How stupid is the water ban

[Damien]

The South East provides most of the money for everything, don't see what that's got to do with anything however. There isn't enough water, let's ration it a bit until there is, job done.

[nomadking]

What's even weirder is that if you get somebody else to clean your car or windows at your own house, they can use a hosepipe from your water supply.

Exemptions
Any commercial businesses operating at commercial premises are not included in the ban.
Businesses that operate at a domestic property or wash private vehicles (e.g. car/driveway washing or window cleaning) can use a hosepipe in the course of their work, where this is done as a service to customers.

Might be worth pointing out another potentially useful exemption.

People who hold a current Blue Badge issued by their local authority can use a hosepipe to water a garden attached to domestic premises in order to water plants and water their own allotment if applicable.

If you think you might qualify for disability reasons(eg disabled Bus Pass), but don't drive and therefore don't have a Blue Badge, you could ask(eg via email) your water supplier.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Damien

The South East provides most of the money for everything, don't see what that's got to do with anything however. There isn't enough water, let's ration it a bit until there is, job done.

theory is less pressure on water supplies more even distribution. The economy should stay the same with fairer distribution jobs.

The issue would need to turn ghost towns back to nature and arable farming. Not withstanding destruction northern country for new towns/cities or expansions.

We probably talking moving circa 2m pop and jobs to go with it.

The other solutions are expensive but which is actually cheapest.

The cop out is metered and higher prices sadly can see this being used every homes. It still wont solve the problem just pass the buck to later.

Its has been years lack forsight old system population anomalties and job market just ignored even encouraged by governments for long time.

[Hugh]

Moving two million people - are you being serious?

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Moving two million people - are you being serious?

You called

[Rob]

A serious question, how as a consumer in an area that might be affected (no one has formally told me, but I suspect I am), am I supposed to know that restrictions are legally applying and what those restrictions are? I haven't had any formal communication from my water company. Am I expected to have just somehow become aware because of articles in the news?

I have a pond, that to replace the current fish if they die might due to their size and age set me back perhaps over £2000. Can I use my hose to keep those fish alive by topping up the pond as it dries out, or to flush out the filters? My water board, not the internet or other gossip in media sources, should be formally adivsing me of what is or is not allowed.

Equally, if the water board are restricting my supply, will my water bill be similarly restricted. I am not metered.

Oh and there are a lot of suggestions about using showers instead of baths. I'm not convinced that actually saves that much water for many modern properties with mains or power showers especially if they have some of those larger shower heads. My own shower for example is well capable of running out of hot water from the cylinder after only a few minutes.

[Maggy J]

It is just how things have turned out. Why all the complaining? It won't last forever. When it does really rain again everyone will bitch about that instead.

[nomadking]

You could check the website of your local water supplier.
From Anglia Water website.

You are allowed to use a hosepipe to fill or maintain a domestic pond/ornamental fountain where fish or other aquatic animals are being reared or kept in captivity.

[Rob]

Originally Posted by nomadking

You could check the website of your local water supplier.
From Anglia Water website.

I could, but why should I as the paying customer have to ferret the information out from my water supplier when they as the supplier should be formally telling me that a restriction applies. Whilst I won't unduly waste water, in the absence of any formal communication from my water board, I will assume I am not restricted, and use the resource I am paying for in a normal manner.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Rob

I could, but why should I as the paying customer have to ferret the information out from my water supplier when they as the supplier should be formally telling me that a restriction applies. Whilst I won't unduly waste water, in the absence of any formal communication from my water board, I will assume I am not restricted, and use the resource I am paying for in a normal manner.

Dont quote me if you got fish in pond your allowed to top it up bedford gov says the following

You can use a hosepipe to:

• Clean graffiti off a public building
• Top up a public swimming pool
• Fill or top up a pond that has fish in it
• Transport rain water from a water butt
• Deal with dangerous or urgent health, safety or biosecurity issues

http://www.centralbedfordshire.gov.u...epipe-ban.aspx

---------- Post added at 23:17 ---------- Previous post was at 23:16 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

It is just how things have turned out. Why all the complaining? It won't last forever. When it does really rain again everyone will bitch about that instead.

FLOODS

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by mertle

theory is less pressure on water supplies more even distribution. The economy should stay the same with fairer distribution jobs.

The issue would need to turn ghost towns back to nature and arable farming. Not withstanding destruction northern country for new towns/cities or expansions.

We probably talking moving circa 2m pop and jobs to go with it.

You are talking about moving 2 million people and their jobs. Thus you would need housing for those 2 million. To give an idea of the size of that project, you are suggesting moving a group of people that is equivalent to a 3rd of Greater London.

Factor in the cost of either providing jobs, or benefits, and it could end up being cheaper to transport the water to the south east. A lot cheaper.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Stuart

it could end up being cheaper to transport the water to the south east. A lot cheaper.

Even if you did it by bucket

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Stuart

You are talking about moving 2 million people and their jobs. Thus you would need housing for those 2 million. To give an idea of the size of that project, you are suggesting moving a group of people that is equivalent to a 3rd of Greater London.

Factor in the cost of either providing jobs, or benefits, and it could end up being cheaper to transport the water to the south east. A lot cheaper.

this what said we have to way up which cheaper option out these.

It may be cheaper new resevoirs but environmentalist do there nuts and nimbyism will stop it.

Up north though there is alot run down estates with lots empty property bit modernising could be perfectly able to be re-housed.

Dont think the issue would be job creation if the government expanded the regeneration. encoured the move jobs would come about. Not all jobs viable to be moved some actually would benefit nearer the trade routes.

I actually been puzzled for years why factories built nowhere near the export hubs they use. Surely saving on transport costs good strong labour force and they save money with cheaper land/property. I think lot time they move to london as the property value can been used better collateral for loans from bank expansion. Its always great add few noughts to the company value. Problem with the thinking is wages higher & transportation costs.

It needs a gradual rethink sort like slow retreat. If we cap the housing so it dont spiral out control the country might benefit northern migration.

Not say only solution or pratical due to costs but if it was cheapest option we would have to seriously consider it. Yep 2m no mean task but would eleviate the pressure of south east.

In ideal world there would be proper modern water, energy, transport network. That would be staggering costs so solution is adapt to what we got spread out.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by mertle

Up north though there is alot run down estates with lots empty property bit modernising could be perfectly able to be re-housed.

I resent that ,the estates are no more run down up north, than down south ,and what makes you think we northerners want you southerners coming here and using all our clogs and flat caps up

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Fawkes

Just move up north, we have plenty of water

Or down to Plymouth where we have two big reservoirs.