Workers Solidarity Movement

This water charge FAQ answers your questions about the water charge and the growing resistance to it.  If there is a question you want to ask that is not here, or if you think one of the answers could be improved, contact us via Twitter or Facebook with your suggestions.

General Information

Who is liable for the Water Charge?
The people who live in the building.

How will Irish Water know who to charge?
From the information you provide in the registration forms

Does the landlord or tenant have to pay the water charge?
Once the landlord informs Irish Water that the tenant is the householder, the tenant is responsible for paying the charge.  The charge is an issue between the tenant and Irish water.  A landlord cannot legally threaten a tenant with eviction for not paying. 

My landlord is increasing my rent in anticipation of the water charges, can they do this and what should I do about it?
Landlords are not supposed to do this.  It’s been stated very clearly by Irish Water that the bill is between the tenant and Irish Water and has nothing to do with the landlord.  All the landlord is entitled to do is give the names of tenants to Irish Water.

My landlord is still hassling me and demanding that I register. I’m worried about being evicted, what can I do to get them off my back?
Because tenants have very little in the way of enforceable rights and there is a shortage of rental accommodation in Dublin you might be vulnerable to being bullied by your landlord.  Registration is not the key fight in defeating the water charges, non-payment is.  So if your landlord will not respect your rights they will probably back off once you register and they know that the bill will not be in their name but yours. 

Landlords that are engaging in such bullying may be doing so because they are not registered and so don't want to come to attention of Revenue.  Tenants subjected to such bullying should check to see if their landlord is registered with PTRB.

How much is the Water Charge?
The government announced a number of concessions in its 'new Irish Water package'. Now there is a two-level capped charge. One adult households will be charged €160 a year, and two adult (or more) households will be charged €260. The metered rate is €3.70/1000 litres (it was originally €4.88).

The government is trying to entice people to register with Irish Water by offering a €100 rebate ('Water Conservation Grant') to anyone who registers (which must be applied for, from September 2015 onwards). This lower charge is presented as a bargain, but of course costs a lot more than no charge at all.

It must be noted that any allowances or concessions initiated by the government are in direct response to the outcry over water charges, and will be scrapped if this outcry subsides - as happened with the bin charge waivers.  If the charge is established, it will surely increase every year.

The water charges were originally much higher. A citizens’ information website estimated that water charge was €629.52 for 2 adults and 2 children in one house for the year, before allowances. 

When is the deadline for registration?
The last deadline was February 2nd 2015. The original deadline was the end of October 2014, but this was extended to November 30th because of huge non-compliance. This final February deadline has been a disaster for the government as hundreds of thousands still haven't registered.

In a humorous twist, Irish Water deferred the registration deadline until 2016 (December 31st 2015). This would be almost a year into the boycott, so Irish Water had effectively abolished the registration deadline in order to save face (they can't afford the humiliation of another failed deadline). However, a few weeks after this Minister Alan Kelly announced that the new registration deadline is June 2015.

What should I do with the registration form?
Our advice is to do nothing, boycott the registration process and refuse to comply.

Will returning the registration packet with ‘No Contract, No Consent’ give me legal protection?
No. At best it's a distraction. At worst it's counter-productive. In mid-November 2014 it was revealed that anyone who returned a registration pack – blank or even with 'No Contract, No Consent' – was registered using any available information. (See below, 'Is it true, as some groups have suggested, that there can be no legal charge in the absence of a contract between the user and Irish Water?')

The only real protection is in numbers, this is why it’s imperative to convince others join the campaign and not to pay their bills also.

What happens if I don’t return the Irish Water registration form, or return it blank?
If a householder does not register with Irish Water, they will be charged at the two adult household level, i.e. €260. They will also not be able to apply for the €100 rebate. (For a blank registration pack, see above). The government have been extremely unclear about this and have profited from people's confusion.

Originally, the punishment for not registering was being denied the 30,000 litre annual water allowance.

When do the first bills arrive?
April 1st 2015.  The original date was January 1st, but this was pushed back due to massive non-compliance and popular pressure. Then it was pushed back again to January 26th due to continue non-compliance and greater popular pressure.

What are the penalties for not paying?
In the 'new Irish Water package', there are monetary penalties for non-payment of the water charges. There are two different 'late payment fees', €30 for one adult households, and €60 for two adult households. The penalty will be added to the water bill if the bill is outstanding for 3 months or more. The penalty will be added again every year, on the anniversary of the first time the penalty was added.

This means that if a householder didn't pay €260 for 2 years in a row, they'd be fined €60 for the first year, and in the second year would be fined another €60 for the first year (i.e. twice for the first year), and would be fined €60 for the second year.

Originally, the government said it would reduce water pressure ‘to a trickle’ if water bills weren't paid. That has been revoked for now (See below, 'Can my water be disconnected, or pressure reduced, if I don’t pay?').

I’m self-employed.  Are there any implications for getting tax clearance cert?
No.

Will not paying affect my credit rating?
No.

Can I defer payment?
Irish Water have made no provision for deferred payments.  However, some may feel more comfortable with the non-payment strategy if they put the money to cover the bills aside.

Is it a criminal offence to boycott the registration of the water charge?
No.

I have sent in (or intend to send in) my registration form, can I still participate in the non-payment campaign?
Yes. Just because you’ve registered, doesn’t mean you need to pay when the first bill arrives in April.

I have received a letter from Irish Water seeking information about where I live, what should I do?
Ignore it.

What is the Market Corporation / Eurostat test?
This is a test to prove that Irish Water Ltd. is a commercial, as opposed to state, entity. To pass the test, Eurostat - an EU agency - must deem that over 50% of Irish Water's revenue comes non-state sources (e.g. from charges collected by Irish Water, rather than taxes collected by Revenue). If Irish Water Ltd. passes this test, the Irish state will be able to borrow money 'off the books' of the national budget and hence not raise the budget deficit (in the eyes of the Troika). The European Commission has already expressed concern about Irish Water's chances at passing this test, for example because the €100 'Water Conservation Grant' is effectively a state subsidy, and because the current water charges are far too low.

Making Irish Water fail this test is an important reason for a mass boycott.
 

Where does Denis O’Brien fit into all this?
Denis O’Brien is Ireland's richest person. Best known as a media mogul, he is the largest shareholder in Independent News and Media PLC, which owns among other things the Irish Independent, the Sunday World, and the Evening Herald. He owns Communicorp outright, which owns among other things Newstalk, 98 FM, and Spin 1038.

Denis O'Brien is directly involved in water metering in Ireland. He bought the company known as Siteserv from the Irish Bank Resolution Corporation - formerly known as Anglo Irish Bank - in 2012. Mr. O’Brien bought the Siteserv construction and utility services group’s businesses for €45.5 million through an Isle of Man company called Millington in April 2012. The company owed €145 million at that time to the zombie bank at the time. €100 million was taken off the price as it was in liquidation. Ordinary shareholders received less than €5 million as a result of the sale with a share getting €3.92 per share.

In August 2013, GMC Sierra won three contracts estimated to be valued at €62 million each for the installation of water meters. GMC Sierra is part of the Siteserv group, and the total value of three contracts to install water in different regions is €186 million.

What's Ervia?
Irish Water is a public company and part of the Ervia parent group holding, which also has Gas Networks Ireland.  This was formed after Bord Gaís Energy was sold to the private company called Centrica for €150 million in a deal that was agreed back in December 2013.  The price of €150 million has been questioned as it included the entire network, an existing customer base of 650,000, and a 445 megawatt power station in Whitegate, Cork which was completed in December 2010 at a cost of €400 million to Bord Gaís Energy.

How much of our Motor Tax goes to Irish Water?
€439 million, that's about two thirds of it.

What happened in Jobstown?
In brief, on November 15th Tanaiste Joan Burton visited Jobstown, a working class suburb in Tallaght, West Dublin, for a photo op. at a graduation ceremony. It was revealed later that the graduating students did not want her there.

A protest was organised by residents in the local area. They were joined by others including Anti-Austerity Alliance (AAA) TD Paul Murphy, AAA councillors Mick Murphy and Kieran Mahon, and Eirigi activist Scott Masterson. They had a role in marshalling, but not leading, the protest. The car Joan Burton was being driven in was blockaded for about 2 hours.

The Gardaí pepper sprayed people, including teenagers and children. This was not reported by the mainstream media. One person threw a brick which bounced off a Garda car. A child threw a water balloon at Joan Burton. The mainstream media concentrated on these events. Although the protest was depicted as chaotic and violent, it was quite peaceful, with the police as usual introducing most of the tension.

It was after this event that Minister for Health Leo Varadkar deployed the infamous 'sinister fringe' line.

And what are these arrests about?
Back in November it was announced that 3 Gardaí would be working full time on this 'case', i.e. trying to pin any possible charge on any of the protesters present.

On Monday February 9th the Gardaí arrested 4 people at 7am, Scott Masterson, Kieran Mahon, Mick Murphy, and Paul Murphy - all politicians or political party activists. A whopping 26 Gardaí executed the arrests. They were detained in separate Garda stations, Tallaght, Rathfarnham, and Terenure. Protests were held outside all of these stations, with over 100 outside Tallaght. Paul Murphy was held for the longest time, 8 and a half hours in Terenure Garda station. They were all released without charge, with a file sent to the DPP.

On Tuesday February 10th the Gardaí followed the same formula, arresting 4 more people present at the original Jobstown protest at 7am (all Tallaght residents). This time they were 'ordinary' people, and one was a 16-year-old boy. Again they were detained in separate stations (Tallaght and Rathfarnham), and again all released without charge by about 2-3pm.

On Wednesday Februrary 11th the exact same thing happened. 4 Tallaght residents, early morning raid, excessive Garda presence, released without charge in the afternoon. This time the arrestees included a 14-year-old boy and an 18-year-old. It's noteworthy that no less than 8 Gardaí executed the arrests of the 14-year-old

The same process continued for several more days until 23 people in total had been arrested. The arrests are clearly an attempt to make the campaign seem illegitimate and dangerous in order to make people relucant to participate in the anti-water charges campaign. Also these arrests are an attempt to bully and intimidate a working class community which dared to stand up for themselves.

'Free the Five' - Who was jailed, and why?

On Februrary 19th, five water charges protesters were sentenced by the High Court to prison - 56 days: Paul “Ollie” Moore, Damien O’Neill, 28 days: Bernie Hughes, Derek Byrne, and Michael Batty. 4 of them are currently in prison, with Michael Batty in Spain due to a medical condition. They were jailed for breaking a High Court injunction which imposed a 20 metre 'exclusion zone' on protesters preventing water meter installations, i.e. the injuncted would have to stay over 20 metres from any water meter installations (with an exception made for residing in their own homes).

Some of the prisoners were been kept in 23 hour lockdown in Wheatfield prison, i.e. solitary confinement with only 1 hour in the day to call family and friends. Solitary confinement is a cruel and draconian punishment. In this case it is clearly an attempt to break the injuncted prisoners and scare off anyone who thinks they could be arrested sometime (for preventing meter installations, blocking a politician's car, and so on).

The 4 imprisoned protesters were released on March 9th ostensibly due to flaws in the commital warrant used to arrest them.

Why oppose the water charge

Why shouldn’t water be a commodity?
Water is essential to human life, otherwise healthy people will literally die if they are denied water for 3-5 days. Supply should not be something for shareholders to make profits from.  Commodities, by their nature, are more accessible to the more wealthy than the poor.  Those with children and families, who therefore have a greater need for water, tend to be more likely to be under financial strain already. 

Isn’t the water charge a conservation measure?
If the concern was about conservation of water, it would have made far more sense to invest the €500 million that has been spent on the installation of meters on fixing the leaks in pipes.  In Dublin alone, over 40% of water leaks from faulty pipes before ever it reaches people’s homes.
There is no evidence that meters have an appreciable effect on people’s usage habits.  Comparisons with areas in Britain where meters have been installed show that, at most, meters reduce water usage by about 1½%. A survey by the Commission for Energy Regulation found that water metering would only reduce domestic water usage by 6% on average, equivalent to 22 litres a day or one dishwasher cycle. This could be considered the very upper limit to water use reduction, and it is far lower than the 15-20% reduction the government is encouraging to 'beat the cap'.

Even if large swathes of people begin conserving water in order to save on the charges, Irish Water will simply have to increase their prices, since they will need to cover all their expenses and make a profit.  The actual amount of water that’s used isn’t a particularly large factor in the cost of water provision: maintenance, repair, treatment and running costs form the bulk of costs.

A public education programme about the need for water conservation would have a much greater impact on water usage than the imposition of meters and charges.

Why, then, is the charge being imposed?
It is effectively yet another austerity tax.  Imposition of a water charge was part of the so-called ‘bailout deal’ struck between the Fianna Fáil/Green party government and the Troika (IMF, ECB, European Commission).  Despite the fact that both Fine Gael and Labour opposed the imposition of this charge before the general election, they proceeded to introduce it once in power.

Household Charge, Property Tax, Universal Social Charge, Pay Cuts, Welfare Cuts, Cuts in Social Services… the list of austerity cuts and extra taxes is almost endless.  These are all imposed on us in order to pay off the gambling debts of bankers and financial gamblers. The water charge is another that they hope to add to the list.

The other principal motivating factor behind the imposition of the charge is to line the water service up for privatisation (see below).  The government have said that they have established Irish Water as a semi-state company so that it can borrow money on the financial markets in order to upgrade the pipe network.  What will most likely happen if they get their way is that when the programme of upgrade is finished (and paid for by us) the company will then be sold, which will ultimately result in our water service being owned by multinational companies who will make exorbitant profits while we pay increased charges.

If the water charge is not paid, won’t the money have to be collected somewhere else?
We already pay for the water service through our general taxation. The first thing would be to actually use all the money allocated for water provision for water provision. There has been a shortfall of hundreds of millions for decades, which Fine Gael and Labour have presided over.

Apart from that, there are several ways in which the government could raise extra taxes without imposing this charge on us.  Political decisions are made about where the burden of increased charges or taxation should fall.  The government believe that we - the ordinary people - should pay even more.  However, the choice could be made to make big business or the wealthy pay more.  After all we have been deluged with increased charges and taxes over the past number of years.  Whether the government - either this one or any future one - will make that choice depends on the extent to which we make that political demand through resistance and pressure. 
A couple of alternative possibilities are:-
A Financial Transaction Tax (a 0.1% tax on financial speculation) would raise €100m
Even a minimal Wealth Tax could raise €150m

Will Irish Water be privatised?
Very likely yes (See above).  The government tells us that there is no intention to privatise it.  But these are the same political parties that before the last election told us that they were opposed to the introduction of both the property tax and the water charges.  Why believe them now?

Indeed EU competition laws will probably dictate that once the charge is established the provision of water will have to be opened up to ‘competition’.

What’s wrong with privatisation?
Privatisation will mean that the primary reason for existence of the company will be the making of profit rather than the provision of water.  As happened with the bin tax waiver, it will inevitably mean the end of any concessions (e.g. the two different payment levels of €260 and €160. Also note that the €100 'Water Conservation Grant' is a once-off).  Privatisation will also result in a poorer service for areas that are more costly to provide.  Witness what has happened with Eircom since its privatisation,  the company has been bought and sold on international capital markets several times resulting in huge profits for financial gamblers but there has been little or no investment in broadband, or even telephone services, especially in rural Ireland.

Doesn’t everyone else in Europe pay water charges?
In Ireland we also pay for water provision.  We pay for it through general taxation.  This is a progressive way to pay for public services as those who earn most pay most. 
 

Huge crowds protest on Nov 1st

Tactics

How will the water charge be defeated?
If enough people refuse to pay, it will inevitably mean that the government will have to change their plans.  That is the key to stopping the imposition of this charge - Don’t Pay and convince as many as possible of your friends, neighbours and workmates not to pay either.

When the bills arrive in April, and people are deciding whether or not to pay, they will make that decision based on what they think everyone else is doing.  So between now and then we need to create a momentum of opposition to the charge that will give people the confidence to make the decision not to pay.

Remember, if someone is making a decision not to pay on their own, that’s a very scary thing to do.  If they’re making it in conjunction with their family members, neighbours and workmates it’s a lot less scary.  And if they’re making it in the context of knowing that there is massive opposition and that hundreds of thousands of others are making the same decision, that gives a huge sense of confidence.

And if there are hundreds of thousands of households not paying that gives us huge power, and will force the government into a re-think.

Can my water be disconnected, or pressure reduced, if I don’t pay?
No.  The legislation states that they cannot disconnect anyone’s water supply.  Nor, since the concessions in November 2014, can they reduce pressure 'to a trickle'.

Originally the government threatened that they will reduce non-payers’ supply to a ‘trickle’.  But to do this, they would have to fit a restrictor on the stopcock outside your house.  A well-organised campaign can take direct action to prevent them fitting restrictors to stopcocks - and can remove any restrictors that are fitted,  In the 1990s, when the Councils had the power to disconnect water supply the campaign managed to prevent most threatened cut-offs and re-connected supply to anyone who was disconnected within hours.

It is of course possible that they could change the law to allow disconnections or pressure reductions.  Again though, if we have a strong campaign involving hundreds of thousands of households, will the government want to attempt to take us on?

Will they stop the charge from my wages or Social Welfare?
The current legislation does not allow them to do so.  And they are very unlikely to want to change the legislation to give them that power.  We all remember that when the boycott of the household charge was successful they changed the law to allow the Revenue Commissioners to deduct the property tax at source.

But remember that the primary motivation for introducing the water charge is to make the service ready for privatisation.  To do this they want it to have an independent ‘revenue-generating’ stream.  So having the Revenue Commissioners collecting it will not suit their purpose.

Again, though, they could of course change the law.  Whether they will do so or not depends on two things - the strength of the boycott ie how many hundreds of thousands of households are refusing to pay and the strength of the protests - how many people are getting out on the streets and showing their opposition.

Could I be taken to court for not paying?
Yes. The government/Irish Water could take people to court looking for an order for payment.  But if they do take anyone to court, this provides us with a massive opportunity to organise huge protests outside the courts.  When one person is taken to court we should turn up in our hundreds or even thousands.

This worked very successfully during the campaign against water charges in the 90s.  When non-payers were taken to court (only a tiny percentage ever were), hundreds of their neighbours and supporters turned up to support them.  The campaign legal team challenged all aspects of the cases in the courts.  Campaigners knew that even if they were successful in the courts the government could change the law  but used legal challenges to delay and frustrate the councils’ attempts to get court orders.

This can be done again.  The key thing is having huge numbers of non-payers.  The court system is already over-stretched so it would be impossible to take legal proceedings against hundreds of thousands of people.  And any court cases can become a rallying point around which we galvanise huge protests.  the government will be aware of this too and so will be reluctant to take court cases.

Should I just vote for Sinn Féin or other anti-water charge candidates to abolish the water charge?
No. Elections are over a year away.  If we pay now the charges will be an established fact by the time of the next election.  We must remember that both Fine Gael and Labour opposed both the property tax and the water charges before the last election.  Yet we know what happened when they were elected.  The best way to ensure the charges are defeated is to refuse to pay now.  Then whoever is in government - whether before or after the next election will be forced to abolish the charges.

Even from the perspective of a party which is opposed to the charges and says that it will be a red line issue in terms of negotiating a programme for government after the next election - surely it would greatly strengthen their hand in those negotiations if there are hundreds of thousands of people not paying.  If, on the other hand, we have paid the charges - even if we have done so under protest - they will be an established fact and the chance that their abolition can be negotiated will be practically nil.  

Should we be concentrating on preventing the installation of meters?
Those communities which have organised protests which have delayed or prevented the installation of meters have done us all a huge service.  They have highlighted the issue and have provided a focus for opposition to Irish Water and the imposition of the charges. Also, water meters are a precursor to the privatisation of water provision as they are required to measure individual water usage.

In any community where people can organise themselves to hold similar protests, we would greatly encourage it.  It shows the government that there is opposition and it gives people the confidence to organise together and get a sense of our power.

What if we can’t stop them installing all the meters?
Even if every water meter is installed, the water charge can’t be enforced if enough people refuse to pay. However, it is still important that we prevent Irish Water installing meters to the best of our ability, as water meters are necessary for use-dependent water charges.

Surely if we get enough people into the streets the government will have to abolish the water charge?
Big demonstrations are very important for two reasons.  Firstly they show politicians and the government that we are serious (although not paying the bill will give them that message in an even more strident manner).  Secondly, and more importantly, demonstrations and protests are crucial to building confidence in people, both in themselves and in each other. By participating in protests, by seeing huge numbers of people on the streets, people realise that they are not alone.

So yes we need large protests.  But we need to remember that the government can ignore protests if all we do is protest.  Protests should be seen as a necessary part of building people’s confidence and thus making a mass boycott possible.

What can I do to stop the water charge?
3 steps
Don’t Pay
Join in or help to organise protests
Become an organiser or a ‘persuader’ - if you are refusing to pay it is in your interest to encourage your neighbours, family members and workmates to refuse to pay as well.  So get involved in your local campaign, or start a local campaign by leafleting your area and organising a meeting to decide where to go and link up with other groups nationwide.

Remember the charges cannot be defeated by political parties, trade unions or community organisations - although all have an important part to play.  They will only be beaten by the active involvement of tens of thousands of ordinary people - people just like you.  If each one of us plays our part we can build an unbeatable campaign.

Can we defeat the water charge through the courts?
It’s very unlikely. (See below).

Is it true, as some groups have suggested, that there can be no legal charge in the absence of a contract between the user and Irish Water?

This is not true. The authority to charge users water charges comes from Part 3 of the Water Services (No. 2) Act 2013, in particular Section 21, which says Irish Water “shall charge each customer for the provision of its water services in accordance with the approved water charge plan.”’The Act states ‘’the occupier of the premises in respect of which the water supply is provided.” Occupation and provision of services, on its own, gives rise to liability for water charges. The entitlement to charge derives from the Act and is not dependent on the presence of a contract. If Section 21 did not exist, a contract would of course be needed – but this is not the case. An Act of the Oireachtas can impose liability where no contract exists.

What the Irish Water Service Act 2013 does, among other things, is transfer the ownership of the national water infrastructure to Irish Water, and grant them both a statutory right and duty to levy and collect charges from “consumers”. This means that, legally, you do not have to consent to the charges; they are being imposed upon you. In real terms this means that returning the Irish Water application packs with “No Contract, No Consent” or burning them, does not alter the legal position; you are still liable for the charges.

Possible arguments could be raised that the Act interferes with citizens’ property rights, insofar as it interferes with their right to own the water which they currently possess. The problem with this argument is two-fold.

First, it will need to be established that water ownership is a property right worthy of constitutional protection. Although we own water once it comes through our taps, it is provided to us by the State. It is therefore an object whose ownership is predicated upon the State creation of value. The Courts have traditionally been reluctant to acknowledge that the State bestowing an object on citizens creates a constitutional property right (Maher v Minister for Agriculture) although this has not precluded some State created objects being deemed constitutional property rights of citizens, such as a State pension (Lovett v Minister for Education). This is an unresolved issue about which there is no definitive answer.

Second, even if a constitutional property right is established, this right can be limited if the limitation of the right is deemed to pass a proportionality test by the Courts (Heaney v Ireland; Meadows v MJELR). The purported financial status of the country may result in the Courts determining that the interference with the constitutional property right passes this proportionality analysis.

Another issue which could arise in Court proceedings is that Irish Water have a property right in regard to the water which they dispense to the populace. It is clear that Irish Water possess the water which they distribute to the public. The fact that Irish Water is a corporate entity is not a preclusion; the Irish Courts have held that corporations also have constitutional property rights (Iarnrod Eireann v Ireland). Moreover, the possible clash of constitutional rights between the property rights of Irish Water and citizens’ other rights (say, right to bodily integrity being infringed if they are unable to obtain water due to non-payment) would be difficult to argue, as interference with such rights generally protects what are considered negative rights (the State taking an action against a citizen, such as entering a premises without a warrant) rather than positive rights (the State providing a benefit to a citizen, such as social security payments).

Even if such a right were to be established, the Courts have generally been reluctant to enforce a mandatory order (also known as an affirmative decree) against the State to provide a service to citizens (Sinnott v Minister for Education; TD v Minister for Education). Therefore, even if water charges were to be deemed to interfere with a citizens’ right to bodily integrity, it would appear difficult to persuade the Courts that they should force the State to repeal the water charges.

Should we be asking others not to pay, considering the risk?
We must consider the risk that the water charge is imposed and we have to pay it. The fact is that the water charge can’t be defeated another way. The more boycotters, the less risk. So instead of spreading fear we should be spreading confidence.

What can we do to lower the risk of non-payment?
It can’t be denied that there’s a risk involved in not paying the water charge, but there are a few things we can do to lower that risk. The first is to convince others not to pay - we have safety in numbers. The second is to create community/campaign funds to assist anyone who is taken to court with legal fees. The third is to protest the courts. The fourth is to fill the courts with so many cases that they simply cannot handle the workload. (See above)

This water charge FAQ answers some of your questions about the water charge and the growing resistance to it.  If there is a question you want to ask that is not here or if you think one of the answers could be improved contact us via Twitter or Facebook with your suggestions.

Want to help convince your neighboors that organisation and non-payment are the way to defeat the water charge?  Download and print our our leaflet making the case