LET­TERS TO THE EDI­TOR

The Coffs Coast Advocate - - YOUR SAY -

The war on drugs would be lost

PILL-TEST­ING at mu­sic fes­ti­vals makes me shake my head and I won­der if I can be­lieve what I’m hear­ing.

Do the hu­man be­ings who make these de­ci­sions and who share the same oxy­gen know the dif­fer­ence be­tween right and wrong?

I have seen the par­ents of these sad in­di­vid­u­als get­ting me­dia ex­po­sure plead­ing with state bod­ies to change their stance to have pill-test­ing.

If you’ve done all you can then let go. It is their choice to go down this path.

Il­le­gal drugs are il­le­gal. I look to the skies and won­der some­times if I’m liv­ing on the same planet, it’s sur­real.

If pill-test­ing sta­tions are set-up at the en­trances to these events then there should also be a lock-up next to it.

When a per­son pro­duces drugs for pill-test­ing they should be read their rights, issued with a costly in­fringe­ment/no­tice and awarded a crim­i­nal record.

If these fools over­dose in these events sim­ply have se­cu­rity place them out­side to suf­fer the con­se­quences.

Duty of care should not be wasted on them.

These “mup­pets” are over­tax­ing valu­able re­sources over peo­ple in the com­mu­nity who gen­uinely need as­sis­tance.

If gov­ern­ments de­cide to give in to per­ma­nent pill-test­ing then the war on drugs has been lost.

This low­ers com­mu­nity stan­dards and ex­pec­ta­tions. The po­lice and emer­gency ser­vices have a big enough job to do now with­out this. Mark Lin­ney, Toormina.

Why coun­cil­lors op­posed the de­sign

WITH the dis­cus­sions in the pa­per in the past few weeks, some peo­ple may be think­ing “why are you coun­cil­lors fight­ing so hard for a by­pass with tun­nels and not ac­cept­ing the change to an open cut op­tion?”

Sim­ply, the open cut op­tion will have far more neg­a­tive so­cial, eco­nomic and en­vi­ron­men­tal im­pacts that we can’t ig­nore.

Make no mis­take, the by­pass will hap­pen as sched­uled, it must.

There are many tens of mil­lions of dol­lars of in­vest­ment and skilled work­ers that need the con­ti­nu­ity of work.

How­ever, we as com­mu­nity have already ac­cepted sig­nif­i­cant com­pro­mises on this piece of National In­fra­struc­ture for the “greater good” of the State and Na­tion.

To date we have ac­cepted the “by­pass” will come closer to our city than de­sir­able.

We have ac­cepted the Coffs Har­bour to Wool­go­olga up­grade that has split a com­mu­nity and made a true by­pass un­able now to be achieved as we are forced to con­nect to the orig­i­nal North­ern up­grade.

The Coffs Har­bour com­mu­nity, to date, has not shirked any “greater good” re­spon­si­bil­i­ties.

We have done our bit. We now need to be given con­sid­er­a­tion by the gov­ern­ments of NSW and Aus­tralia to al­low us to have a de­sign with the least neg­a­tive im­pact on our com­mu­nity, not a by­pass dic­tated to by cost alone.

Open cuts will “in­dus­tri­alise’” our town for no good rea­son. These cuts will be nearly four foot­ball fields wide into solid rock, de­stroy­ing fam­ily farms that have been there for gen­er­a­tions as well as nat­u­ral habi­tats.

There are two op­tions of de­sign be­fore us and one is far su­pe­rior to the other.

The dam­age caused by the wrong decision is sig­nif­i­cant and ir­re­versible.

This is a for­ever decision. There has been much mis­in­for­ma­tion ped­alled to the com­mu­nity such as that dan­ger­ous goods trucks will con­tinue to go through town with a tun­nel op­tion. Not cor­rect.

Nearly all dan­ger­ous goods trucks can go through tun­nels.

The ex­cep­tions are a few highly flammable and ex­plo­sives goods.

This amounts to less than 20 trucks i.e LPG car­ri­ers, among the 2500 trucks that go through town at the mo­ment, and some of these are de­liv­er­ing to town any­way.

The re­ten­tion of 10-odd trucks go­ing through town in a day is an in­con­ve­nience that I am sure the com­mu­nity can ac­cept if we get a solution that will mean re­duced noise, limited visual im­pact, less wildlife and veg­e­ta­tion dam­age and re­ten­tion of our nat­u­ral beauty and life­style.

It’s worth fight­ing for these key things that make us want to live here and oth­ers want to visit. This is an issue for us all to stand up and be counted on. Coun­cil­lor Paul Amos

Step­ping out to com­bat air pol­lu­tion

I AM amazed to find that over a third of all the world pol­lu­tion is gen­er­ated by petrol, gas, diesel and av­gas.

No won­der that in the ma­jor cities the qual­ity of air is so poor.

My new year res­o­lu­tion is to drive less and walk more. Would you join me? Bill Vega, Boambee East

There is op­ti­mism in a fall­ing mar­ket

I DON’T un­der­stand the doom and gloom con­cern­ing the hous­ing mar­ket and fall­ing prop­erty prices.

Prices were too high in the first place, the fact they are go­ing down is a good thing.

It means more peo­ple will be able to af­ford houses.

I would like to see hous­ing prices drop even fur­ther.

If peo­ple are in a prop­erty that is worth less than what they paid for it doesn’t mat­ter at least they have a roof over their heads.

Bleat­ing about fall­ing prop­erty prices dam­ag­ing the econ­omy is led by vested in­ter­ests. Bob Vin­ni­combe

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.