westtip wrote: » For Lord Glentoran, re your comments recently on press releases. They work with coverage like this.
end of the road wrote: » simply requesting it would in all likely hood not have been enough, they would have had to offer an incentive for the provider to spend the money deviating the pipe from their original plan.
Lord Glentoran wrote: » I’ve written press releases. Local papers love them because they fill space that they don’t have to themselves.
serfboard wrote: » Indeed that is the case where a pipeline exists, but there is a little more to it than that in the case of Tuam. The original plan for the Gas pipeline was for it to bypass Tuam and not to come into the town at all. IIRC, Valeo asked for a diversion, so that the Gas pipeline would actually be brought into the town to supply their factory.
L1011 wrote: » There was no Longford pipeline at all, so realistically there is no difference. Valeo are not magic; anyone that will consume lots of gas will get a pipeline to them.
Muckyboots wrote: » Just to reference this back to the WRC, the point is that if a substantial FDI provider seeks specific infrastructure they tend to receive it. None of FDIs on the WRC have sought rail infrastructure, passenger or frieght. They did request cycling infrastructure and it was delivered.
end of the road wrote: » they don't get it because they simply request it however.
Isambard wrote: » yes everything went by rail pre motor vehicle.
serfboard wrote: » Of course Valeo are not magic. Any large multinational making the same request would have fit the bill. Some people seem to be assuming that I am suggesting that only Valeo could have done it. I did not, and I am not. But, does a large multinational automatically get a pipeline diverted to them simply by being a large multinational? No, they do not. They have to request it first. And if a large multinational, called, for example, Valeo, does not request a gas pipeline diversion, then it will not be done. Therefore, if Valeo had not requested it, it would not have happened.
L1011 wrote: » Any large potential gas consumer gets connected, multinational or not
intellectual dosser wrote: » https://www.con-telegraph.ie/2020/05/09/mayo-td-calls-for-fast-tracking-of-rural-infrastructure-in-recovery-drive/ Sinn Fein re-iterating their desire for the WRC completion. They won the most seats in the last election yet the Government most likely to form will almost certainly favour a greenway.
marno21 wrote: » Sinn Fein will be in favour of it until they have to sit down with civil servants who teach them the lesson of what money is and how it works. You can't be in favour of everything in a country with large debt burden, a barely balanced budget (pre-covid) and long term tax sustainability questions. It's very easy to be pro-WRC with no Government experience hurling from the ditch.
intellectual dosser wrote: » Sinn Fein re-iterating their desire for the WRC completion. They won the most seats in the last election
Hotblack Desiato wrote: » They won the second largest number of seats in the last election. The spin must really be working!
westtip wrote: » SF/WOT
Lord Glentoran wrote: » Very “informative”.
westtip wrote: » Ah sure LG where has your sense of humour gone, thought you might pick up on the "WOT spokesperson" mind you from what I recall he truly would be the SF/WOT spokesperson. The whole thing is safe as houses at this stage to be in the PFG to ensure nothing happens.
Sligo eye wrote: » A lot of bang but no impact.
donvito99 wrote: » A bit like Sinn Fein
end of the road wrote: » a substantial amount of the electorate would disagree with you.
Sligo eye wrote: » Perhaps 30 years ago there would be some point in using the “SF” bogey man thing as a weapon against whatever. At this stage (and I’m speaking as someone who is not a SF supporter) relying on a “oh but SF” attack is a bit like trying to fire a gun loaded with paper bullets. A lot of bang but no impact.
westtip wrote: » Ah now Shligo don't ya know da history of this thread and the spoofing around on SF/WOT, not suggesting SF is the bogey man but they are the only party that seems to have a fixation with this West on Track stuff, sure even the Greens dropped the WRC from their manifesto as a named project in both 2016 manifesto and the more recent one in January. Did you not know that, the only party that listed the WRC in their election manifesto was SF, therefore SF/WOT is perfectly legitimate to use in that context, and when you consider it is only SF that try and drive the WOT agenda with public meetings about spoof money from Europe, I am afraid Shligo Aye, the association of SF/WOT is perfectly explainable.
Sligo eye wrote: » I’m sure you are trying to make a point there with the funny spellings etc but what that point is even St Brendan himself the patron saint of Commuting and Transport would struggle to understand what it is.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
