paper as saying ‘‘We are going to redevelop Chamberlain Park’’ one wonders about the reality of this process, particularly as the website includes a ‘‘None of the above’’ option.
From the ‘‘Consultation Phase 1’’ numbers shown, it appears that 59 per cent of 1365 respondents requested ‘‘Walking’’ as an option. In fact it is 59 per cent of the1020 who responded to the question ‘‘Select the three everyday activities that you would like to do at Chamberlain Park’’. The same applies for each percentage given - it is the percentage of the votes for a number of individual questions.
The most notable omission is the 55 per cent of respondents who voted for ‘‘Other’’ in answer to the flawed question ‘‘Select the three sporting activities you would most like to do at Chamberlain Park’’ with the write-in responses on the survey clearly favouring golf, which should have been included as an option. High percentages are also shown for the Chinese garden and for an 18-hole golf course, this latter option only having been introduced partway through the survey period. Each of the golf scenarios contains an error in the total par of the course and this makes one wonder how much rigour has been applied to the consultation documents.