"Green" policies are destroying this country

Oooh Charlie, that Mayo anecdote cuts deep (which definatelty happened and you didn't make up for the purposes of the thread). Never 'came back' so to speak.

And since we're getting spicy, you've given a poor account of yourself on this thread and have an extremely limited grasp on what we're talking about. You want some sauce for that chip?

You're getting closer to a solution in your last paragraph. And various iterations of such an idea with different financing models have been explored. Villages and smaller provincial towns stand to gain big time from such an approach.

The chape site brigade still cling to the chape site though.

D) Pricing of water

The Water Framework Directive contemplates water pricing as an economic instrument of environmental protection, just as if an eco-tax was assessed on the supply of water to consumers. In doing so, it does not require a strict internalisation of external environmental costs linked to the use of water, but instead leaves a margin of discretion to the Member States by providing that they “take account of the principle of recovery of the costs of water services” (Article 9(1)). This implies a “user-pays” principle, and thus an economic instrument and, for determining the appropriate level of pricing

You're not a very good poster Charlie. And you're one track with a severe chip on your shoulder.

I never pretend to have all the answers, but you're not even attempting to provide anything. You believe in the power of folding your arms, stamping your feet and shouting no, and hope someone else will pick up the tap. It's the stance and the politics of a toddler I'm afraid to say.

"The use of economic instruments by Member States may be appropriate as part of a programme of measures. The principle of recovery of the costs of water services, including environmental and resource costs associated with damage or negative impact on the aquatic environment should be taken into account in accordance with, in particular, the polluter-pays principle."

Directly from the judgement. You're going way off piste here and down some sort of odd rabbit hole.

It's really simple, I advocate the polluter pays principal, you advocate someone else picks up the tab. You're not mature, but then again you're not alone.

Water services and the environmental and infrastructure costs derived from the the use of water (and in particular negative environmental outcomes) should be borne by the individuals who use them. Really simple stance.

"Excess use charges are intended to promote conservation and personal responsibility for water use and to help Ireland meet the requirements of the Water Framework Directive."

https://www.water.ie/help/domestic-account/household-conservation-charge/

*Whistles in being right*

Repeat after me: 'My name is Charlie and I'm wrong on the internet again'

P.S, don't even bother with using words like bully-boy when you're using Intimidatory language like 'ass kickings'. I'm not a wallflower but it makes you look silly and a bit unhinged.

Agreed. A lot of people have big talk about 'community' in this country, but the reality is actually quite different.

High fences and hedges in one off archepeligos away from everyone else, local villages ignored in favour of the shop to the nearest retail park. No investment in the villages because there is next to no foot traffic or people living in them.

It's actually very sad and it could all be very different with a bit of imagination, planning and buy-in.

Some people on rager here have tried to paint me (and others) as 'anti-rural', couldn't be further from the truth.

I grew up in a village with the surrounds blighted by one-offs. Here's the reality today: a couple of pubs, a chipper, a closed post office (wonder why?) a random tat shop that hasn't changed since the 90s, a closed cafe (someone made a decent go at opening one fair play, but there is no foot traffic), a phone repair shop and a Spar that just about stays open - and that's about it besides the over-store and general dereliction. Place has a catchment population of about 4000 I'd say. Sad.

The shopping gets done in the nearest town of scale about 20km away. The Spar is for fags and lotto tickets by and large. Perhaps the village could sustain a reasonable-sized Supervalu or something, but not with the way people live sitting in their cars and driving everywhere. If you're 5-6k from the village and 14k from the town, and the choice is the Aldi in the town or the sh*tty spar, 9 out of 10 times people are making the run to the Aldi. These are consequences of dispersed development every single day. No one dropping into a cafe in the village, no stop and chats, just a village that once was and people passing through.

The recycling? Cmon, people recycle in urban areas.

It's improved immeasurably in recent decades, but I'm sorry to say a lot of people in rural areas (before people fly off the handle a reminder I grew up rural) were pigs for fly-tipping back in the day. Roads used to be strewn with rubbish, and you can't blame the denizens of Ballybough or the Northside of Cork for that. Urban Ireland has it's problems, but they are different in character.

This whole heated exchange started with the reasonable suggestion that urban generated one-offs aren't sustainable anymore, and I'll hold that the evidence presented on this thread on a number of fronts backs that up firmly. And successive governments and the civil service are doing absolutely the right thing by rural Ireland and the country generally in phasing it out where possible as a phenomenon.

Predictably, it's descended into some sort of ethno conflict where folk who stand to gain as individuals from one-off developments try to frame it as some sort of Croats vs Bosnian Serbs conflict. It's faintly ridiculous.

You could. West Dublin boom-time development, in particular, wasn't great. But there's been catch up and there's not a suburb of Dublin without an Aldi or Lidl or Dunnes (sometimes all three with amenities around) within a couple of kilometers shot at the worst at this stage, and the amount of car journeys generated in rural Ireland far outstrips what happens in Dublin. The scale of the problem is completely different in rural Ireland it's not even close.

I'd just ask people not to delude themselves that the individual choices (and demands made to the political system) in rural Ireland don't have negative outcomes for the others at large and the economic prospects of the community they say they care so much about.

Couldn't give a rattlers about holiday homes. Let's not pretend that many rural Irish landowners weren't in on that boondoggle looking for a quick buck back in the boom times. We play all these games together. Tax 'em and get them back into usage. And sorry, one-offs are a problem.

You're overegging the pudding on recycling here. People in cities recycle, if you don't it wont be long before management of the complex will be along to have a word. You're gainsaying for no reason.

Nobody wants to bulldoze anything or said anything about bulldozing. Give over.