LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksit would be cheaper for many schools to sink their own wells and treat the water on site
it would be cheaper for many schools to sink their own wells and treat the water on site
How does a flat charge reduce unecessary water usage ?Originally Posted by qtman
It isn't a revenue generating exercise. The objective is to reduce unnecessary water usage, in that providing water is a hugely expensive business.
Once it is paid, the school can use as much or as little water as they want
Rubbish answer
1,197 people agree with me.. how many agree with you ?
the problem is not using water its soiling it
An abusolute disgrace - Parents must get together and form a group to oppose these unjust charges. - what we dont seem to appreciate is that historically these charges were met via our PAYE liabilities - If the playing pich has been changed will wre see a reduction in the PAYE leviesn attached to our earnings???????????????????????????????
does our free education have a value
What does the Irish President spend their time doing. Work in progress
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Hundreds of thousands of people pay almost €2 consistently for a bottle of water. Grand so.
Parents are expected to pay less than a fiver per annum to pay for their children's sanitation and drinking water in school - an outrage!
Parents already pay a fee of usually less than €100 for "admin" to shools, this charge could easily be incorporated into that. It's an EU law that, to be honest, doesn't really cause any harm and kind of makes sense! This annual harge is only a fraction of a single child-benefit payment. Parents spend more on copies and books and pens than they will water for the year.
Seriously folks, why this is such a big deal is beyond me. Perhaps it's a measure of how well this Government is doing that the opposition make a big deal out of something (a) they could not have prevented if in office (b) something that costs almost zilch but provides a huge service.
Minds cannot be managed, only inspired.
It's a big deal because it's pointless. I can see - although I do not agree with - the justification of charging schools a per use fee for water, as it could encourage them to cut down use, especially wasted water. But a flat fee does not do that. All this does is add a further cost to the running of schools. Its a disgrace, and I am completely opposed to this.
[color=#4000FF]What part of [/color][color=#00BFFF]NO[/color][color=#4000FF] don't [/color][color=#00BFFF]EU[/color][color=#4000FF] understand?[/color]
If “we” want to discuss issues only in terms acceptable to “us” and to the exclusion of “others”, “we” should set up “our” own site.We are not discussing John Bruton here. Keep this debacle in context you small minded fool! As ever you want to destroy any debate with your incessant tripe. Get a life.Sure why not, didn’t John Bruton try to tax the shoes on their feet & the cloths on their back, not once but twice. Short memory there Blucey, try some other tack, although you’ll have to go some to find a subject that FG haven’t ballsed up at one time or another.I love how the Grianna Fail members keep their heads down and skulk in shame. Serves em right. When they start SERIOUSLY giving leadership (no more mercs, give em a bus pass for example) I may take them semi seriously. But, no ... lets tax kiddies.
And if you want an example of small mindedness I point you to your very own original post on this thread. If you want to dish it out, be prepared to take it, otherwise you look like a bit of a whinge.
I think LA’s charging for water is a good idea, they are after all the one’s providing the service. In this case it could be refined to the point where schools who use less per head, pay less.Yep, he did. So? FG had a flirtation with fascisim in the 30's - would that make greens armed with courgette peelers right?Sure why not, didn’t John Bruton try to tax the shoes on their feet & the cloths on their back, not once but twice. Short memory there Blucey, try some other tack, although you’ll have to go some to find a subject that FG haven’t ballsed up at one time or another.I love how the Grianna Fail members keep their heads down and skulk in shame. Serves em right. When they start SERIOUSLY giving leadership (no more mercs, give em a bus pass for example) I may take them semi seriously. But, no ... lets tax kiddies.
Anyhow, enuf they did-we did Tone ole mate. Do YOU think it right to start paying for water in this way, or should it be elsewhere or atallatall?
In the meantime the capitation grant should be increased. Education is expensive, we have to be prepared to pay a reasonable price for the basics.
You are thse pasr master in small mindedness my dear Tonys and all you arguments eventually culminate in inane stuff as posted above. You will be claiming next that Brian Boru was responsible for the Celtic Tiger.If “we” want to discuss issues only in terms acceptable to “us” and to the exclusion of “others”, “we” should set up “our” own site.We are not discussing John Bruton here. Keep this debacle in context you small minded fool! As ever you want to destroy any debate with your incessant tripe. Get a life.Sure why not, didn’t John Bruton try to tax the shoes on their feet & the cloths on their back, not once but twice. Short memory there Blucey, try some other tack, although you’ll have to go some to find a subject that FG haven’t ballsed up at one time or another.I love how the Grianna Fail members keep their heads down and skulk in shame. Serves em right. When they start SERIOUSLY giving leadership (no more mercs, give em a bus pass for example) I may take them semi seriously. But, no ... lets tax kiddies.
And if you want an example of small mindedness I point you to your very own original post on this thread. If you want to dish it out, be prepared to take it, otherwise you look like a bit of a whinge.
Context is not your speciality I'm afraid.
Reply With Quote