Federal funding.Aidan wrote:Rhino, that's not what I'm saying at all. I never claimed the desalination plant wasn't needed. The drought made it clear that it was needed.rhino wrote:If I remember correctly, one of the big complaints at the time was "We need a desalination plant! Why didn't this government have the foresight to build it before it was needed?"Aidan wrote: And rhino, if the cost is falling then it should be put off until it is needed.
Now we have you, with your enormous ammount of knowledge on every subject, some of which you admit is gained from reading the Murdoch Press, telling us that the government was wrong to have built it because the drought broke and they should have waited until it was needed. It beggars belief.
What was not needed was to build it at 100 gigalitre/year capacity straight away, as opposed to the original plan of 50Gl/y capacity with provision to double it.
Why is that so hard to understand?
Pretty sure the Feds said it was now or never - make it 100gL and we'll throw in some cash to help you do that. Or leave it as it, and pay for the cost of the upgrade later by yourselves. The former is what they chose, and what we got.
Sure, we're dealing with the consequences now through higher water bills, but to be honest, it would have been silly to turn them down. If anything, It actually probably saved us another $1b (accounting for future inflation & construction costs).
If one quotes either from the likes of the Oz or Pravda, one is likely to get guffaws of hilarious laughter. 
Or offers of lottery wins from Nigeria. I am not saying that everything from the Oz is likely to be bolloxed, but if anything it reports is true, then others will be reporting and confirming what it says. When they don't, you know something is a little fishy. 
