More than a few eyebrows were raised as to how central a theme Irish Water was during the protracted negotiations between Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil that culminated with the agreement on Wednesday.

It would be relatively safe to assume a majority of Fianna Fáil voters paid water chargers, despite the party’s increasingly contrarian stance on the issue during the last parliamentary term. The exit poll conducted by RTE on the day of the general election indicated it was the dominant issue for only 8 per cent of voters.

And yet no other issue came close to scuppering the talks as it did. The chasm between both teams of negotiators last week was so wide it looked like a collapse was imminent. It took the intervention of Minister for Finance Michael Noonan to salvage a solution – he told both sides that talks falling on that issue could not be tolerated.

The proof of that is in the large chunk of the final agreement that is taken up by the segment on Irish Water. A third (almost 600 words) of the 1,750 word document relates to water charges with a convoluted agreement on how to proceed.

So much for the quango cull. It involves yet another new agency, the External Advisory Body, which will advise on how to make Irish Water more acceptable. And then there will be a (separate) commission to report within five months on a sustainable long-term funding model. The recommendations of the commission will be discussed by a special Oireachtas committee which must make recommendations within three months. It will then be voted upon by the Oireachtas within a one-month period.

If you add up all those time periods, you get nine months, the exact same period as the suspension of charges.

Unfortunately, as the reality of politics has proven again and again, there is not a sliver of a chance that Sisyphean task will be completed in that time.

That raises the prospect of political blowback. But not, for once, from the anti-water charge protesters; rather from those who have paid. Fianna Fáil in the shape of Jim O’Callaghan and Fine Gael’s Marcella Corconan Kennedy both insisted yesterday that those who have not paid will be pursued.

The difficulty is that that cannot happen until the arrears reaches €500 and it will be at least 18 months before that happens. In the event of water charges being suspended for a period longer than nine months (a likely prospect) enforcement measures are likely to be either delayed or moved down the priority list. O’Callaghan said yesterday it is unlikely those who have paid will be refunded.

That will raise a question of equity for those who have paid if there are inordinate delays in ensuring compliance. That could result in a political time-bomb for the two two big parties, particularly Fianna Fáil.

For its part, Fianna Fáil has only made commitments to support or abstain in four specific instances: the nomination of Taoiseach and Government; Budgets; confidence motions; and pairing arrangements.

However, the policy framework indicates the party will in effect have to give tacit support to the government on the big issues. That means that fiscal and taxation policy (including the reduction in USC) will be pre-agreed, and both parties will follow a similar path on the Landsdowne Agreement and the public sector pay commission (“a second cousin to social partnership and benchmarking”, said one participant).

In many instances, when one reads though the items, it reads like a summary of an election manifesto (a broad aspiration without the policy detail).

An example: (both parties commit to) reduce primary school class sizes; reintroduce guidance counselling to secondary schools and increase financial supports for post graduate students with a particular focus on those from low income households.

(and) to take all necessary action to tackle high variable interest rates.

(and) to increase investment in the Irish language.

There were a few other issues besides water that proved potential stumbling blocks. There were big arguments on rent supplement and mortgage interest relief, and strangely enough, on the career guidance and post-graduate commitments stated above.

One potential difficulty was avoided altogether. Fine Gael committed in its manifesto to set up a citizens assembly to deal with the Eighth amendment to the Constitution (on abortion). Fianna Fáil was never going to be agreeable to this measure, which it would have difficulty with given the conservative nature of many party members. Considering most other parties and Independents will support such a move, both parties agreed that this matter would be decided by parliament and would not have to be subject to an agreement.

Fianna Fáil might boast that more of its hand is evident in the document than that of Fine Gael. That will make little difference when it comes to the realities of day-to-day governing. It might find it difficult to walk the tightrope that will be demanded of a party that is in opposition in one instant and supporting the Government in the next. As the Scottish Nationalist Party, Charles Haughey’s 1989 government, and Steve Harper’s Conservatives have proven, the minority party in situ can often improve its lot despite depending on the kindness of strangers.