Innocent oversight or deliberate ploy?
SINCE 2015 CHCC has published a plan for the Jetty Foreshores that they led everyone to believe, was what they actually intended to do.
CHCC recently revealed that it had been discovered that this was not the 'correct' plan.
Now two months into construction the "actual plan" will now put the boardwalk through the middle of the dunes despite having been assured Jetty Dunecare since 2015 that it would not. The mayor has apologised for the mistake but has been unable to answer our questions.
'At what point, and by who was the plan made, to have the boardwalk on the western side of the dunes, and for what reasons?
Apparently those responsible for knowing about any of this are no longer with CHCC.
If those remaining at CHCC have been unable to answer a number of simple questions around the planning process for the Jetty Foreshore development, then who there is looking after the interests of the boarder community and our precious natural environment?
Who will take responsibility for this apparent lack of oversight and continuity of the planning process?
In light of these recent events how will subsequent investigations eventually rank CHCC in the adherence to the guiding principles Transparency, accountability and due Process? Fundamentals of our democratic process.
Why are these things too much to ask for? Why should we accept anything less?
This is public land and public money. It's our right to know. It belongs to us all.
Even if the vested interests and their supporters believe they have found a legal loophole for this radical turn, is it reasonable, fair or ethical to have misled the public for so long with no explanation?
What can be done to improve the quality of the process for any proposed future developments on our public land?
I believe the truth will eventually be revealed, but I fear for what damage will be done through this debacle in the meantime, not just to our vulnerable dunes but to the trust and good will of our community.
Simpler funding formula is a per student allocation
ARNOLD Jago quotes Mary MacKillop, who spoke against government funding for Catholic schools (Your Say, 1 July), and I must agree that, in some respects, she had it right!
My forty-plus years working in government schools taught me many things, not the least being the iniquity of inequality in schooling.
All people should have the right to equality of opportunity in learning, but this has never been available.
Instead of ensuring equality, governments have used the taxes payed by both the least wealthy and the most wealthy in society, to fund schools for special interest religious groups and the wealthy.
The "funding formula" should be simple.
Every student should be allocated an amount of government money, provided regardless of the type of school which the student attends throughout the primary, secondary and tertiary levels, and regardless of the financial circumstances of students' families.
Governments should provide everything required to create one excellent school system catering for the vast majority of taxpayers who have neither the desire to access the teachings of religious groups, nor the funds to access schooling for the wealthy.
If a religion or a group of wealthy individuals wishes to establish a school, they should fund the entire exercise from construction to staffing to daily running. The only money provided by governments would be the per capita funding provided to all students.
Eliminating government funding to non-government systems would ensure that wealthy schools would have to finance that third swimming pool or that sixth tennis court themselves.
Public housing has been neglected leading to homelessness
NOW that winter has set in it's time for the community to think about all those poor people who are homeless in these cold conditions.
Affordable housing is in short supply as repeated governments, both state and federal have neglected this vital sector.
Thousands are on the Department of Housing waiting lists and a waiting time of 10-15 years is the average in this area.
With the scarcity of affordable housing,spiralling power bills and reduced penalty rates it seems those on low incomes have been left well and truly behind those negatively geared, multiple home owners.
What are our local members doing about this?
Little that I can see,safe seats being part of the problem.