for what it's worth (1 Viewer)

[nofunchee]

there's an online petition on the st. michael's estate regeneration team website calling on the government to carry on with the regeneration plans despite the wealthy developers deciding that it's no longer profitable for them to do it.

maybe online petitions are pointless, i dunno. but here's the link if anyone is interested:

http://www.stmichaelsestate.ie/

 

[dleacht]

Where is St. Michaels? Online petitions are not pointless if you get them out to the right people. Do you have contacts in IT departments? If you can get emails going out to all users to the likes of the hse or councils, or colleges with alot of staff and any large network you can reach alot of people fast.

 

[Scientician 0.8]

I don't know why the government didn't provide the developers with a punitive get-out clause.

 

[Moods For Mallards]

It's in Inchicore.
Will be signing that.

 

[Goff]

I don't know why the government didn't provide the developers with a punitive get-out clause.

Because they're a shower of cunts?

 

[Scientician 0.8]

Aye that must be it.

 

[nofunchee]

Where is St. Michaels? Online petitions are not pointless if you get them out to the right people. Do you have contacts in IT departments? If you can get emails going out to all users to the likes of the hse or councils, or colleges with alot of staff and any large network you can reach alot of people fast.

nah, it's not my thing. i just got an invitation to the launch of the website/campaign and figured people here would be interested. thanks though.

I don't know why the government didn't provide the developers with a punitive get-out clause.

i don't know much about the deal but it seems that ppps are generally weighted heavily in favour of the profit margins of the private interests. maybe someone who knows about this stuff can shed some light on the usual composition of these deals?

that profit-making element in these projects seems to be a pretty weird way of going about providing basic human needs or dealing with social problems. but that's a very fundamental way of looking at it and i'm sure practical realities make rosey ideals more of an impossibility. i guess the real question is where's the balance to be found?

 

[classic seanc]

Because they're a shower of cunts?

We don't know if they did have a punitive get out clause or not, nor do we know exactly how punitive or otherwise it was, if it was there. The developer pulling out is surely an eventuality which is covered in the contract, it's a fairly basic part of any contract.