Sir, – Maureen Gaffney is correct that there is a need for fairness in the social contract ("Why we must collect unpaid water charges", Opinion & Analysis, Online, December 21st). However, the reason people did not pay the water tax is that they believe the social contract has been broken and are angry, not simply in relation to water tax but in relation to the many other inequalities in Irish society. – Yours, etc,
TIM SPALDING,
Kerrykeel,
Co Donegal.
Sir, – Applying Maureen Gaffney’s “psychological experiment” to the likes of Apple helps to explain why so many citizens of this State have refused on principal to pay the water charges. – Yours, etc,
PETER COGHLAN,
Terenure,
Dublin 6W.
Sir, – Many thanks to Maureen Gaffney for highlighting the potential of the water charges debacle to have a profoundly damaging impact on our society. Given the Government’s U-turn on water charges and the apparent disregard for all the law-abiding citizens who did their civic duty, the only rational response to the next demand for contributions to costs of running our society will be to wait and see how many of our fellow citizens are paying and what sanctions will be applied to non-payers. The social contract is under threat unless the Government treats all citizens fairly. – Yours, etc,
AILBHE MURRAY,
Cabinteely,
Dublin 18
Sir, – Was Northern Ireland’s renewable heat subsidy, which pays more for wood pellets than they cost, therefore incentivising people to make money by wasting energy, inspired by the €100 water conservation grant, which was paid even to those who boycotted the water charge? Were both schemes inspired by Flann O’Brien? – Yours, etc,
ÁINE LAVELLO,
Dublin 8.
Sir, – Jim O’Sullivan (December 22nd) complains that introducing water charges “would have resulted in many engaging in water rationing”. I can’t imagine a better justification for such charges! – Yours, etc,
TED MOONEY,
Dublin 6.