For­eign aid is not op­tional ex­tra

Warragul & Drouin Gazette - - NEWS -

Cor­re­spon­dent Ilana Leeds (Gaz 4/9) is quite right to en­cour­age us to sup­port Aus­tralia’s farm­ers. But Aus­tralians can have a big­ger vi­sion than fur­ther cut­ting our al­ready miserly for­eign aid.

It is true that char­ity be­gins at home – but char­ity does not end at home. We can do two things at once.

Pro­vid­ing fair and proper sup­port to farm­ers, and other Aus­tralians who are strug­gling whether on the land or in towns, ought to be stan­dard pro­ce­dure, and not re­garded as some sort of op­tional ex­tra.

Pro­vid­ing fair and proper en­cour­age­ment to peo­ple in the Pa­cific Is­land na­tion states and other places in the less de­vel­oped world, ought equally to be re­garded as stan­dard pro­ce­dure and not an op­tional ex­tra.

The two types of sup­port are not al­ter­na­tives, but the two sides of the one coin – the coin of hu­man­i­tar­ian friend­ship.

To say you can’t give overseas aid in or­der to sup­port farm­ers is like a par­ent say­ing he and she can’t love their sec­ond or third child be­cause they al­ready love their el­dest child. We love them all.

Buy­ing Aus­tralian pro­duced food, en­cour­ag­ing young peo­ple with jobs, pro­vid­ing high stan­dard aged care are all part of the same vi­sion: to live in an open, car­ing, gen­er­ous, just and sus­tain­able world. That’s our high vi­sion. Any­thing else sells us short.

Let’s tell our politi­cians we have loftier goals than a fat­ter hip pocket and that our vi­sion ex­tends be­yond our own bound­aries.

Eric Smith, Shady Creek

Bun­gled NBN

A pro­fes­sion­ally re­spon­si­ble or­gan­i­sa­tion promptly re­me­di­ates blun­ders by its per­son­nel.

That doesn't ap­ply to the pleased and proud much ad­ver­tised na­tion­ally im­ma­ture and de­pen­dent NBN.

Forced by the cut off date of Septem­ber 14 in Long­warry to con­nect I ar­ranged in good time with a highly ef­fi­cient telco for an NBN con­nec­tion which was sched­uled to oc­cur on Au­gust 30.

The telco provided a mo­dem with in­struc­tions which was made op­er­a­tive on that date with func­tion­al­ity to oc­cur within 24 hours.

But the con­nec­tion was bun­gled by an NBN op­er­a­tive and I was deprived of lan­d­line and in­ter­net. Disoblig­ingly the NBN sched­uled an­other con­nec­tion date, Septem­ber 4 some 96 hours af­ter the blun­der.

My phone com­plaint to the NBN was recorded I was told but not reme­died. An ear­lier date was not pos­si­ble. This delin­quency in­stances an or­gan­i­sa­tion that sub­jects its users to its con­ve­nience not theirs.

No­to­ri­ously the much hyped NBN is be­com­ing a na­tional white ele­phant and the bas­tard off­spring of the Punch and Judy mu­tual blame game by both highly salaried sides of the party play­ground in the na­tional sound cham­ber as they long pros­ti­tuted it to their self serv­ing par­ti­san pol­i­tics.

The dere­lic­tion I've de­scribed should at­tract a fi­nan­cial penalty im­posed on the NBN. Likely? Porcine avi­a­tion will first en­sue I sup­pose

Frank Car­leton, Long­warry

Tell Baw Baw Coun­cil

We re­ceived a let­ter from the Baw Baw Shire in re­la­tion to clos­ing part of Lil­lico Road. The por­tion to be closed is from the en­trance of the new es­tate to the in­ter­sec­tion with Eve Rd.

The en­trance to the new es­tate is slightly up­hill from the creek, which is at the bot­tom of a steep hill run­ning down from Brandy Creek Rd.

We know that when this road clo­sure takes place coun­cil will then en­act its plan to re­name this stretch of Lil­lico Road, putting 28 prop­erty own­ers to some con­sid­er­able ex­pense to change their street ad­dress.

Rep­re­sen­ta­tion was made to coun­cil by a lo­cal heavy ve­hi­cle op­er­a­tor of the al­most im­pos­si­ble le­gal travel through the new round­about in­side the es­tate, the ad­vice from one coun­cil­lor “Can’t you go an­other way” wasn’t well re­ceived. As it would en­tail a much longer route to his prop­erty, us­ing more ex­pen­sive fuel.

Traf­fic mov­ing north south on Lil­lico Rd will en­ter the es­tate, head­ing down hill, re­duce speed, ne­go­ti­ate a round­about and then travel out to the ex­ist­ing south­ern por­tion of Lil­lico Rd and ac­cel­er­ate up the hill.

Traf­fic head­ing south to north travel down the steep hill, chang­ing down through the gears and then up the rise, brak­ing to turn into the es­tate, ne­go­ti­at­ing the round­about which seems to be on a “strange” down­hill angle, re­quir­ing longer ve­hi­cles to travel into the on­com­ing lane to ne­go­ti­ate the right hand turn, ac­cel­er­at­ing up the rise, past the houses, then join­ing the ex­ist­ing Lil­lico Rd.

If the cur­rent road­way is left in situ traf­fic will “flow” past the es­tate, re­duc­ing noise pol­lu­tion, air pol­lu­tion, ex­ces­sive use of fuel and al­low the res­i­dents of the es­tate a qui­eter ex­is­tence.

We have been told by coun­cil that the south­ern sec­tion of Lil­lico Rd is not a “feeder” road but the new road run­ning from Dol­lar­burn Rd, Brandy Creek Rd in­ter­sec­tion into the es­tate will be a feeder road.

That road will not be con­structed in the near fu­ture as it is in the fi­nal stage of the de­vel­op­ment, mean­while its okay for the south­ern sec­tion to “feed” into the es­tate all the traf­fic as­so­ci­ated with the de­vel­op­ment and hous­ing.

Ve­hi­cles of all sizes and types head­ing north down the hill, us­ing their ex­haust brakes and chang­ing down gears to slow down enough to ne­go­ti­ate the turn into the es­tate. Then the noise of them ac­cel­er­at­ing up the hill to the new build­ing sites.

The cur­rent in­ter­sec­tion of Eve Rd with Lil­lico Rd meets at 90 de­grees, af­ford­ing a clear line of sight to the traf­fic com­ing around the bend to their left and a clear line of sight to the traf­fic on their right.

Clos­ing that por­tion of Lil­lico Rd and util­is­ing the new es­tate road­way will now re­quire the driv­ers of ve­hi­cles ex­it­ing Eve Rd to turn 45 de­grees to see over their left shoul­der to view any on­com­ing traf­fic.

It is com­mon sense to leave the cur­rent road­way, to re­duce the con­stant brak­ing, gear chang­ing (we don’t all drive au­to­mat­ics) and ac­cel­er­at­ing, all ac­com­pa­nied by noise pol­lu­tion.

So if you would like to in­form the coun­cil that you would like less noise pol­lu­tion, air pol­lu­tion, and re­duce the use of fos­sil fu­els then you should lodge a sub­mis­sion to be re­ceived by Coun­cil by 5pm on Tues­day Septem­ber 25 and should be ad­dressed to the chief ex­ec­u­tive of­fi­cer Baw Baw Shire Coun­cil PO Box 304, War­ragul, 3820. Terry J Hennessy, War­ragul

Com­mon­sense pre­vails

It was good to read the re­port about the exit lane at the Shell Nar Nar Goon Ser­vice Sta­tion (Gaz 4/9).

Com­mon­sense has pre­vailed at last. The busi­ness was es­tab­lished in 1928 and passed to the Clough fam­ily many years ago. It is among the top fuel re­tail­ers in Vic­to­ria, a po­si­tion achieved by of­fer­ing com­pet­i­tive prices and good ser­vice.

When the Pak­en­ham By­pass was con­structed just over 10 years ago, ac­cess to the site was se­verely re­stricted. Ev­ery cus­tomer since then has been forced to drive an ex­tra 2.5kms due to this re­stricted ac­cess. The same in­con­ve­nience ap­plied to east bound ve­hi­cles ex­it­ing Bessie Creek Road.

The in­con­ve­nience came about be­cause of a Vic Roads rule that such busi­nesses could only sup­ply fuel and food to mo­torists. The Mazda deal­er­ship was not con­sid­ered a ser­vice to the mo­tor­ing public.

Now your re­port tells us that the Clough brothers have had to pay for the very ex­ten­sive exit lane them­selves. Not only did the ser­vice sta­tion lose ac­cess to the west-bound traf­fic when the by­pass opened, it could only serve east-bound with dif­fi­culty.

It seems very un­fair that it has taken over 10 years, ma­jor le­gal costs and sev­eral vis­its to VCAT to ob­tain the sen­si­ble de­ci­sion to al­low an exit lane that should have been in place when the by­pass was built.

Maybe we should see a class ac­tion by cus­tomers to re­cover the cost of 2.5kms ex­tra driv­ing for ev­ery time they have vis­ited the ser­vice sta­tion. In my own case, I have been there on av­er­age twice a month for the past 10 years. Say 25 times a year by 10 is about 250 vis­its, by 2.5kms is about 600 kms for no pur­pose other than a very silly and re­stric­tive Vic Roads reg­u­la­tion. There have been mil­lions of vis­its by cus­tomers in the 10 years.

If Cloughs have to pay the full cost of this ‘overkill' merg­ing lane, what con­tri­bu­tion did the ser­vice sta­tions at the Sand Road over­pass make to their very ex­ten­sive road works?

May Shell Nar Nar Goon in­crease sales so that the un­fair cost is re­cov­ered in a very short time. I am not as­so­ci­ated with Shell Nar Nar Goon other than as a cus­tomer. Don McLean, Bun­yip

Just a slo­gan

I thank the Gazette for their ar­ti­cle on my can­di­da­ture as an In­de­pen­dent in the Up­per House Vic­to­ria for the forth­com­ing elec­tion (Gaz 28/8).

A po­lit­i­cal cam­paign slo­gan is about po­si­tion­ing the com­mu­nity for a higher pur­pose in a mem­o­rable way. It serves as a first im­pres­sion for vot­ers, hop­ing to stir emo­tion in them to take ac­tion.

A slo­gan should have mean­ing and a high de­gree of emo­tion as­so­ci­ated with it.

My cam­paign mes­sage 'Make Gipp­s­land Great' might be com­pared to Trump’s 'Make Amer­ica Great Again' or even Clive Palmer’s ‘Make Aus­tralia Great' but it is only a slo­gan.

I have also used “keep the bas­tards hon­est”Don Chipp and “It’s Time” La­bor .

I be­lieve that most Gipp­s­lan­ders want to see change hap­pen. They want to see Gipp­s­land re­stored to its po­si­tion of eco­nomic and re­source sig­nif­i­cance within the state.

‘Make Gipp­s­land Great' is my way of sum­maris­ing what I stand for. That we as Gipp­s­lan­ders need to be given time, at­ten­tion, fund­ing and a pow­er­ful voice for change, so that we can im­prove our trans­port ser­vices, our ed­u­ca­tion, our em­ploy­ment op­por­tu­ni­ties, our polic­ing ser­vices, and our health ser­vices.

Other re­gional ar­eas of Vic­to­ria are be­ing given pri­or­ity at the ex­pense of Gipp­s­lan­ders and this must stop. It is our turn. It is our right.

To­gether we can stand up and de­mand that we be given fund­ing, sup­port and re­sources.

To­gether we can make the govern­ment live up to its prom­ises. To­gether we can make Gipp­s­land Great – Grow Gipp­s­land.

Michael Fozard, Trafal­gar

No sticker

I thought this could be a good fo­rum to in­form the driver of large white util­ity (I do have the reg­is­tra­tion num­ber) that his dis­abled driver sticker was not show­ing when he parked in a dis­abled space at Wool­worths, last Thurs­day early morn­ing.

I hope he reads this and finds his sticker be­fore he parks again. I would not want him to get into any bother by park­ing in a dis­abled zone with­out the proper per­mis­sions.

Ann Humphries, War­ragul

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.