Noth­ing wrong with ‘spe­cial lobby group’

Port Douglas & Mossman Gazette - - FEEDBACK -

could be by­passed be­hind closed doors.

Now we have War­ren Entsch (what water­front plan?) and friends want­ing to over­ride the water­front pub­lic con­sul­ta­tion and com­mit­tee process for what?

This re­minds me a lit­tle of the dy­ing years/months of the Dou­glas Shire Coun­cil. A few ques­tions. How many pools does Port need? How many re­sorts do not have a pool? Who re­ally wants the pool? Has any­one spent time on the Cairns Es­planade - ever go swim and pic­nic on the “Nade”?

A lot of back­pack­ers - not the biggest spenders to the Dou­glas re­gion at all.

I thought this area wished to be re­garded as a 4 and 5-star des­ti­na­tion.

If our mar­ket­ing brains in Port Dou­glas re­ally think that putting a pool in Dick­son’s In­let is go­ing to change not only tourism but the econ­omy in this area than maybe they need to think again.

A pool ain’t go­ing to change much but our rates. Crocodiles - say no more. Se­cu­rity - who’s pay­ing for the all day and night se­cu­rity?

When the pubs and bars close and the merry vis­i­tors and lo­cals want to go swim­ming, are the be­hind door crowd go­ing to pay?

I’m sure the po­lice will be de­lighted at hav­ing this pool so close.

Would it not be a wiser choice to in­ves­ti­gate the area be­hind the surf club, where a prop­erly fenced and land­scaped pool could com­ple­ment that for­got­ten sec­tion of the water­front?

There is al­ready a swim­ming cul­ture es­tab­lished with a well-or­gan­ised club, which I’m sure would ap­pre­ci­ate the paid life­guards’ work.

But re­ally the main is­sue is Dick­son’s In­let it­self.

Putting a pool in Dick­son’s In­let is as en­vi­ron­men­tal as putting a sub­di­vi­sion on wet­lands at Wonga.

What is rad­i­cally chang­ing the coast­line near the in­let mouth go­ing to do to the silt,the tides, the birds?

This is a much loved and ap­pre­ci­ated area just as it is.

I know it’s all pol­i­tics but let’s think about the prac­ti­cal­i­ties and the in­let.

Don’t screw with our coastal en­vi­ron­ment any­more. and fel­low neigh­bours, you should all be very proud of your­selves. I DON’T un­der­stand why it is such a ter­ri­ble thing that a “spe­cial in­ter­est lobby group” has its fin­ger in the Water­front La­goon pie (Toni McNamara let­ter, Gazette, Novem­ber 18). She should re­joice this pri­vate ini­tia­tive.

A small part of the master­plan can be re­alised soon, rather than hav­ing to wait 10 years as per master­plan timetable.

What was “se­cret” when three mem­bers of the Water­front Ad­vi­sory Com­mit­tee were in­vited to at­tend the pri­vate meet­ing?

Toni’s ad­vi­sory com­mit­tee con­sists en­tirely of mem­bers rep­re­sent­ing spe­cial in­ter­est groups. Con­trib­u­tors are the Water­front As­so­ci­a­tion, LIPS, the fish­er­men, the His­tor­i­cal So­ci­ety, the de­vel­oper Meri­dien, the Cham­ber of Com­merce and the lo­cal en­vi­ron­ment group rep­re­sented by Toni on her green hobby horse.

With the fi­nal­i­sa­tion of the water­front master­plan and its ac­cep­tance by the Cairns Re­gional Coun­cil last month, the Water­front Ad­vi­sory Com­mit­tee be­came re­dun­dant. It does not rep­re­sent our com­mu­nity, but rather only the views of its mem­bers.

Mem­bers of our com­mu­nity don’t need to con­sult or seek per­mis­sion from the Water­front Ad­vi­sory Com­mit­tee as sug­gested.

The water­front master­plan be­longs to all of us and good luck to the peo­ple who want to get on with it. “I think it is a very good idea we def­i­nitely need more in Moss­man. The Gate­way is go­ing to open up more jobs for lo­cals and in­vite more tourists to the area which will be great for the re­gion.

“To be hon­est I don’t know any­thing about it. I live in Moss­man but I haven’t heard much at all re­ally.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.