| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Big thanks to PUTNEYSW15.com for raising awareness of this on the home page! | |
| Posted by: | Claire Johnson | |
| Date/Time: | 19/11/10 10:04:00 |
| this article from 2008 suggests 2.5 billion, I wouldn't be surprised if the 3.5billion figure is correct - 2 years is a long time to find out all the additional costs. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/04/london-water Which is probably why current government is so so keen to push this through. Politically, it's a perfect option for them a so called "private sector" multi billion £ project in times of highly troubled economy paid for by the people of London who have no choice because TW is the monopoly for water supply. If anyone objects they say - but we have to because of EU regulations, and of course anyway, it was the last government that agreed to the deadlines from the EU on this and understood the fines for UK if we don't comply. Hmmm, now I wonder why we haven't heard anything from Justine Greening, To be honest, I think everyone wants cleaner rivers - that's a no brainer, and I'm not against the project per-se (although I do think the other options were ruled out too quickly maybe for the above reasons) the important thing is to get this project right, not rush it through and cause minimal impact to environment, and people of London. That's why Brownfield sites should be chosen where possible - and there ARE possible alternatives...even TW said so at the meeting this week... |