Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

***ALL THINGS IRISH WATER/WATER CHARGE RELATED POST HERE***

Options
1327328329330331333»

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    I wonder if many people will sell their PPS numbers for 100 euro?

    I can't imagine anyone would go to the trouble & not!


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,858 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Ive said a few times that I support a single water provision entity.

    I also support the charging all users for water usage

    My personal choice would have been a national statutory agency (quango) like the NRA for example.
    I'm not appalled by its semi state status, I can see the logic, its just a preference.

    I'm not fond of the leadership, but I don't know anyone better for the roles...... Wasn't happy with the lack of more transparent directorial recruitment mind

    however I still support the principle of IW.
    I think long term its best for Ireland.... Once its not killed in its embryonic state that is.


    But sure the NRA itself could have been used. A load of civil engineering and project management experience that did a good job previously and currently isnt building any roads. The County Councils are working to a service level agreement with IW which the NRA could have managed just as well, as they currently do for national road network maintenance, and any charges could have been levied at Council level similar to commercial rates or NPPR.

    However none of that logic was employed, IW is a mess, time to abolish and go back to first principles before more good money is p155ed away after bad.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭Curly Judge


    Cuttlefish wrote: »
    Yet we can write off €100m debt for Siteserv?

    If you had a company you could have negotiated a deal for a 99 million writedown and the powers that be would have been only too delighted to accept and save the exchequer a million quid.
    The only reason you should resent DOBs bid is if he used some undue influence to prevent others from bidding in competition with him.
    If you have that evidence you should present it.
    If not...well...


  • Registered Users Posts: 759 ✭✭✭twowheelsgood


    and buying the election with short term bribes or tax cuts is unlikely to work in the way it used to, as people are at last waking up to the reality of the falseness of the old system
    I suspect this will prove to be more aspiration than expectation. I see no evidence that the electorate can no longer be bought. But we could soon find out as we are (unfortunately) quite likely to have governments depending on independents in the next few years. We will then see if the days of the Jackie Healy-Rae’s of this country really are done.

    And I also doubt your more substantive point about any great public demand for higher standards from our public representatives. The enthusiasm for such lofty standards seems to come with austere times and depart the same way. Can you cite a single TD who was punished by the electorate for being unethical (as opposed to thrashing the economy)?
    and the marches of recent weeks are a clear demonstration of that awareness.
    Most of the marchers I think would disagree with your thesis that we should change the status quo in relation to water provision.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!


    MOD

    Just coming up on 10k posts which is when the hamsters start twitching.

    I'll transfer the last few posts to a new thread and we can continue, on the phone so gimmie a few minutes :)


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 31,152 ✭✭✭✭KERSPLAT!




This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement