Dying, just not in our seas

IN response to Clark Cooley (“Pacific solution stops the boats — don’t go back”, Talking Point, May 21), the argument that the boat turn-back policy has saved lives at sea is a convenient one that is rolled out by both major parties, yet is not the case. It has just made sure that these people don’t die in our sea. They may instead die on the coastline of some other country, or at the hands of the brutal regimes from which they have fled, somewhere where we don’t have to deal with them. Mr Cooley and his conservative colleagues refer to those who seek asylum by boat as illegals. Under the Refugee Convention, of which Australia is a signatory, it is legal to seek asylum by boat and without a valid visa.

It is a blessed relief to the many Australians who support the right of people to seek asylum that Labor may be loosening their support of the inhumane policy of indefinite detention. People are languishing in offshore detention with no knowledge of when, if ever, they will be processed. Surely a 90-day maximum of offshore detention is closer to the sensible and humane policies to which Mr Cooley refers. This first step may bring our country closer to a more humane place and closer to our national anthem’s line “for those of who’ve come across the seas, we’ve boundless plains to share”.

More bang for buck

THE report by SGS Economics analysing the economic case for council amalgamations suggests the net benefit to ratepayers from a Hobart-Glenorchy merger would be $166 million or $8 million a year over 20 years. Community engagement could be maintained via precincts or community boards which ensure that the voice of ratepayers is still heard. In short, the report finds that an amalgamated council would deliver more bang for the ratepayer’s buck and reduce pressure for rate rises. As a recently elected alderman, it’s likely that I would lose my role in any such amalgamation, however my instincts and analysis tell me that helping to deliver this could be one of the most substantial contributions I could make to my community for several decades. government to compulsorily acquire reserved public land for the proposal. Alarming, certainly. Likely to elicit negative reactions, absolutely. Completely accurate and factual, yes.

The brief preambles to the poll questions do not mention the direct impacts, such as major building disturbance proposed at the Pinnacle, the three 30m-plus pylon towers, including at the crest of the Organ Pipes cliffs, and the bushland clearing required to accommodate an Old Farm Rd base station, with car park, bus turning circle, loading, retail and ticketing infrastructure, fire bunker and fire buffers, all in Wellington Park. Also not mentioned are the impacts that thousands of visitors per day would have on the most fragile accessible alpine country in Tasmania or the impacts on South Hobart residents by the tourist traffic.

Work on better councils

WITH elections due in October, voters should organise their thoughts to improving their local council. Suggestions: Elect at least two pensioner ratepayers to each council; replace staff who resign, retire or leave for any reason with volunteers, similar to that practised by the Tasmanian library. Perhaps retired shire or town clerks or similar; increase significantly fees and charges for building applications and double fees for multiple dwelling applications; reduce councillor allowances and payments to reasonable levels; and cap rate increases to no more than pensioner allowances.

Unsuitable slogans

WE continue to see wayward Wicked Camper vans roaming our island displaying negative unsavoury words of doom and gloom. How did this group pass our business and advertising watchdogs and work ethics commissions? If someone advertised in a similar fashion on a private van, cab or bus it would be deemed unsuitable and the licence terminated. The Wicked Campers message is degrading and unpleasant. We want camper visitors to have a devil of time but not in a manner of harmful words and nasty slogans.

Keeps me awake

ONCE again a Liberal minister has caved in to those who make a lot of money from the unnecessary suffering of animals. Agricultural Minister David Littleproud is now wasting public money travelling to the Middle East to assure live sheep importers that Australia, to its shame, is staying in the trade.

Whilst he is there will he do anything about the brutal abattoir workers who have been filmed kicking, bashing and even throwing these poor dumb creatures?

I cannot sleep at night thinking of these poor animals struggling to stand up as the ship rolls and dips across the Indian Ocean. They must be so terrified as they are forced to endure conditions that no farm animal should experience. Please, is there any politician that will stand up for what we know is intrinsically wrong?