(no subject)

Date: 2007-01-05 02:48 am (UTC)
More dams are a bulwark against the /next/ time this happens - that's how we got the Thomson in the 1st place I believe. Its not a good solution, but its "doing something" - a maxim that seems to be all the rage amidst current governing bodies.

re: storm water. It used to be a given that you /had/ to put water down the pipes to keep them clean and unblocked :)

Interest = remaining in government. Currently when you pay for water, some of it is skimmed off by the billing company, and the rest goes to Melbourne water, which is a corporation. ... A solely government owned corporation, sure, but still. (FWIW: people doing water recycling impacted on the amount of water being used and thus on MelbWater's income to a significant degree).

I don't believe that the current situation - water restrictions, low dam levels, etc - are condusive to a tax on tanks. True, governments do insane things in the name of income, but rebating with one hand and telling everyone to be careful with water and then taxing with the other seems a career limiting move for a State Government

Local councils, I'm not so sure on.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

Profile

lirion: (Default)
lirion

April 2011

S M T W T F S
     12
3456789
10 111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags