cajonlardo wrote: » Tell you what. Why don't all you lot go ahead and organise a Pro Water Charge March. When you get tens of thousands marching we might take notice of something you say.
Iwasfrozen wrote: » So how many people turned up? 100k?
BoJack Horseman wrote: » Perhaps 180-200k nationally.
VinLieger wrote: » Nobody is pro water charges, of course I don't want to pay for water or anything else I just have enough cop on to understand that we have to otherwise in 10-20 years we will all be on boil water notices and living with third world standards of water infrastructure.
Beaner1 wrote: » I have a pro water charges facebook group that's doing well.
hmmm wrote: » Even taking your vastly inflated figures at face value, that means 4.3 million people got on with their normal Saturday. The people have spoken.
El Horseboxo wrote: » There aren't 4.3 million bill payers or houses in Ireland.
ROCKMAN wrote: » But can someone please point out or provide me with a link to a specific plan of action /a charter of work actually outlining Irish waters infrastructure improvement plans
ROCKMAN wrote: » Have heard this been stated a lot of times, But can someone please point out or provide me with a link to a specific plan of action /a charter of work actually outlining Irish waters infrastructure improvement plans ,something in writing giving places ,times and dates where work will actually start And Not these vague statements been banned around by them and the Government saying the money will be used for this and that , LOOKING FOR HARD COLD FACTS.. Otherwise I think Mick Wallace is right in saying it's a lot of money just to set up a billing service.
[Deleted User] wrote: » How many of those who marched today are house owning bill payers?
BoJack Horseman wrote: » Nationally, a lot more than that Perhaps 180-200k nationally.
mfceiling wrote: » Can you post the link up? I'm not on facebook but i'm sure a lot of the pro water and anti water people on here might find it interesting.
gladrags wrote: » Levy the financial institutions,namely the banks,to fund the modernisation of the supply system.
Strawberry Milkshake wrote: » Well I am one. Majority of people I knew at my local protest are too. What's with putting everyone down all the time?
Cork crowd 5 to 7k. Less than half the 15k who marched against public pay cuts in 2009
Beaner1 wrote: » https://www.facebook.com/WorkersForWaterCharges Likes are hidden as people were getting too much grief off shinners.
cajonlardo wrote: » What on earth has that to do with whether or not Mary Lou was entitled to march? Don't bother answering, tbh I could care less what Mary Lou gets up to. I've news for you. You are almost certainly not more intelligent than 100,00 who marched. They understand water processing has to be funded. Their difficulty lies in O'Brien , Cronies and Subterfuge in the setting up of I.W. They have difficulty understanding why a disabled person with adult college going children gets the same allowance as a single millionaire.... Whole setup is rotten to the core and Enda and Co got it seriously wrong when they thought it would be swallowed
BoJack Horseman wrote: » Dept of Environ site has some white papers & objectives for long term stuff. Like 20% leakage reduction etc..... But they've never had the cash to tackle it.
ROCKMAN wrote: » Is there anything in writing /Legislation that will /can force them to follow the certain path of action
Highflyer13 wrote: » +1 I'd like to see a high level project plan to see where my money is going to in the medium to long term. Dates, % of work completed, what needs to be done, and cost estimates for accountability and transparency.
hmmm wrote: » Is your answer to everything to load taxes onto someone else? Why should anyone else (banks or otherwise) have to pay for the water you use?