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

The ESB And Eirgrid can go f*ck themselves - Merge

Options
24567…26

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    MungBean
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,915 ✭✭✭MungBean


    Strange reaction from some people here.

    If that was my land and those bastards came along and told me they would be bulldozin through it to stick up some pylons I wouldnt be too fcukin pleased. Nor would I open the gates and tell them to destroy what they like.


  • Options
    #33
    kraggy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,414 ✭✭✭kraggy


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    Property rights are not absolute. Try telling the government you're not going to pay them anymore taxes and you'd be in the slammer pretty quick.



    Do you think someone should be able to buy Newgrange and demolish it?

    Or buy a strip of land which encircles a town or village and insist nobody crosses it or build a bridge over it or road across it?



    She would have rights to civil action against property destruction I'm fairly sure.

    Bullsiht example.

    She is not the one making a move on something that isn't hers. They are moving on her.

    She was just living there minding her own business and they decided to move on HER.

    If it's a complusory purchase order, then she'll have to let them it and that's that. But your example has got nothing to do with this case.


  • Options
    #34
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,352 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    longhalloween wrote: »
    Hold on now, so does that mean the ESB can roll up to anyones house, say 'sorry luv we have to dig up your garden and stick a pylon in' and that's legal?
    No. First off, they are going to plan the route, which on balance minimises cost, disruption and environmental effect. So when its a choice between a housing estate and open fields, its likely to go in the open fields. Forest -v- open fields, well, through the open fields again. Short route through forest -v- long route through fields, well they're going to weigh that up.

    Then they need planning permission - if its a major line, they also need to do an Environmental Impact Statement. That can be appealed to An Bord Pleanála (on planning or point of law) and then to the courts (point of law only). That could take 3 months - 2 years.
    Is she going to be compensated for the destruction of her property?
    It seems its quite lucrative. Lump sum up front + annual payment. It seems the lump sum can work out to be worth more than the land (but you get to keep the land). http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74594029&postcount=122


  • Options
    #35
    up for anything
    Registered Users Posts: 5,776 ✭✭✭up for anything


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    Really? I think you'd find yourself in an insignificant minority on that issue.

    Thank goodness.

    Gee whiz, do I feel small? No. :cool:


  • Options
    #36
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    kraggy wrote: »
    If it's a complusory purchase order, then she'll have to let them it and that's that. But your example has got nothing to do with this case.

    I was merely using it to show how property rights are not absolute.

    I agree with you that she was minding her own business but if there is such a thing as being reasonable and she is living in a country which will actively uphold her property rights the vast majority of the time.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    Property and accommodation have a 4 0r 5 page thread on this.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=2056383068

    Much the same points are being hashed out over there.

    Fact of the matter is that the woman is going to jail for contempt of court. She defied a court order and is going to jail for that reason. Simples. And good enough for the daft old biddy.


  • Options
    #38
    Micky Dolenz
    Registered Users Posts: 44,080 ✭✭✭✭Micky Dolenz


    biko wrote: »
    Old lady, check
    Big company, check
    Angry people, check

    Big company man says that ESB/Eirgrid had offered to compensate Ms Treacy and to plant new trees to replace any that might get damaged. He said it was not possible to place the wires underground.

    Would the judge not send her to prison but acquit her any landowning Tom, Dick, Harry and so-called Irish Freemen would soon use this to piss off the government at any turn.

    If this was a 30 year old man instead of a 65 year old woman would everyone scream blue murder? I don't think so.

    It isn't a sexism or ageism issue. It's a land right issue.

    There is also a difference between impossible and inconvenient.

    We often have no room in our prisons for criminals but this person gets an indefinite sentence. Wheres the justice there?


  • Options
    #39
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    Micky Dolenz wrote: »
    It isn't a sexism or ageism issue. It's a land right issue.

    There is also a difference between impossible and inconvenient.

    We often have no room in our prisons for criminals but this person gets an indefinite sentence. Wheres the justice there?

    What gives her the right to totally ignore and disregard a valid court order? If i decide what laws and court orders i will and will not obey does that mean i will be able to get a face book campaign going, and have loads of internet heads standing up for my rights as a obnoxious twat too?


  • Options
    #40
    Micky Dolenz
    Registered Users Posts: 44,080 ✭✭✭✭Micky Dolenz


    gatecrash wrote: »
    What gives her the right to totally ignore and disregard a valid court order? If i decide what laws and court orders i will and will not obey does that mean i will be able to get a face book campaign going, and have loads of internet heads standing up for my rights as a obnoxious twat too?

    Firstly the insults are unnecessary and just weaken any argument you may have.

    The landowner isn't opposed to having the powerlines on her land but wants them out of view.


  • Options
    #41
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    Everyone wants power and motorways but not in their backyard.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    cyrusdvirus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,752 ✭✭✭cyrusdvirus


    Micky Dolenz wrote: »
    Firstly the insults are unnecessary and just weaken any argument you may have.

    The landowner isn't opposed to having the powerlines on her land but wants them out of view.

    I insulted her in my first post on the thread, in the one you quoted I was saying that I'D be the obnoxious twat for picking and choosing what laws and orders i want to obey.

    Anyway, this is all well and good, and in-line with most internet discussions/arguments totally pointless. I have my opinion, you have yours, they are at opposite ends of the spectrum and ne'er the twain shall meet.


  • Options
    #43
    Micky Dolenz
    Registered Users Posts: 44,080 ✭✭✭✭Micky Dolenz


    biko wrote: »
    Everyone wants power and motorways but not in their backyard.

    Again, the landowner isn't opposed to her land being used. She is objecting to how it's being used.


  • Options
    #44
    ringadingding
    Registered Users Posts: 1,010 ✭✭✭ringadingding


    Get darryl karrigan on the case

    Tell em they're dreeemin


  • Options
    #45
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    gatecrash wrote: »
    What gives her the right to totally ignore and disregard a valid court order? If i decide what laws and court orders i will and will not obey does that mean i will be able to get a face book campaign going, and have loads of internet heads standing up for my rights as a obnoxious twat too?

    So once a court order is issued, it is infallible and just, beyond any doubt, and there is no possibility it might be unjust? im sure there are some court orders you might not obey, in the right circumstances.


  • Options
    #46
    blaze1
    Registered Users Posts: 1,559 ✭✭✭blaze1


    Kevin Irving wrote: »
    First of all, I don't agree that she should be sent to prison.

    However, it's madness that one person can hold up a big project over her love for trees. Also, they haven't planned to cut them down, although there is a risk that some may be damaged. They will be replaced though.

    It's all very well having principles until you don't have any electricity because the lines couldn't be replaced. ESB should cut her off, since she seems to think it's so dangerous.

    (Edit: Might be best practice, but it's not always possible to place them underground)

    I'm sure the money they wasted on bringing the women to court and greasing the judge would have at the very least paid for the ducting for the cabling.


  • Options
    #47
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,352 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    So once a court order is issued, it is infallible and just, beyond any doubt, and there is no possibility it might be unjust? im sure there are some court orders you might not obey, in the right circumstances.
    You can appeal the order, but the person in this case appears not to be doing so.


  • Options
    #48
    Tazz T
    Registered Users Posts: 3,202 ✭✭✭Tazz T


    gatecrash wrote: »
    What gives her the right to totally ignore and disregard a valid court order? If i decide what laws and court orders i will and will not obey does that mean i will be able to get a face book campaign going, and have loads of internet heads standing up for my rights as a obnoxious twat too?

    I'm stunned by the amount of people willing to 'stand up' for a laws deliberately created to bypass 'laws made to protect people and their property'. These are laws created by the establishment to get round their own laws legitimately when the need arise.

    The iron is there's a big sign outside the ESB building in Dublin, saying 'no skateboarding' on a public area. If you went to protest by putting a tent up you'd be arrested.

    Not one of you would take the same stance if it was your property or any other law that infringed on your freedom. Hypocrites the lot of you.

    We've become a country full of pussies ready to lie down and get shagged when the powers that be say so.


  • Options
    #49
    stovelid
    Closed Accounts Posts: 27,252 ✭✭✭✭stovelid


    I have some sympathy for her but I also don't like the nimby thing of holding up important projects by people who are often reaping the benefits of society (like indirectly or directly benefiting from roads or electricity) themselves but just don't want it on their manor.

    By all means replace the trees though even if elsewhere.


  • Options
    #50
    biko
    Registered Users Posts: 81,223 ✭✭✭✭biko


    Micky Dolenz wrote: »
    Again, the landowner isn't opposed to her land being used. She is objecting to how it's being used.

    Oh? I haven't read that. Maybe you can find the source?

    This is what I've read "Treacy had objected to the construction of the power line because it would mean the destruction of a substantial number of trees on her land"

    "Teresa Treacy was "emotionally attached to her 100 acres of forestry"."


  • Options
    #51
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    RoundyMooney wrote: »
    Bollocks.

    Without lifting a finger, she'd have pocketed 150k. Now she may well have to pay the legal costs, if, as she inevitably will, she keeps kicking up about what amounts to a single mast on her land, and timber clearance to facilitate the line.

    They're not knocking her flippin' house, and I'm sick of people putting a daft spinster like her, who never struggled for a bob in her life, forward as some sort of cause de celebre, with the usual would be accompanying disclaimer to the effect that if we didn't jail the bankers, we shouldn't jail her, blah blah blah.

    I vote we jail both, and keep the lights on AND the books balanced.

    The ESB v the old woman. Id say if it was a lanfill on any of the pro esb posters doorstep, or indeed the overhead line , they would likely not be so in favour, even though they are needed somewhere. Its ok when its someone else though.

    But i think its the jail sentence that annoyed people more than the order.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,352 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Tazz T wrote: »
    The iron is there's a big sign outside the ESB building in Dublin, saying 'no skateboarding' on a public area. If you went to protest by putting a tent up you'd be arrested.
    That only refers to the ESB-owned, but publicly accessible area. Would you like someone skateboarding in your garden?


  • Options
    #53
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    It'd be nice for the Indymedia heads if it was just a case of evil company throwing a helpless little old woman (incidentally she's not that old) into prison... but there is just a tad more to it. I don't like the idea of a woman my mother's age going to prison either, but... blame the law?


  • Options
    #54
    StephenHendry
    Registered Users Posts: 1,146 ✭✭✭StephenHendry


    i think most people would be pissed off with what the esb are doing, it is her land after all and if she allowed them the permission but objected to what the esb were going to do on her land, then couldn't a compromise have been found but instead its come to this, ridiculous. i know you're shagged if you go against a court order but couldn't it have been sorted before it got to this stage


  • Options
    #55
    joseph brand
    Registered Users Posts: 4,537 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    RoundyMooney wrote: »
    Bollocks.

    Without lifting a finger, she'd have pocketed 150k. Now she may well have to pay the legal costs, if, as she inevitably will, she keeps kicking up about what amounts to a single mast on her land, and timber clearance to facilitate the line.

    They're not knocking her flippin' house, and I'm sick of people putting a daft spinster like her, who never struggled for a bob in her life, forward as some sort of cause de celebre, with the usual would be accompanying disclaimer to the effect that if we didn't jail the bankers, we shouldn't jail her, blah blah blah.

    I vote we jail both, and keep the lights on AND the books balanced.

    Hear Hear!
    I just wish I was in a position to have the ESB 'ask' me for my permission to put a mast somewhere amongst my acres upon acres of land. But Alas, I have a 3 bed semi and a mini garden. Ye wouldn't fit a pylon in my garden.
    She's probably minted, and a lonely woman who will have lots of company in jail. Hence her comment about prison not worrying her.
    She'll be fine, it's not Guantanamo.


  • Options
    #56
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    StephenHendry wrote: »
    couldn't it have been sorted before it got to this stage
    Probably.

    But she doesn't come across as the most rational person. I imagine her terms were - "Go stick them somewhere else".

    The underground argument is a misnomer. You still have to dig up the ground and it's a much more expensive way to run cabling.

    It's the same kind of whinging that the hippies did when they were constructing the N11. A few trees being chopped down, inconsequential to the overall area.

    As said above, she'll be amply compensated (and she gets yearly rent afaik), so it's a whinge about some bloody trees. She could plant twice as many with the money she'll get.


  • Options
    #57
    Tazz T
    Registered Users Posts: 3,202 ✭✭✭Tazz T


    Victor wrote: »
    That only refers to the ESB-owned, but publicly accessible area. Would you like someone skateboarding in your garden?

    Have you ever tried skateboarding in a garden?

    But yes, if I had a choice between letting a horde of overpaid ESB workers destroy my garden and letting someone have pleasant picnic or maybe a game of badminton, I'd choose the latter.


  • Options
    #58
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Dudess wrote: »
    I don't like the idea of a woman my mother's age going to prison either, but... blame the law?

    Or blame how it is sometimes enforced and sentenced to make examples of people for others to see.


  • Options
    #59
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,378 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    She owns 100 acres of forestry and is letting a subjective beauty stand in the way of needed infrastructure. Not much sympathy. if she owned a 5m squared garden, then maybe. Or if the trees were in fact natural beauty, then id have more sympathy.


  • Options
    #60
    joseph brand
    Registered Users Posts: 4,537 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    With people facing evictions (some already evicted) and the rest of the 'real' worries people are facing here. It's this woman who makes the news.

    She will be compensated and everything put back, no big deal. Also, is she not pi**ing some people off by blocking the electricity path to other homes? I'm not sure.

    Could the ESB not go 'around' her land, or is it that vast as to be a ridiculous idea?

    This story, to me, doesn't seem like an 'ESB VS Little Old Lady' battle. Most old ladies/ grannies would abhor the idea of prison.

    I notice a lot of these activist types are from old money and somehow don't need to work. Not to moan about them all, but the ones protesting construction of the M3 were just a pain. 'Jobless Crusties' someone called them. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Lollipops23
    Registered Users Posts: 5,420 ✭✭✭Lollipops23


    Hang on, it's her propery they want to ransack, why should she let them? She requested that they put them undergaround, something she would have happily complied with and they refused.

    The minute we start letting them barge onto people's property and do whatever they like is the minute we may as well roll over and let them take us up the árse.


Advertisement