OH BOY, WE NEED A PLAN

LEADING developer Bob Ell’s commitment to getting two major projects under way in the Tweed should be music to the ears of the Gold Coast.

According to ABS figures, the city’s population – not taking into account developments such as Mr Ell’s just over the border – will be 768,000 by 2030 and one million by the middle of that decade.

His $1 billion Cobaki Lakes and Kings Forest projects combined will deliver blocks for 10,000 new homes – large housing developments but of course, nowhere near enough to absorb the numbers governments and planning experts say will arrive here in the decades ahead.

Enter long-time developer and former councillor Norm Rix, who has called for zoning that restricts the vast tracts of caneland in the city’s north to agricultural use to be relaxed to allow housing development.

It is a controversial proposal that will generate plenty of discussion – as it should, because the future of the Gold Coast must be debated.

At the moment, the State Government has set targets and dumped them at the door of the city council. Under the Government’s Shaping SEQ plan, the council is required to accommodate an extra 158,900 dwellings by 2041.

Many things have to be considered in working out how this is to happen. The obvious first question is why all these people want to come here. Then there is the matter of how they wish to live – in houses or units, and where. When they arrive, they will find that a long list of factors, chiefly among them cost, creates a wide divide between expectation and reality.

With the City Plan undergoing review, one element has become apparent – when the chief decisionmakers, the councillors, are up for election and therefore prone to backflipping as the blowtorch of voter/resident anger is applied, a matter as vital as this to the city’s future should not be left solely in the local government’s hands.

Instead of issuing a directive and telling the council to get on with it, the State Government therefore should be a key player in sorting out the mess – and that indeed is what this is, since the decision to go big for example with high-density development in the nominated population “hot spots” was watered down quickly when furious residents gave their divisional councillors a hot time of their own at public meetings.

Added to that is the appalling delay that has long existed in provision of transport infrastructure necessary to keep the city functioning. One look at the drone video footage posted on our website, showing the volumes of traffic trying to use service roads and ramps accessing the M1 in the city’s north, should horrify anyone contemplating what the future might hold unless the authorities get a move on with M1 upgrades, build the alternative Coomera Connector and upgrade the feeder roads. We can only imagine too what might happen in the eastern and southern suburbs if the tramline is not built.

The Gold Coast will only have one chance to get this right. The Queensland Government has to recognise this, accept our city’s case is unique and so play a major role in finding solutions.

I WOULD like to thank the Gold Coast Bulletin for ongoing coverage of the homeless issue. It’s a shame all three levels of government seem to put the problem in the too hard basket.

I’m a business woman who works in Southport every day. You can’t comprehend the enormity of the homeless tragedy here unless you spend time on the ground in Southport talking to the homeless, to residents, to business owners, to the police and the charities.

I’m running as a candidate in Division 6. I didn’t enter the race due to an aspiration to be a politician. I entered because I have seen the deterioration of Southport and the escalation of homelessness in Southport over the years. I believe with my experience and ability to get things done I can make a real difference. I’m shocked that nothing is being done, nobody is talking about it – except the Gold Coast Bulletin – not even the other candidates.

The homeless don’t need our pity and they don’t deserve our scorn. Homelessness is a huge, complex problem but it is solvable. What we are lacking is the collective and political will to get it done.

Sustainable housing is what most homeless experts agree is the best solution. Provide more permanent and supportive housing, which means supplying homes with all the services on site to not only break the cycle of homelessness but to address issues where we can break the cycle of poverty, address mental, physical and emotional illness. Get people up to a more sustainable self-reliant mode.

One of the arguments is a lack of resources. However, we spend millions on homeless services, on

health care, on law enforcement, mental health treatment. Added together it’s a lot of money without making significant progress. All very limited and expensive resources just to see people returned back to the streets a few days later. This costs all of us an enormous amount in tax dollars. This doesn’t even take into account the cost to our local business owners and local residents. The homeless, the business owners and the local residents all deserve better.

It doesn’t cost more to provide permanent solutions, we could be spending far less and having better outcomes for the homeless while at the same time creating much healthier communities for all. JO SHERLINE, CANDIDATE FOR DIVISION 6

ON Thursday, “Diz” lamented in Chatroom why there were variations in the volume on TV channels.

“One minute you can hear the program, the next you are blasted out of the room. It is so annoying.”

The answer is simple: TV channels are not interested in intelligibilities.

In the good old days, there was an announcer who read the news for listeners.

My favourites were Annette Allison in Brisbane and Brian Henderson for the years I spent in Sydney … crystal clear understandable reporting.

Today we have up to four TV reporters at the desk – who are obviously encouraged to amuse themselves.

Nobody at the stations checks things such as audio volumes, or anything else.

Through the eyes of TV managers, such programs no longer require

preparation, clarity and honesty.

“Diz”, I hope that helps your understanding. IAN TIMMINS, MERMAID BEACH RICHARD GAGIE, ORMEAU BILL HAUFF, SURFERS PARADISE

THERE’S so much focus on raising funds to support victims of the bushfires that we sometimes forget the devastating impact on our native animals and birds.

Birdlife Australia is an organisation devoted to protecting out native birds. Many of our unique birds already had threatened numbers or limited habitat, and the fires have wiped out a lot of the birds or their feeding and breeding sites. So Birdlife Australia is attempting to raise funds to support sending experts into the various areas to assess the impact and survival of the birds and habitat to see what steps can be taken to reduce the losses.

To that end they have a campaign to raise funds at www.birdlife.org.au/current-appeal/.

Please visit that site if you are able to help.

THE real reason for red tape and absolutely ridiculous laws is because we have an extremely bloated public service.

The Premier has put on thousands and thousands of new public servants who have no idea what happens in the real world as they have no experience.

They are led by more public servants who have no idea either. They spend an inordinate amount of time and resources coming up with ridiculous laws that just do not work.

FEDERAL Opposition leader Anthony Albanese (GCB, 21/2) couldn’t be more wrong with his ridiculously unscientific “zero carbon” goal. Does he know all life on Earth is carbon-based?

When the climate changes it’s because of variations in solar energy received, heat stored/released by 1.3 billion cubic kilometres of seawater, and related cloud cover patterns.

Any possible effect of manmade trace gases is mathematically dwarfed into insignificance by the enormous natural force of the sun at work on Earth’s massive oceans.

Jobs are dependent on a vibrant economy and the three things killing that are excessive regulation, excessive taxation and excessive energy prices – all dictated by governments.

The Federal Government could do a great deal to dramatically improve the number of jobs simply by minimising its own tax and regulatory burden on businesses and taxpayers.

The laws of physics dictate that existing solar, wind, and battery technology cannot and will not replace coal, gas, diesel, nuclear, and/ or large hydro – not at any price.

The federal government could slash power bills by a third by simply changing the price of a Renewable Energy Certificate to one cent – then we’d default to cheap, reliable energy which would include zero renewables.

But, sadly, as long as both branches of the LNP-ALP UNiparty cling to the UN’s climate change wealth redistribution and global governance plan we’re doomed to swirl our way down the gurgler. PETER CAMPION, TOLGA