On Thursday afternoon, I attended a meeting with other community representatives from Dickson Residents Group, Downer Community Association and North Canberra Community Council with the LDA about development in Dickson (section 72, where the pool is).
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
On Friday, I found The Canberra Times reporting the development will be "green-lighted" ("Dickson development nod", July24, p1).
At the meeting, LDA told us they were working on a territory plan variation, and implied it was months away. It now seems the LDA must have spoken to The Canberra Times before us, given that our meeting finished after 5pm. They told a different story to The Canberra Times than the community.
Interesting with hindsight, they asked us if we were recording the meeting and we said no. I guess we should have recorded them, so I could have been stronger in my comments than "implied it was months away".
I cannot understand why the government is not prepared to treat the community as adults and communicate openly with us. This is the sort of contempt for the public that makes me, and others, cynical and distrustful of all government initiatives.
Caroline Le Couteur, Downer
Terrible plan
The ACT Environment and Planning Directorate has recommended that the Territory Plan be amended so a 10-storey residential complex of up to 500 units can be built on the corner of Melrose Drive and Hindmarsh Drive ("Housing redevelopment to transform Lyons", July27, p1). This is an irresponsible planning recommendation.
The intersection of Melrose and Hindmarsh drives is one of the busiest main road intersections in the area. The proposal will increase pedestrian numbers, which will increase road fatalities, particularly young children living or visiting in the complex.
It will also increase noise reverberation from the traffic, concentrate pollution, overshadow the intersection making it feel closed in, harder to drive and the road surface more slippery in winter.
Canberra's original planners, Walter Burley Griffin and Marion Mahony, were much more visionary; they had their building heights and densities decrease towards the intersections, which gave a generous airy spacious feel. We need more vision.
John Skurr, Deakin
Traffic projects
I am dumbfounded that $315,000 has been spent on two junctions in Yamba Drive in South Woden ("Yamba drive safety", July23, p2). For $315,000, the good burghers of Canberra received minor reshaping of two 30- to 40-year-old slip-lane traffic islands, road surface to fill in the reshaping, half a dozen gratuitous signs and some paint on the road.
Meanwhile, five kilometres away on Mugga Lane, the entrance to the tip (or whatever PC title it has this year) remains as it has for 20 years: narrow, tight for the many large trucks that turn into and out of it daily, and generally dilapidated. No roundabout to give all a fair go and no slip lanes for through traffic to avoid turning traffic.
It's just as well that the cycle path running through Isaacs now has line marking, to keep the dozen or so cyclists that use it daily just that little bit safer.
I would wager double next year's rates to nothing that Mr Gentleman would spend his own money with more circumspection than he wastes ours.
John Henderson, Isaacs
Barr out of touch
ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr announced to Australia that he is sure ACT residents would be willing to pay more tax. Really?
With the waste we see in the ACT dealing with major infrastructure projects such as the bungled Gungahlin Drive fiasco, built 10 years too late and too small, so that it had to be immediately widened, costing millions more than if it had been done right the first time.
The multi-storey car park at the Canberra Hospital, which I believe has now been built three times.
The numerous artworks nobody seems to like (OK, I think I found one person who likes them).
The proposed tram, which I am convinced is more about building monuments to the name of a few politicians than about servicing the people of Canberra.
When I see such waste, it is hard to justify the need for additional tax.
When the GST was introduced in 2000, governments were rubbing their hands together at the windfall of extra income. Where has that extra income gone?
One can guarantee that if the GST is raised, so too will be the appetites of governments to spend, and they'll be back in a few years wanting more.
Mr Barr's comment is arrogant and shows he is out of touch.
Paul Coleman, Curtin
Objecting to abortion
In the 1970s and 1980s, I took part in protests and prayer vigils near ACT abortion clinics.
It is disgraceful that attempts are now being made to ban such demonstrations of sympathy for unborn Canberrans who, if allowed to live, are likely to be a great source of joy to their families and others in future years.
"The very difficult decision to abort" to which you refer in your editorial "Where rights of privacy and protest collide" (Times2, July22, p2) is often taken in response to pressure from the boyfriend who wants to avoid paying child maintenance.
Audrey Donnithorne, Hong Kong
Powerful example
A simple example may help Doug Hurst (Letters, July24) understand how power production can be increased from renewable energy sources. Take two houses in Canberra: one has solar panels on the roof, the house next door has none. Install panels on the second house and, hey presto, double the power can be generated. The sun comes up every morning and powerful storage batteries are on their way.
The maths works the same for paddocks and wind turbines.
Perhaps, though, he was just playing with our minds?
Sheridan Roberts, Bemboka, NSW
Smote by a mote
R.C.Warn and Suzanne Vidler (Letters, July 23 and 25) have been carried away in taking The Canberra Times to task over the "moat" in its eye. Perhaps, they should have been more vigilant in differentiating between "moat" and "mote".
The former is a ditch filled with water and impossible to be contained in an eye, while the latter is a particle of dust that can be contained in an eye. Cleverness has a habit of backfiring.
Noel Benjamin, Oxley
British enthusiasm for green energy waning
Richard Benyon ("Climate science dismissal is not conservative", Times2, July23, p5) may be from the UK, but he seems unaware of what is happening there. The number of planning applications for renewable energy projects in the UK last month slumped to the lowest level in five years. According to official figures released by the Department of Energy and Climate Change, there were 21 new submissions last month, a 78per cent drop on the 95 applications lodged a year before in June 2014.
In line with plans announced in the Conservatives' election manifesto, energy and climate change secretary Amber Rudd first scrapped subsidies for onshore wind farms, which are opposed by many Tory MPs, a year earlier than planned. Chancellor George Osborne then ditched a climate-change tax exemption, which hit shares in Drax, the power station switching from burning coal to wood pellets.
The government had already cut back support for large-scale solar projects and will now look at extending reductions to smaller solar plants of up to 5 megawatts in generation capacity.
Britain has finally seen what our prime minster has know for some time: renewables such as wind and solar are very expensive and their electricity generation capacity is intermittent.
J. McKerral, Batemans Bay, NSW
Doug Hurst (Letters, July 23), the sun and the wind already produce far more energy than we need – it is just a matter of capturing it. We can capture more than enough for all our needs by simply increasing the number and size of solar arrays and wind turbines. As our capacity to store this energy increases, the arrays and turbines can be located where not even Joe Hockey could be offended.
Michael McCarthy, Deakin
Shorten eclipsed by colleagues in debate about asylum seekers
While I agree with ALP national president Mark Butler that the quality of debate on the floor of national conference in relation to the party's asylum-seeker policy was of an exceptionally high order, regrettably, Bill Shorten's performance was significantly overshadowed by others who participated in the debate.
For those who watched the proceedings, there was no doubt Richard Marles and, more particularly, former immigration minister Burke both delivered speeches that were much more passionate than their leader's. As is usual with his delivery of set pieces, Shorten lacked gravitas.
Ian De Landelles, Hawker
Profit the priority
I agree with Australian Medical Association president Brian Owler's comments regarding Medibank Private at the National Press Club on July22. Medibank Private, since it has become privatised, appears to be placing profits in front of its members' healthcare. It appears it is placing unreasonable demands on Calvary Health Care. It assumes medicine and care are a perfect science. I'm sure Calvary Health Care and its staff do not intend to have adverse health events.
In life, accidents or illnesses happen, even after the best processes are set up, and that's why we pay large sums for healthcare insurance. As a Medibank Private member of over 30 years, it now appears I will have access to limited services at Bruce's Calvary Hospital, located on the north side of Canberra. So, now I'm paying an increasingly large amount of money to Medibank Private for a limited service.
I can now see how they are increasing their profits for their "new" shareholders – higher premiums and fewer services. As a member, I'm not considered to be a shareholder. This issue highlights the dangers of privatising government services and assets. The Australian government gains a short-term windfall, but the public faces increased costs and fewer services.
Medibank Private should have stayed in the control of the Commonwealth government. Any health review by the Australian government should include the modus operandi of private health funds.
Maybe we would be better off having a national health service like the United Kingdom – removing profit-making from healthcare.
Greg Blood, Florey
Axe allowances
It is high time that all parliamentary allowances and "entitlements" were ended. This $500million-a-year system (for all federal and state legislatures) is set up for abuse.
On top of salaries ranging from triple to six times the earnings of the average Australian, the parliamentary package is now an unambiguous market signal to rorters, thieves and con people , however often they may declaim "I never went in it for the money". All individual parliamentary expenses should henceforth be axed and MPs required to claim legitimate "business" expenses on their tax, same as the rest of us. This at least means they can be audited by an independent body such as the Australian Tax Office. To facilitate this, a position of Parliamentary Auditor should be created within the ATO to oversee the process and publish reasons for accepting or denying each MP's claims.
Only that way can we, the people, have confidence we are not being taken for a ride by a grubby set of gold diggers, main chancers and "entitlers".
Julian Cribb, Franklin
When you need to consult the likes of Gary Gray for entitlement endorsement, it's already a bit whiffy ("Paying the price of perks", Forum, July25, p4). If you have a doubt, if it feels wrong, if you have to ask, then don't do it. That's the way the electorate do it.
Joe Murphy, Bonython
I can see some kind of quaint logic that says you cannot compare Mrs Bishop's helicopter ride with Mr Slipper's cab charges, but surely taking a chauffeur-driven limo to the opera at taxpayers' expense on a regular basis is on a par to Mr Slipper's afternoon of visiting wineries? What fine point of logic am I missing here? Mrs Bishop was supporting the arts, and Mr Slipper was supporting the wine industry.
K. L. Calvert, Downer
Religious licence
Colin Douglas is concerned about Islamic anti-social violent writings and dictates. Unfortunately, most, if not all, religions, including major ones of this country, contain such sentiments.
Religious leaders often cherry-pick from their writings and profess love, freedom, tolerance etc, but, in practice, only for themselves. They, in turn, usually discriminate against those who have a different religion, gender and sexual orientation.
Some religious writings do not accord with basic human rights standards. It is difficult, therefore, to understand why we, as a society, accept religious exemptions from human rights legislation, pour money into religious schools and exempt churches from local taxes. Religions should be subject to the law and made to pay their own way.
Roy Jordan, Reid
Truth uncomfortable
Kim Rubenstein's rebuttal of Bob Carr's ANU presentation on Middle East issues ("Bob Carr's new tune undermines citizenship", Times2, July24, p5) was relentlessly predictable, disproportionately testy, and studiously artful – in the manner of most of the output of the Israel lobby.
Professor Rubenstein is (apparently) deeply puzzled by the term "Israel lobby", as cited by Mr Carr in his talk. Apparently, Mr Carr's offerings were "insidious" and vaguely anti-Semitic "tropes". Hilariously, Mr Carr is accused of having a "transparently anti-Semitic" comment "presented to him" How dare he have such a thing said to him.
We even see reproval being cast at the ANU itself, all the better that it might think twice about ever again hosting a debate that goes anywhere near the subject of Israel and its policies and international outreaches.
Professor Rubenstein's contribution pretended concern over, and focus on, "citizenship". That, you see, was its boarding pass and fig leaf. It was, in fact, the inevitable "police action" and return of fire we habitually see from some corner of the Israel lobby to the airing of uncomfortable truth.
Ross Kelly, Monash
TO THE POINT
MORAL CRUSADERS
Whilst on their crusade to rebuild society's moral framework (Letters, July23) perhaps Tom Quinlan and Co should start with their own house; I don't recall seeing them outside the courts or the churches publicly condemning (or praying for) any convicted paedophile priests in the past? Quietly swept under the carpet, indeed!
Brent J. Woodward, Richardson
TWO OF A KIND
What is the real difference, if any, between pro-abortion, radical feminists and radical Islamic terrorists such as IS. As far as I can see, both cults promote the killing of the innocent using false doctrinal messages and seek world domination. Please don't insult my intelligence by saying that a person is not a person until he or she is born.
John Popplewell, Hackett
SABOTAGING PEACE
Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council policy analyst Sharyn Mittelman writes a whole article ("Iranian deal unenforceable", Times2, July23, p4) on the Iran nuclear deal without mentioning that only one country in the Middle East – we all know who – has nuclear weapons. If Israel had any interest whatsoever in dealing with the threat of nuclear weapons in the region, it would stop sabotaging every effort to negotiate a Middle East zone free of all weapons of mass destruction.
Sue Wareham, Cook
LEGAL QUESTIONS
What is the legal difference between money being extracted by a union official threatening an employer being paid into a personal rather than a union account? Further, how is the law applied to money paid into a union account, as the result of threats made to employers, being distributed to union officials?
Ed Dobson, Hughes
LOST ON ROAD HOME
Former prime minister Kevin Rudd in 2008 launched a white paper called The Road Home, an ambitious target to halve homelessness in Australia by 2020. Seven years on, and it is estimated that on any given night about 105,000 Australians will be homeless –with the rate of homelessness increasing each year. What is either major political party doing about it?
John Milne, Chapman
ROOM FOR LIGHT RAIL
Given the kerfuffle over the delays to the new Majura Parkway bridge over the Molonglo, there is one light at the end of the tunnel: Sufficient clearance has been left under the new bridge to allow the the extension of the light-rail system from Russell to the airport.
Dan Barton, Cook
Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attached file. Fax: 6280 2282. Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.
Keep your letter to 250 words or less. References to Canberra Times reports should include date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).