Boundary Extension for City?

road_high

JMT2016 wrote: »

All of the time being spent on this issue which doesn't result in one extra cent coming to region or the local area affected to fix the massive issues impacting everyone.

It really doesn't' you know. It's after stirring up this horrible anti Waterford thing in Kilkenny and vice versa. I personally hate it because I love (shock horror) Waterford and its scenery and people, as I do any other part of the country. I love going down there for a drive, some different shops or a walk on the beach...
If there's issues in Ferrybank then the local authorities need their heads banging together not the emotive warfare we've witnessed (and I've probably partaken in as a natural defence mechanism!) from both sides.

road_high

zulutango wrote: »

Unnecessary? This is a very important issue for the development of the South East and the prosperity of the people living there. What's effectively happening here is Kilkenny is shooting itself in the foot.

You've lost me here...

zulutango

road_high wrote: »

You've lost me here...

Waterford City is an economic driver for the South-east. It's not a very good one at the moment, in large part due to the tug-of-war between its local authority and Kilkenny's. If you had just one local authroity (combined Kilkenny and Waterford) that would lead to a far stronger Waterford City and that would be very good for all the people in the South East. As it stands, Waterford City and the South East region are economically under-performing because of the way their local governance is structured. You have the exact same situation in Limerick where a similar tug-of-war exists. This is a far bigger issue than county identity.

Max Powers

Max Powers wrote: »

its a sensible thing to do in fairness, just like Tipperary might be better off taking over Carrick-begs admininstration, but people will pull out the relevant GAA jersey and bite of their nose to spite their face

As far as i know, Carlow Town Council (which are now absorbed into Carlow CoCo) administer Graiguecullen or parts of it. similar situation to Carrickbeg.

I suppose the irony of the whole GAA thing is that counties were originally divided by English rule. The basis against the argument seems to be GAA/parochialism. What people tend to forget also is that North and South Tipperary were separate counties (technically) for near 100 years up to 2014 and yet still played as one GAA county.

Another irony is that our continuous loyalty to the divisions have left a serious imbalance in GAA which remains today. The likes of Carlow and Leitrim will continue to struggle while Dublin will continue to thrive

Waterford should get in touch with Vladimir Putin. He's an expert when it comes to Annexing stubborn regions :pac:

road_high

zulutango wrote: »

Waterford City is an economic driver for the South-east. It's not a very good one at the moment, in large part due to the tug-of-war between its local authority and Kilkenny's. If you had just one local authroity (combined Kilkenny and Waterford) that would lead to a far stronger Waterford City and that would be very good for all the people in the South East. As it stands, Waterford City and the South East region are economically under-performing because of the way their local governance is structured. You have the exact same situation in Limerick where a similar tug-of-war exists. This is a far bigger issue than county identity.

But there's no evidence for any of what say- why would it lead to a stronger Waterford city? That area is already there, in situ. It's part of the Waterford metro area, just happens to be in a different county and jurisdiction (so what)- what evidence have you that changed the name plates will suddenly transform the area and region? It would hugely wound the s east region, as you'll be kissing goodbye to any support there after from Kilkenny for Waterford. Waterford will be isolating itself further.
I think you motioned you're from Limerick and that city wants to do something similar in co. Clare so you might forgive me for thinking you may have a ready bias for this attempt.

road_high

Deleted User wrote: »

As far as i know, Carlow Town Council (which are now absorbed into Carlow CoCo) administer Graiguecullen or parts of it. similar situation to Carrickbeg.

I suppose the irony of the whole GAA thing is that counties were originally divided by English rule. The basis against the argument seems to be GAA/parochialism. What people tend to forget also is that North and South Tipperary were separate counties (technically) for near 100 years up to 2014 and yet still played as one GAA county.

Another irony is that our continuous loyalty to the divisions have left a serious imbalance in GAA which remains today. The likes of Carlow and Leitrim will continue to struggle while Dublin will continue to thrive

Ever meet someone from Graig? There always at pains to tell you they live in Laois
Laois coco administer much of that area bar the but around the bridge which is Carlow.
I think you're far too dismissive of county loyalties, they exist, are real and aren't going away any time soon. Ask anyone around the country "where are you from"? and they'll almost always answer County Wherever.
The sensible answer to all this is for the existing counties to cooperate, not seek to lob chunks off eachother.

road_high

Deleted User wrote: »

Waterford should get in touch with Vladimir Putin. He's an expert when it comes to Annexing stubborn regions :pac:

But Crimea was Russian in the past...;)
Slieverue was never in Waterford

road_high

road_high wrote: »

Ever meet someone from Graig? There always at pains to tell you they live in Laois
Laois coco administer much of that area bar the but around the bridge which is Carlow.
I think you're far too dismissive of county loyalties, they exist, are real and aren't going away any time soon. Ask anyone around the country "where are you from"? and they'll almost always answer County Wherever.
The sensible answer to all this is for the existing counties to cooperate, not seek to lob chunks off eachother.

Oh i agree with you. If Kilkenny coco absorbed the Mullinahone and Ballingarry areas for example id still be from Tipperary let me tell you

The challenge for the likes of Waterford is to promote the amalgamation in a way that makes it clear to the individual citizens that the county they identify with wont be affected which is easier said then done. By nature we are tribalist people. For all the bs of cead mile faillte we tend to stay in cliques. Ive seen this before.

road_high

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh i agree with you. If Kilkenny coco absorbed the Mullinahone and Ballingarry areas for example id still be from Tipperary let me tell you

The challenge for the likes of Waterford is to promote the amalgamation in a way that makes it clear to the individual citizens that the county they identify with wont be affected which is easier said then done. By nature we are tribalist people. For all the bs of cead mile faillte we tend to stay in cliques. Ive seen this before.

Ya can keep them (joking)!!

The GAA has probably reinforced what you say (Waterford too, I consider them to be hurling mad, as bad as some in Kilkenny having worked with a few in the past but I enjoy the banter that brings.)
I've worked in England and to my surprise the county loyalty is big among many too (try telling someone from Yorskhire or Cornwall they're not from there...).
I worked in Wicklow along the Carlow border, (a non big GAA county as such) and county loyalty is still huge. Try tell them to "become" part of Carlow and Wexford and you'd be soon told where to go frankly...

road_high

road_high wrote: »

Ya can keep them (joking)!!

The GAA has probably reinforced what you say (Waterford too, I consider them to be hurling mad, as bad as some in Kilkenny having worked with a few in the past but I enjoy the banter that brings.)
I've worked in England and to my surprise the county loyalty is big among many too (try telling someone from Yorskhire or Cornwall they're not from there...).
I worked in Wicklow along the Carlow border, (a non big GAA county as such) and county loyalty is still huge. Try tell them to "become" part of Carlow and Wexford and you'd be soon told where to go frankly...

Lol. i wouldnt blame you even if you werent. Incidentally the county border doesnt need a sign to signify we are in KK or Tipp because ye have better quality roads. Ours are shocking.

road_high

Deleted User wrote: »

Lol. i wouldnt blame you even if you werent. Incidentally the county border doesnt need a sign to signify we are in KK or Tipp because ye have better quality roads. Ours are shocking.

I travel all over the south east and Tipp's are awful. Often Desperate surface, non existent road signs or markings. Sheer size of the county probably make its difficulty.
Wexford were bad but have improved a lot, Offaly some awful ones but usually because of the bogs it's very hard to improve them.

Squidvicious

road_high wrote: »

Ya can keep them (joking)!!

The GAA has probably reinforced what you say (Waterford too, I consider them to be hurling mad, as bad as some in Kilkenny having worked with a few in the past but I enjoy the banter that brings.)
I've worked in England and to my surprise the county loyalty is big among many too (try telling someone from Yorskhire or Cornwall they're not from there...).
I worked in Wicklow along the Carlow border, (a non big GAA county as such) and county loyalty is still huge. Try tell them to "become" part of Carlow and Wexford and you'd be soon told where to go frankly...

Alot of people from Waterford on this thread downplay the county thing, but it does matter to many, probably most of us. I know that it can't be the only deciding factor but it really grates the way that those of us who want to be able to remain in Kilkenny are sneered at. I reckon most people in the country are proud of the county that they're from(surprisingly enough as regards one or two counties!!). We're entitled to say that we want to remain as Kilkenny people. As I say, it's not the only factor but it deserves consideration and a little respect.

road_high

Deleted User wrote: »

Lol. i wouldnt blame you even if you werent. Incidentally the county border doesnt need a sign to signify we are in KK or Tipp because ye have better quality roads. Ours are shocking.

Squidvicious wrote: »

Alot of people from Waterford on this thread downplay the county thing, but it does matter to many, probably most of us. I know that it can't be the only deciding factor but it really grates the way that those of us who want to be able to remain in Kilkenny are sneered at. I reckon most people in the country are proud of the county that they're from. We're entitled to say that we want to remain as Kilkenny people. As I say, it's not the only factor but it deserves consideration and a little respect.

Absolutely. And very hypocritical as they are all clearly passionately pro Waterford and I respect that. What I dont respect is the attempt to ride over people like me and dismiss us out of hand.
FF as usual with their pulse on the national mood have stated very clearly they are against any moves to change county boundaries- it's divisive, regressive and exactly what we don't need.
I've read some of the stuff on FB and it's truly awful triumphant stuff bordering on offensive. Along the lines of "we are superior and will take you over"- stuff I would expect from Northern Unionists. I showed it to a few non Kilkenny work colleagues and they were quite taken aback. That's not what this country is about.
I actually pity some Waterford people if they genuinely think this is going to boost where they live and some how enrich their existences. Because it would not make a joy of difference to them or benefit them in any way.

Max Powers

road_high wrote: »

Absolutely. And very hypocritical as they are all clearly passionately pro Waterford and I respect that. What I dont respect is the attempt to ride over people like me and dismiss us out of hand.
FF as usual with their pulse on the national mood have stated very clearly they are against any moves to change county boundaries- it's divisive, regressive and exactly what we don't need.
I've read some of the stuff on FB and it's truly awful triumphant stuff bordering on offensive. Along the lines of "we are superior and will take you over"- stuff I would expect from Northern Unionists. I showed it to a few non Kilkenny work colleagues and they were quite taken aback. That's not what this country is about.
I actually pity some Waterford people if they genuinely think this is going to boost where they live and some how enrich their existences. Because it would not make a joy of difference to them or benefit them in any way.

To be fair, you read some probably idiotic comments, this is the internet, they're everywhere, especially on likes of Facebook I'd imagine.

road_high

Max Powers wrote: »

To be fair, you read some probably idiotic comments, this is the internet, they're everywhere, especially on likes of Facebook I'd imagine.

This is true but they was a bit of a pattern going on! Take your point though. Pinch of salt needed!

zulutango

road_high wrote:

But there's no evidence for any of what say- why would it lead to a stronger Waterford city? That area is already there, in situ. It's part of the Waterford metro area, just happens to be in a different county and jurisdiction (so what)- what evidence have you that changed the name plates will suddenly transform the area and region? It would hugely wound the s east region, as you'll be kissing goodbye to any support there after from Kilkenny for Waterford. Waterford will be isolating itself further. I think you motioned you're from Limerick and that city wants to do something similar in co. Clare so you might forgive me for thinking you may have a ready bias for this attempt.

I'm from the border of Limerick and Clare. I've no allegiance to one or the other. I think counties Clare and Limerick should be amalgamated as it would lead to a very strong region. I don't care what it's called.

I'm on my Christmas party so don't have time to go into your post in detail but will get back to you tomorrow or over Christmas.

road_high

zulutango wrote: »

I'm from the border of Limerick and Clare. I've no allegiance to one or the other. I think counties Clare and Limerick should be amalgamated as it would lead to a very strong region. I don't care what it's called.

I'm on my Christmas party so don't have time to go into your post in detail but will get back to you tomorrow or over Christmas.

I wouldn't oppose similar here but I'd imagine many would. And knowing Clare and have relations there they're fiercely county proud and loyal. I can't see them buying into that proposal.

Johnboy1951

road_high wrote: »

I wouldn't oppose similar here but I'd imagine many would. And knowing Clare and have relations there they're fiercely county proud and loyal. I can't see them buying into that proposal.

The Clare/Limerick border change has been a 'hot potato' even longer than the Waterford/Kilkenny one, and no sign of a move there either.

road_high

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

The Clare/Limerick border change has been a 'hot potato' even longer than the Waterford/Kilkenny one, and no sign of a move there either.

It's true. Dare I say even more vehement than Waterford Kilkenny too. This tells me cooperation is what's needed not divide and conquer in such areas.

zulutango

road_high wrote:

I wouldn't oppose similar here but I'd imagine many would. And knowing Clare and have relations there they're fiercely county proud and loyal. I can't see them buying into that proposal.

And that's the problem. A loyalty to the county is getting the way of their general well being. Same as in the South-east.

road_high

zulutango wrote: »

And that's the problem. A loyalty to the county is getting the way of their general well being. Same as in the South-east.

Well unless you want to abolish all counties then it'll be always so. Have to admit I don't wake up in cold sweats at night worrying about the south east region, and I doubt anyone else does either! - we have a huge tendency to moan down here, we have huge advantages that people seem to forget about. We are doing better than the midlands, north west and the north east regions for example.
I thought the Capital of culture bid was an example of what can be done together...potentially setting a match to potential like that going forward is folly in my eyes.

Max Powers

road_high wrote: »

Well unless you want to abolish all counties then it'll be always so. Have to admit I don't wake up in cold sweats at night worrying about the south east region, and I doubt anyone else does either! - we have a huge tendency to moan down here, we have huge advantages that people seem to forget about. We are doing better than the midlands, north west and the north east regions for example.
I thought the Capital of culture bid was an example of what can be done together...potentially setting a match to potential like that going forward is folly in my eyes.

Cooperation is a two way street and there are numerous examples of kk and wex doing their best to undermine Waterford, taking some of its resources etc.Just look at what Hogan and Labour fella from wexford did.there is a long history of Waterford being undermined and attacked by some of its neighbours.
We all want cooperation, let's see some of our neighbours get behind Waterford in its attempts to challenge limerick and Galway for resources, surely supporting the regions largest urban centre, the regional capital with a bigger population will help all those in area.

Suryavarman

Max Powers wrote: »

To be fair, you read some probably idiotic comments, this is the internet, they're everywhere, especially on likes of Facebook I'd imagine.

It could be worse. They'd could be as bad as comments printed in a Kilkenny newspaper.

road_high

Suryavarman wrote: »

It could be worse. They'd could be as bad as comments printed in a Kilkenny newspaper.

Not sure which comments exactly but they never wanted or asked for the boundary review to take place. So naturally they're going to say and do everything to prevent it. If you take an aggressive and combative approach as Waterford have, don't expect to be treated with kindness and reverence back.

Road-Hog

road_high wrote: »

Not sure which comments exactly but they never wanted or asked for the boundary review to take place. So naturally they're going to say and do everything to prevent it. If you take an aggressive and combative approach as Waterford have, don't expect to be treated with kindness and reverence back.

'Aggressive and combative' suggests a military approach....there is after all a procedure in local government to facilitate 'boundary extensions'.....I think you should tone down your language....'combative and aggressive' is more suitable to Putin and the take over of Crimea an area of approx 27,000 sq Kms.

road_high

Road-Hog wrote: »

'Aggressive and combative' suggests a military approach....there is after all a procedure in local government to facilitate 'boundary extensions'.....I think you should tone down your language....'combative and aggressive' is more suitable to Putin and the take over of Crimea an area of approx 27,000 sq Kms.

Hardly...there may be a "mechanism" (I'd call it political opourtunisbm) but that doesn't mean you need to over ride and ignore the potentially affected one. Nor does it make it right. That's pretty aggressive to me.
I never made the Crimea analogy, you did so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up ? It was mentioned earlier in the thread as a joke by someone else. We're all Irish men and women so let's sit down like adults and discuss the issues. Not using political opportune (ala P Coffey) and seizing on it like Waterford city council tried to do. Enda Kenny seems to love this dimwit and hates John Paul Phelan- weak leaders always surround themselves with yes men....
Anyhow FF have basically shot down the potential review as their policy is not to alter county boundaries.

Deiseen

road_high wrote: »

Hardly...there may be a "mechanism" (I'd call it political opourtunisbm) but that doesn't mean you need to over ride and ignore the potentially affected one. Nor does it make it right. That's pretty aggressive to me.
I never made the Crimea analogy, you did so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up ? It was mentioned earlier in the thread as a joke by someone else. We're all Irish men and women so let's sit down like adults and discuss the issues. Not using political opportune (ala P Coffey) and seizing on it like Waterford city council tried to do. Enda Kenny seems to love this dimwit and hates John Paul Phelan- weak leaders always surround themselves with yes men....
Anyhow FF have basically shot down the potential review as their policy is not to alter county boundaries.

Alan Kelly, Labour TD from Tipperary, set this up to look at the borders in a number of areas in Ireland, not just Waterford.

So can you tell me, what have Waterford done to justify this label of "aggressors" that you keep going on about?

fricatus

Interesting article in the Irish Times today (not able to post link, but should be easy to find) about Simon Coveney's plan to focus growth on the four largest cities outside Dublin, plus somewhere in the midlands.

In relation to Waterford, he's saying that it's future growth can be more balanced on both sides of the river, which sounds to me like a nod in favour of a boundary extension.

road_high

Deiseen wrote: »

Alan Kelly, Labour TD from Tipperary, set this up to look at the borders in a number of areas in Ireland, not just Waterford.

So can you tell me, what have Waterford done to justify this label of "aggressors" that you keep going on about?

If you read the submission by WCC. Coffey was Junior Minister in the dept, it was driven by him as some kind of sad project to get the elected. After he realised he'd done nothing for the past 5 years.

road_high

Deiseen wrote: »

Alan Kelly, Labour TD from Tipperary, set this up to look at the borders in a number of areas in Ireland, not just Waterford.

So can you tell me, what have Waterford done to justify this label of "aggressors" that you keep going on about?

If you read the submission by WCC. It's basically a bashing exercise. Basically Coffey was Junior Minister in the dept, it was driven by him as some kind of sad project to get the elected. After he realised he'd done nothing for the past 5 years.

road_high

fricatus wrote: »

Interesting article in the Irish Times today (not able to post link, but should be easy to find) about Simon Coveney's plan to focus growth on the four largest cities outside Dublin, plus somewhere in the midlands.

In relation to Waterford, he's saying that it's future growth can be more balanced on both sides of the river, which sounds to me like a nod in favour of a boundary extension.

Simon Coveney is one td in the house and thankfully only one opinion- growth can take place on all sides of the river, it doesn't need to have an imaginary line moved to achieve that. I never understood the obsession, lots of cities all over the planet are on one side of rivers, are beside the sea etc (you don't hear calls to reclaim land into the sea to have a more balance shaped city). There's also zero space constraints on the other side, but yet you get this bizzare fixation with the Kilkenny side of the river.

Deiseen

road_high wrote: »

If you read the submission by WCC. It's basically a bashing exercise. Basically a lot Coffey was Junior Minister in the dept, it was driven by him as some kind of sad project to get the elected. After he realised he'd done nothing for the past 5 years.

So WCC made a SUBMISSION to the commission based on their opinion of the situation? My god, how aggressive and Cromwellian of them....

The boundary commission for Waterford/South Kilkenny would have been set up regardless of Coffey. I'm sure he pushed for the case of it, likewise the Kilkenny TD's would have lobbyed that it wasn't needed. But at the end of the day Alan Kelly went with it because he saw some merit in it, as does Coveney.

Johnboy1951

road_high wrote: »

Simon Coveney is one td in the house and thankfully only one opinion- growth can take place on all sides of the river, it doesn't need to have an imaginary line moved to achieve that. I never understood the obsession, lots of cities all over the planet are on one side of rivers, are beside the sea etc (you don't hear calls to reclaim land into the sea to have a more balance shaped city). There's also zero space constraints on the other side, but yet you get this bizzare fixation with the Kilkenny side of the river.

I cannot think of one off-hand, but accept there are some, but they would be a very small percentage of all cities on rivers.

road_high

Deiseen wrote: »

So WCC made a SUBMISSION to the commission based on their opinion of the situation? My god, how aggressive and Cromwellian of them....

The boundary commission for Waterford/South Kilkenny would have been set up regardless of Coffey. I'm sure he pushed for the case of it, likewise the Kilkenny TD's would have lobbyed that it wasn't needed. But at the end of the day Alan Kelly went with it because he saw some merit in it, as does Coveney.

How naive. He went with it because they're buddies. This is Irish politics we are talking about. This being typical of the sliveenery that goes on.
There was a review only ten years ago, yet here we are again with another to blow taxpayers money on something that ain't going to happen. If Coffey wasn't there there'd no review whatsoever.

road_high

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I cannot think of one off-hand, but accept there are some, but they would be a very small percentage of all cities on rivers.

Waterford can Develop on all sides of the river. County bounds don't need changing to achieve this. Shared local authorities occur in cities all over the world.

Squidvicious

fricatus wrote: »

Interesting article in the Irish Times today (not able to post link, but should be easy to find) about Simon Coveney's plan to focus growth on the four largest cities outside Dublin, plus somewhere in the midlands.

In relation to Waterford, he's saying that it's future growth can be more balanced on both sides of the river, which sounds to me like a nod in favour of a boundary extension.

I suppose that the question is what Coveney proposes doing to achieve this for Waterford. Merely proposing it will do nothing. Hint for Mr. Coveney :ensure that UHW is properly resourced and establish a university in Waterford. I am highly sceptical that a Cork TD will take these steps.

Johnboy1951

Originally Posted by road_high 
Simon Coveney is one td in the house and thankfully only one opinion- growth can take place on all sides of the river, it doesn't need to have an imaginary line moved to achieve that. I never understood the obsession, lots of cities all over the planet are on one side of rivers, are beside the sea etc (you don't hear calls to reclaim land into the sea to have a more balance shaped city). There's also zero space constraints on the other side, but yet you get this bizzare fixation with the Kilkenny side of the river.

Originally Posted by Johnboy1951 
I cannot think of one off-hand, but accept there are some, but they would be a very small percentage of all cities on rivers.

road_high wrote: »

Waterford can Develop on all sides of the river. County bounds don't need changing to achieve this. Shared local authorities occur in cities all over the world.

I commented on your statement

lots of cities all over the planet are on one side of rivers,

not on the administration or on county boundaries.

road_high

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I cannot think of one off-hand, but accept there are some, but they would be a very small percentage of all cities on rivers.

Squidvicious wrote: »

I suppose that the question is what Coveney proposes doing to achieve this for Waterford. Merely proposing it will do nothing. Hint for Mr. Coveney :ensure that UHW is properly resourced and establish a university in Waterford. I am highly sceptical that a Cork TD will take these steps.

I read the article. The main body referred to cork- this is what this "plan" is all about. This is all Coveney is interested in, cork and staying in in power.
There might be a few crumbs for the south east...
Cork don't want a strong Waterford as they are not particularly well located geographically so they need part of the s east to justify a lot of the state investment it gets. Hospital, airport and university for example.
By the time m his shopping list for cork is completed there'll be zilch for anyone else- light rail for cork city for example. Funny how he can rattle off specific things for cork but when Waterford came up there was nothing of substance just the usual buzzwords like "potential growth and jobs".

azimuth17

I have been following these posts out of interest and in particular those by Road High. I cannot recall a review of the city boundary 10 years ago or the establishment of a boundary commission to consider that issue?

road_high

azimuth17 wrote: »

I have been following these posts out of interest and in particular those by Road High. I cannot recall a review of the city boundary 10 years ago or the establishment of a boundary commission to consider that issue?

There was one about ten years ago. Not sure if it took the same format but it did happen.

azimuth17

I am pretty certain you are not right Road High. Are you confusing an electoral boundary commission with the present Boundary Commission?

Jamie2k9

Minister Simon Coveney says Waterford can double its population from its current level of 47,000 as part of a balanced future growth of the city on both sides of the river Suir.

Waterford is one of a number of Regional cities to be earmarked for expansion over the next 25 years.

The Irish Times reports that the new national planning framework will attempt to ensure that Waterford along with Cork, Limerick and Galway, see greater population growth, more jobs and increased investment in transport links.

Simon Coveney says the population of Ireland will likely increase by one million by 2040
and three-quarters of that growth should take place outside Dublin.

Waterford he says could become a much more balanced city with potentially thousands of houses with job opportunities but it needs a significant increase in population.

http://www.wlrfm.com/news/local/93876-waterford-earmarked-for-expansion-in-government-plan.html


I still don't see them giving it the go ahead especially if FF will vote against it. Would require SF to support the Gov and I don't see them been in favor either.

Jamie2k9

road_high wrote: »

Waterford can Develop on all sides of the river. County bounds don't need changing to achieve this. Shared local authorities occur in cities all over the world.

While I agree I really cannot see these two working together unless they were started from scratch. If anything people not from either county would be better in charge.

---

IT link
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/cities-to-be-focus-of-growth-under-simon-coveney-plan-1.2917908

road_high

azimuth17 wrote: »

I have been following these posts out of interest and in particular those by Road High. I cannot recall a review of the city boundary 10 years ago or the establishment of a boundary commission to consider that issue?

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

http://www.wlrfm.com/news/local/93876-waterford-earmarked-for-expansion-in-government-plan.html


I still don't see them giving it the go ahead especially if FF will vote against it. Would require SF to support the Gov and I don't see them been in favor either.

I've seen the local SF TD (Funchion?) attack FG over this saying it's hypocritical when they've abandoned the 6 counties in NI in relation to Brexit..Whether people agree or not I guess is their own perspective...so I can't imagine they'd be in favour of change as the "32 counties" have been their mantra since as long as I can remember.
Edit; I think you're referring to the Coveney thing there...

azimuth17

: Original post from Road High How naive. He went with it because they're buddies. This is Irish politics we are talking about. This being typical of the sliveenery that goes on.
There was a review only ten years ago, yet here we are again with another to blow taxpayers money on something that ain't going to happen. If Coffey wasn't there there'd no review whatsoever.

Can I take it we agree that there was no boundary review ten years ago?

road_high

azimuth17 wrote: »

: Original post from Road High How naive. He went with it because they're buddies. This is Irish politics we are talking about. This being typical of the sliveenery that goes on.
There was a review only ten years ago, yet here we are again with another to blow taxpayers money on something that ain't going to happen. If Coffey wasn't there there'd no review whatsoever.

Can I take it we agree that there was no boundary review ten years ago?

you've heard of google? It could have been 2005/6, it was discussed at length here back then too.

azimuth17

@Road High. I have indeed heard of Google. I am certain there was no boundary application 10 years ago. If there was, would you do me the kindness of posting the appropriate link as you seem so certain to the contrary. there was talk of such a thing indeed when Martin Cullen was Minister for Environment but no application to set up a commission was made as far as I can recall. So if you have access to information as to the setting up of a commission 10 years agp, I would very much like to see it, thanks.

road_high

azimuth17 wrote: »

@Road High. I have indeed heard of Google. I am certain there was no boundary application 10 years ago. If there was, would you do me the kindness of posting the appropriate link as you seem so certain to the contrary. there was talk of such a thing indeed when Martin Cullen was Minister for Environment but no application to set up a commission was made as far as I can recall. So if you have access to information as to the setting up of a commission 10 years agp, I would very much like to see it, thanks.

As I said it may have taken a different format but there was a review or something similar. Seem to recall FF called a halt because their policy was to work within and across existing county boundaries.

Deiseen

road_high wrote: »

As I said it may have taken a different format but there was a review or something similar. Seem to recall FF called a halt because their policy was to work within and across existing county boundaries.

So in other words, your spouting crap.