It shouldn't be surprising that Technical Real Estate still seems keen to maintain its data hub project in Canberra (editorial, November 15, pB6).
That ACT Government departments, ActewAGL and associated companies would lease space could already be guaranteed.
Used by Australian Government departments and other local businesses, it is also likely to figure in the Canberra Technology City projections.
Technical Real Estate says Canberra is the largest information economy in Australia.
It's unlikely any of this business would follow the company interstate.
Technical Real Estate has four proposed data centres, none yet built.
Only the other Australian centre, in Sydney has yet received regulatory approval. Canberra Technology City is the largest of Technical Real Estate's proposals and is the only one offering co-generation with a gas-fired power plant.
It would appear central to the company's strategy to create an Asian region network of data centres.
The consortium is not without blame for the situation it finds itself in.
The power plant proposal was scaled back from 220 megawatts to 28MW on the eve of facing regulatory approval and the potential size of the project halved.
It is believable that this occurred because the larger power station was unlikely to get approval or because, as stated by ActewAGL's chief executive, Michael Costello, it was too small to be economic (to whoever was to be its ultimate owner).
The ACT taxpayer should not be responsible for these costs.
John Bromhead, Rivett
It shouldn't be taxpayers who foot the bill for the Tuggeranong data centre and power station debacle (''Data hub asks for moving money'', November 15, p1).
Apparently, it should be the one or two insiders, and maybe fee-taking ''consultants'', who seemingly bullied their way past good planning, due process, and common sense, possibly for commercial gain. This is redolent of the Narrabundah Long Stay Caravan Park mess, the section 63 (City Hill) excesses and omissions, and the like.
It's time we had a permanent independent commission against such society-destroying practices.
Jack Kershaw, Kambah
Greeds not Greens
The announcement that the Green Speaker of the ACT Assembly, Shane Rattenbury, will also hold shadow portfolios (''Speaker to juggle role with portfolios'', November 15, p7) finds me agreeing for the first time in my political life with Chief Minister Jon Stanhope.
This is a decision that reflects on the independence of the Speaker.
If Speaker Rattenbury is also to be Rattenbury, Greens spokesman on environment, climate change, water, energy, justice matters, tourism and sport, then the least the Greens can do is to provide money from their Speaker's high salary to Mary Porter MLA.
As Deputy Speaker she is going to spend more time in the chair than the better remunerated Speaker. Indeed, in wanting the best of everything political, perhaps the ACT Greens should be renamed the ACT Greeds.
Greg Cornwell, Yarralumla
Minority rules
It will be interesting to see if a new cemetery will be built on the now defunct data centre site in Macarthur (Letters, November 15 ).
Judging by how many decisions are made in this town where the noisy minority tends to come out the winner, all it will take is a handful of residents to get a few prominent pollies on side for the whole thing to be laid to rest, no matter whether the majority benefits.
Julie Clark, Flynn
Email a friend