| Topic: | Re:Protest at Battersea Arts Centre tomorrow.... | |
| Posted by: | Roland Gilmore | |
| Date/Time: | 14/03/11 20:51:00 |
| Nick, 1. The previous government have a lot to answer for. Please confirm who, in the current government, gave you an instruction to develop this particular proposal? Since you have confirmed it is going to cost us all an extra £52+ on our bills for you to develop these proposals, I am surprised that any individual member of government has such powers. 2. We had previously been informed that you intend to empty only four times a year. Please confirm when the 48 hour period starts from? 3.It may increase the cost but that is not the main issue. The main issue is that you discharge raw sewage into the Thames and have confirmed that you intend to continue that practice. There is absolutely no technical reason why the Mogden discharges could not be connected to this new £multi billion pipe. You must admit that the notion that TW intend to save us all money by not stopping these discharges, despite spending £Bns, sounds ridiculous. 4. It sounds as though you are now saying that not just Mogden but other discharge points will continue to discharge raw sewage into the Thames. I think that Ofwat, (a failed quango if ever there was one) and the "Consumer Council for Water" (who are they?) are not the people to decide whether TW are striking the "right balance". That prerogative lies with those who will be forced to pay for your proposal. No matter how difficult you may believe it to be, TW need to start thinking about and doing something about separating Storm Water from Foul Water. It seems ridiculous every house and every office keeps these separate until the boundary of the property when they are combined. How much storm water flowing into Mogden would have to be intercepted to prevent continued discharge into the Thames; 5%, 6%? What is the comparative cost to the four mile pipe you are complaining about? Do you really expect us to believe that a 4 mile pipe would take longer to install that the one intended. You jest! |