Ireland Tap Water Fiasco Yields Death Threats

Newfound utility charges for Ireland residents, who had previously enjoyed free tap water, continue to stoke public outrage, and some people on the fringes are making death threats over the issue.

“Minister for the Environment Alan Kelly has received a warning from [police] about death threats made to him by dissident Republicans,” Irish Central reported.

“Kelly said he, his family and staff have received death threats since Irish Water was set up. The threats came as heightened concerns at Leinster House, the seat of government, have given rise to plans for increased security,” the report continued.

“The threats have been linked to an ongoing national campaign not to pay water charges since Irish Water was established,” the report said.

The utility Irish Water was established two years ago to take over the responsibilities of local water authorities. It is a semi-state company created under the Water Services Act 2013.

Ireland residents had not traditionally paid for tap water. But under a money-saving plan, new charges were scheduled to hit consumers last year. The plan hit a snag when a massive public backlash ensued, including a boycott and protests in cities across the country.

The new charges were a condition of a bailout deal in 2010 when the Irish government sought billions in funding from the European Union and the International Money Fund just to stay up and running.

But in the wake of public protests, water utility leaders say they should have handled the transition more carefully. Michael McNicholas, chairman of Ervia, which oversees Irish Water, said the company “came up short,” according to Irish Examiner.

He also “admitted that the controversial utility may not exist after the looming general election,” the Irish Independent reported.

In retrospect, the need for funding to improve infrastructure should have been a primary part of the campaign around fees, he said.

“We could have been clearer about just how unfit for purpose the current water infrastructure is, and just how much work was required to give us an infrastructure that is needed for a modern economy,” he said, per Examiner.

“With hindsight, more could have been done to make the case for the payment model to explain that people are not paying twice, but that the money paid in water charges would be used to fix the creaking infrastructure,” he continued. “Coming at a time of austerity it was easy to depict water charges as a by-product of austerity, just another tax imposed on a weary population.”

“Our failure to explain these things properly has contributed to a broader failure to build a consensus around the need for a transformation of our water and wastewater services, and the need to have this project led by a national utility,” he said.

For similar stories, visit Water Online’s Consumer Outreach Solutions Center.