one moment that this mainstream media censorship
of people like Katie Hopkins and Kevin Myers is because those
individuals are seen to hold opinions considered right wing. ALL
OPINIONS considered not to the establishmen's liking are now being
targetted and we are already seeing this agenda coming from the Irish
judiciary in their dealings with protesters and activists as it pertains to
social media. To those reading this who consider themselves left wing or
liberal and who today are celebrating the gagging of Katie Hopkins and
Kevin Myers, our advice to you is to BE CAREFUL OF WHAT YOU
WISH FOR! Because it will be YOUR own humble opinion they will
silence next, if they are not already doing so without you noticing.
No end to corruption, interception,