Crikey koko thats a lot ...........are they able to justify this

Do they ever have to justify it Clay. They make all these ridiculous policy decisions and we end up paying. The Victorian Government had a logical area for a new dam, on the Mitchell River, and, under pressure from the Greens, then made it into either a National or State Park so that a dam could never be built there. Then decided on a site for a Desalination Plant, and guess what, the Mitchell River overflowed and flooded the Desalination Site. I read that the ETS is still on the cards so we are in for a tough time

Do they ever have to justify it Clay



...........................................................



No they don't keith and of course they never will ...........I am now wondering what our lot will do in this respect with water and of course other utilities which are under constant price increase threat also .............clay

Do they ever have to justify it Clay. They make all these ridiculous policy decisions and we end up paying. The Victorian Government had a logical area for a new dam, on the Mitchell River, and, under pressure from the Greens, then made it into either a National or State Park so that a dam could never be built there. Then decided on a site for a Desalination Plant, and guess what, the Mitchell River overflowed and flooded the Desalination Site. I read that the ETS is still on the cards so we are in for a tough time



Have found the link to the story, and will post it below.

You're right Keandha.....I'm listening and watching right now as the rain is pelting down. If they had built us a new dam, we wouldn't have the heartbreak of watching a lot of this rain literally drain away.

This rise in the cost of water is to pay for their wretched de-sal plant.

The ETS is definitely still on the cards, and from costing $1.00 per person per year, as Rudd said during the campaign, it's now estimated at $9.00 per week.

What the real figure will be is anyone's guess.





>

>

>

>

"WATER prices will skyrocket by up to 96% under plans backed by the State Government today.



Water minister Tim Holding today said steep increases were necessary to fund crucial water infrastructure projects."



>

>He said he was pleased the increases would be be no more than double in real terms over time."

>

>

>http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24615504-661,00.html





"

Clay, as Keandha has said, they don't have to justify it.

What makes me mad(among other things) about this is, in the article above, Holding talks about the growing population.

Helloooo!

Melbourne's population has been growing rapidly and steadily for a long time.....and this lot have just woken up.

That's their pathetic justification.

Yes Koko, I think Bracks was still in charge and the Vic Govt. were boasting about the wonderful increase in Melbournes population and the prosperity that would come from it and even then I thought "thats well and good but wheres the water coming from". They were, and still are, living in hope of a couple of really wet years. I hope that they occur but its far too important to gamble on.

This is atrocious, the government stuffs up and we pay. When are they going to be accountable for their mismanagement of OUR money? There should be some penalties for gross incompetence, particularly with public money, e.g. resign immediately with no perks is one suggestion.

We in the A.C.T. have been on water restrictions for ages, using the odds and evens system between 7-am-10.am and 7pm-10.pm using a hose with the gun type nozzle. We have had some rain getting into the dams, bringing it up to 51% capacity, and now they are talking about relaxing the restrictions so that people can water their lawns. This is a joke, we have all adapted well to the restrictions and planted water savvy shrubs etc. These minimal type of restrictions should be the norm in my opinion.

An interesting article, which in part, proves beyond doubt Keandha's observations of the Vic Govt.

>

>

>

"Conspicuously absent from the options are proposals for dams. Although dams are discussed, the Government does not trust people sufficiently to release information about the costs. It treats voters as mere subjects to be kept informed by glossy booklets on water rather than facts on the cheapest new supply sources.



But we can estimate the costs since Water Minister Tim Holding, using data from a study that had been kept under wraps until yesterday, had earlier revealed that a big dam on the Mitchell River duplicating the Thomson Dam would cost $1.35 billion. He made out that this was a high price, yet it is less than half the cost of the Wonthaggi desalination plant. It is also less than the cost of the Sugarloaf reservoir pipeline project with its associated work in the state's northern irrigation areas. That project will, at best, provide half as much water as a big, new dam."

>

http://business.theage.com.au/business/dam-good-idea-holds-water-20080812-3u7j.html