The Irish establishment / government took quite a heavy beating on Water Charges, and the way this week’s shortages are being spun, it certainly looks like they haven’t let it go.
Article by Killian Woods [with reporting by Cormac Fitzgerald] in Fora.ie on March 5, 2018
‘Ireland’s ‘fragile’ water supply could make firms think twice about investing here‘
“Dublin Chamber chief executive Mary Rose Burke has said the restriction of water supply in the capital could make some companies looking to invest in Ireland reconsider their options.”
For full disclosure, I took part in #RightToWater marches and did not pay my charges so it’s pretty clear where I stand on the issue. But this particular post is more about media coverage than it is the water issue.
Check out the linked article on Fora.ie, a business site which is part of the Journal.ie network.
While I understand that the focus of this site is what is going on in the business community, does that mean it should only ever offer their point of view on particular issues?
This is an article in which the Dublin Chamber of Commerce is effectively being given free reign to offer it’s own take on the restrictions recently put in place by Irish Water. Forgive us for assuming a like-minded approach among the Chamber, the Government which took such a bad beating over water, and the jobs-for-the-boys private company which it created.
While they don’t actually state that water charges need to be reinstated, it’s not exactly well hidden between the lines. If there’s not enough money to fix the water infrastructure, they claim, then there won’t be investment which in turn means no more jobs. The implication is very clear.
All I want to do in this article is present a viewpoint from the other side, which I believe Killian Woods could have done. And he wouldn’t even need to ask for a quote either…he could have copy/pasted from the Facebook page of any anti-austerity TD such as Paul Murphy :
The water shortages we’re experiencing are a consequence of long-term under-investment in infrastructure. The predictable attempts to use them as a new argument for charges have to deal with fact that London, which has meters and charges, has the exact same problem. The solution is investment, which should be funded by progressive taxation of profits, high income and wealth.
No prizes for guessing which side I’m on, but at least I have presented you with more than one viewpoint in my article. JLP