LETTERS: High-rise dividing the community
THE NewsMail slogan has historically been "connecting our community".
It has done some wonderful work, over time, creating awareness about many issues.
In his editorial on Saturday (NM, 15/09), the editor throws the weight of the media into supporting the nine-storey high rise at Bargara.
He states, correctly, that the media has "the power to support our community leaders to make decisions".
Mr Editor you are ignoring one basic fact - Bundaberg Regional Council has not sought community opinion in this instance.
The current Town Plan reflects community opinion, unless and until it is changed.
It is not yet three years old.
If this development application had been for five storeys, with appropriate protection for the turtles, it would have been a "tick and flick".
Instead the developer has issued a nine-storey ultimatum, promising us more of the same, well aware that his application breaches the Town Plan.
That is not "connecting our community" - that is "dividing our community".
BEING an editor for Neighbourhood Watch, I noticed an article about speed limit cuts on 22 Bundaberg streets on your internet site.
I clicked on the headline which took me to a page that stated it was a premium article and I had to be a paid subscriber to access the information.
That article is of major importance for all road users and drivers and to not display the street names in your internet edition is disgraceful on your part.
It only needs one crash resulting and your integrity in protecting our community falls by the wayside.
A future government
THE performance of our Federal Government leaves me in absolute dismay.
No amount of past censure has changed the constant belligerent attitudes within and between the respective parties.
The turmoil of the "revolving door" of Prime Ministers is intolerable.
I therefore propose a complete change of the Westminster system of government as follows:
1. A fully partisan parliament comprised of like-minded and totally independent members.
2. No political parties required or allowed whatsoever.
The structure is envisaged as follows:
The prime minister is to be elected by ballot by the independents.
The duly elected prime minster would then choose two assistants from the remaining independents. He would then choose a Speaker and Cabinet again from the independent members.
Thus formed and duly sworn in by the governor-general, the government would operate as follows:
1. Its prime purpose is for the betterment, safety and welfare of the Australian people.
2. Each and every member will be totally and responsibly dedicated to that outcome.
Prior to being elected, the future member will be required to sign a sworn affidavit that he/she agrees
1. To Carry out his /her duties in a civilised, honest and lawful manner. Any breach thereof bringing about an instant dismissal.
2. That he/she is not a current member of any political party or group whatsoever.
There will be an audit/policing body within parliament comprised of civil servants, having the power and authority to oversee the behaviour and work ethics and performance of all Members.
There would be no opposition party in this new partisan government, set to oppose, hinder, delay and frustrate progress.
The checks and balances that the Westminster system required in the form of an opposition party would no longer apply, as those qualities are taken up by the independent members, who will have the absolute right to speak and to vote according to the dictates of their individual areas of responsibility and their own agency and conscience.
These conditions apply also to all senators.
Further to this, I believe that Australia should be governed wholly and solely by the Federal Government with one set of uniform laws.
The cost savings would be enormous. Now is the time to return to civility and unhampered progress.
I am not advocating that change is easy it will be difficult for some, but they will be in the minority.
AN ARTICLE published on the anniversary of September 11 argues that after 17 years, and a limitlessly funded brutal foreign policy, the only accomplishment by the US in the Middle East is chaos and destruction, an environment to breed extremist groups.
In 2001 the Bush Administration launched the War on Terror to eliminate Al-Qaeda, a group resulting from an operation by the CIA to arm and fund the Mujahideen in Afghanistan in the 1980s.
By the end of 2018 the US will have spent $5.6 trillion ($23,386 per taxpayer) caused the death of 500,000 people in Iraq, 31,000 civilians in Afghanistan and incalculable property and infrastructure damage throughout the Middle East.
Now it appears that rather than being destroyed Al-Qaeda is stronger than ever, spread by US policy, flourishing in Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Syria and Libya, all countries where the US has been actively engaged in bombing campaigns.