Environment Agency Serves Suspension Notice Following Trent Cyanide Pollution

Stealph Viper

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
5,233
Reaction score
7
Location
Just Floating Around
Fred,

Only Union members can vote in a Ballot, if they're not members they get no say.

Now there is hell up other proposals to bring in Temporary workers to cover the strike action dates.

Sorry, but, i say Tough.
 

Fred Bonney

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 26, 2001
Messages
13,833
Reaction score
12
Location
Domus in colle Lincolnshire Wolds
Well my friend in your eagerness to post something, you have taken my analogy and turned it into something else.:mad:

They are Union members, but as usual apathy rules, in their case with the possible loss of their jobs, and you not ever getting letters in the post.

If anglers don't add their names to the petition and let apathy rule, we may find we have no fish in our rivers. TOUGH

Simples!!!
 

Stealph Viper

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
5,233
Reaction score
7
Location
Just Floating Around
I think you are confusing Apathy with Choice.

The action of the Strikes could end up being the end of the Postal System anyway. If they continue to Strike for better pay, and better hours, and less work etc etc and the cost of providing this service keeps going up then we the public pay more and more for the same service we were getting before.

To compare the Postal Service to the Angling Trust is sheer nonsense.

If the Postal Service goes bump, believe me there will be enough companies out there willing to pick up were they have left off.

Some of you need to take your Apathy hats off and look at the Big Picture here, A group of workers are not happy about the amount of pay they are getting, some think, ok, it could be better but it could also be a lot worse, and then some think, hey the pays actually quite good, times are difficult for everyone, the working conditions are not bad etc etc and they value there job above all else.

To call the ones who are not union members, who have not voted because they don't agree with it Apathetic, is pathetic and stupid and single minded trash.

That is their job, there future as well, and if they don't agree with it, they bloody well should stick to there principals, and good on them for doing so.

Tell me, does anyone here think that the Postal Workers, are under paid, do they have a difficult job, are they entitled to a wage rise above the national average.
 

Fred Bonney

Banned
Banned
Joined
May 26, 2001
Messages
13,833
Reaction score
12
Location
Domus in colle Lincolnshire Wolds
You just don't get it do you, no comparisom, just showing the signs of apathy exists in everything we do.


It's got sweet ****all to do with workers rights or pay scales


If we don't take advantage of our God (or parliament) given right to speak out...we loose out!!!!!
 
Last edited:

Stealph Viper

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2007
Messages
5,233
Reaction score
7
Location
Just Floating Around
It's got sweet ****all to do with workers rights or pay scales

Then tell me Fred, why are they striking ?

Are you saying then that they are striking because other workers have not joined the Union, NO, they are striking because of workers rights and pay scales, absolutely nothing else.

What you are saying if Ludicrous, Apathy, because they're not in the Union and there for didn't vote on the strike action, the same ones who will go to work and get called scabs by there unapathetic work colleagues, and why, because they chose not join a profit making union.

I hate that word Apathy, it is to easy a word to use with only meaning to one side, it's like the word Love and Hate, people use it to freely without thinking of the consequences them words can have on others.

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR, I ain't posting on this subject anymore, i've made my point clear enough :D
 

MarkTheSpark

Senior Member
Joined
May 15, 2002
Messages
4,260
Reaction score
7
Location
Peterborough
There's little doubt in my mind - confirmed by the leaked letter last week - that Mandy and Crozier are doing a spot of union-busting. This will be essential if they are to flog off the Royal Mail.
The posties aren't after any more money, just to have what they have been promised.
Thanks for thr tip-off about the Sunday Times. Just off to get one
 

mikeshaw1979

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2009
Messages
217
Reaction score
0
Location
Cheshire/Wales border
Page 8 Sunday Times,

Fines Fail to stop river polluters

the theme gets nearly half a page but, no mention of petition!

Mark Lloyd and Anglers Trust get's a quote though.




It's also on 'Times on-line':

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6879440.ece

From The Sunday Times October 18, 2009

Fines fail to stop river polluters

Steven Swinford


WATER companies and factories are threatening to undo two decades of work to clean Britain’s rivers by continuing to spew out sewage and chemicals.

They are largely responsible for 1,500 serious pollution offences in the past five years, killing hundreds of thousands of fish and destroying wildlife habitats and ecosystems.

Yet the average fine for each breach was just £4,411, the Environment Agency has revealed. Critics claim the penalties — a fraction of the firms’ multi-million pound profits — are failing to deter the polluters.

They are also concerned about the agency’s move to hand water companies responsibility for monitoring and reporting pollution. Campaigners say it amounts to self-regulation and will be open to abuse.

“The punishment does not meet the crime at all,” said Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat environment spokesman. “It makes no sense to put the power to monitor waterways in the hands of people who are guilty of polluting them.”

Mark Lloyd, chief executive of the Angling Trust, said: “These fines are meaningless to huge companies whose primary concern is profit.”


In 1989, The Sunday Times launched its Water Rats campaign to expose companies routinely polluting UK rivers. Although water quality has improved dramatically since then, there are still more than 400 breaches each year.

Water companies have been prosecuted 342 times in the past five years. The worst offender was South West Water which was prosecuted for 42 pollution offences.

However, the most damaging incident involved Thames Water, which has committed 30 offences and has been fined £481,000 since 2004. In September 2007, employees cleaning filters at the company’s sewage works in Beddington, south London, accidentally allowed sodium hypochlorite, a bleach, to be released into the Wandle.

Within a few hours, a three-mile stretch of the river was in effect stripped of life.

In January this year Thames Water was fined £125,000 with £21,335 court costs. It also gave the Wandle Trust, a conservation charity, £500,000 to help restore the river. The combined sum is less than the annual pay of David Owens, the company’s chief executive.

Anglian Water is also a repeat offender, having been fined a total of £328,405 for 20 incidents of water pollution.

In some cases, water companies have been able to pump raw sewage into waterways without fear of prosecution.

When the industry was privatised in 1989 the government granted water firms a temporary exemption on 20,000 overflow pipes.

In 2007 environmental campaigners discovered that 4,193 of the pipes remained unregulated. A year earlier, tens of thousands of fish had been killed along a 10-mile stretch of the River Don when sewage from Sheffield and Rotherham poured through one of these unregulated overflow pipes.

The pollution was so bad that local anglers reported fish trying to jump out of the water.

In July this year the agency announced that it planned restrictions on all remaining unregulated pipes.

Water companies responded by launching appeals on 3,959 of them.

Factories, farms and other industries have been responsible for 832 serious incidents in the last five years and paid fines totalling £3.74m.

Earlier this month sewage and cyanide found its way into the Trent, killing thousands of fish. The Environment Agency has linked the leak to Red Industries, a metal production factory in Stoke-on-Trent.

The Environment Agency said: “Over the last 15 years the number of water pollution incidents has fallen by just over 90%. Nevertheless, 440 incidents a year is 440 too many.”

Thames Water said it had improved its pollution record but claimed that progress could be jeopardised if companies were not allowed to raise bills.


I've emboldened Tim Farron's words, as well as those of Mark Lloyd, as I think it's refreshing to see a mainstream politician (Lib/Dem Environment) speaking so wisely on the subject; who knows - the Liberal Democrats may do really well in the next election.
 
A

alan whittington

Guest
As per usual Fred the apathy sets in, there should have been thousands already,but people cant be bothered,Kieth Arthur may have an opinion(like i)that custodial sentancing is suitable,but that shouldnt have stopped him trying to unite anglers(and non anglers)to show their disapproval in a massive way and then stands there and expects all fishermen to join the AT,there seems nothing that can get anglers to unite and fight,w*****s the lot of us.:mad:
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
13,768
Reaction score
40
Location
Cheshire
It's because there is nothing stopping most anglers going fishing tomorrow, next week, next month or next year (apart from the wife!).

There is no 'clear and present danger', so to speak.

When there is, anglers will prick up their ears, but it will be too late then.
 
A

alan whittington

Guest
Thats right,but its a shame,when i rang 'talksport's f'mans blues' some while ago bringing up my fears on the middle Thames,i was attacked verbally,to which i say tough im a big boy now(too bl**dy big),so i put up with it,but in the Trents case its a fact,the river has been murdered and anglers,with all caring inhabitants of this country should be shocked and be determined to poke and prod to find some way of punishing these b******s properly.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
13,768
Reaction score
40
Location
Cheshire
What is sad is that some of the Trent anglers effected by the recent pollution MAY join the angling trust in support, while others will just look for somewhere else to fish.
 
A

alan whittington

Guest
That may be true but i feel the legal system is rigged in favour of businesses and there may only be so much the AT can persue,and this petition,if it had enough followers may show our govnt. how strong public feeling is,lets be perfectly honest about this,if this was about cruelty to cats or dogs there would be thousands signed up,nobody gives a toss about our rivers,unless they watch on autumnwatch or something similar,personally i would like the owners hung for their wrong doing,but thats not going to happen so a just punishment MUST be meted out,and that comes from an angler who hasnt fished the Trent for many years,this shouldnt happen to any river,brook or stream in this day and age.
 

Neil Degg

New member
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
Staffordshire
Not sure if this is the right place to post this:

We have organised a meeting to disguss the recent pollution incident, whats happened, where's affected and more importantly the future of the affected areas.

Mark Owen Environmental campaigns manager for the Angling Trust, will be speaking.

Date of meeting will be friday 27th November at Doveridge village club, postcode DE6 5JZ
Start time will be 8.00pm

Hopefully we can get a good turn out. It is important. Everyone is welcome.
 
Last edited:
Top