Trouble at the Railway precinct
The public has spoken. The results are crystal clear. In just five days, nearly 700 people completed The Courier survey on the future of the Ballarat Station.
Nine out of ten people don't support the sale of nearly half the site for non-transport uses; they don't support the building of a 'hotel' and convention centre; they want the $25m government money to be spent on current and future public transport and on protecting our outstanding rail heritage.
Overwhelmingly, people want more, not less, public car parking. They want the historic Goods Shed to be used for a bus interchange.
It is time for Sharon Knight, Geoff Howard and Jaala Pulford to admit they got it wrong. If they cannot bring themselves to advocate for their electorates, they don't deserve to be re-elected. If Dan Andrews can't see that the $25m being spent on redevelopment of the Ballarat Station is backing the wrong horse, and will result in the loss of two lower house seats in the 2018 election, then he truly is the emperor with no clothes.
Save our Station, SOS Ballarat is holding a meeting at the Provincial Hotel today (Saturday 18th March from 10 - 11am.) All are encouraged to attend.
John Barnes, Save Our Station SOS
There cannot be a stronger argument for a C21 bus facility within the railway precinct than the current confusion on Lydiard Street North. Good facilities and services would enhance the public transport system for Ballarat and help to alleviate the parking problems.
Margaret Eedle, Wendouree
It is to our shame that our government cannot move far from the game of politics, thus closing the door to any compassion in special circumstances surrounding our Boat People. We hear too many heart breaking stories where individuals of good character, who make excellent citizens are subjected to harsh treatment of separation and uncertainty. Surely Australia has a bigger heart than this. Many folk hurt to see such injustice to good people left to suffer with little or no hope. A poor reflection on our nation. Our Minister holds much power, ever increasing, he shows great zeal in keeping to the letter of the law, but so often appears blind to the spirit of the law.
June Johnson, Alfredton
Time to shift our thinking
I am concerned when so-called climate sceptics use their doubts to take risks on behalf of us all. A sceptic is defined by the Oxford dictionary as "A person seeking the truth; an enquirer who has not yet arrived at definite convictions". I therefore don't believe a person who claims to be a climate sceptic and then makes the statement, "It's most certainly a case of the dog being wagged by the tail." (see Letters 15 March 2017). By definition, that is not a sceptical statement. It's a statement of conviction. That person is a climate denier. I'm concerned that his emotional, unscientific claims are stopping us from taking reasonable precautions. Like our "sceptic", I object to inequitable funding: The funding of coal-industry-friendly projects like carbon capture and storage. By hugely favouring this project, the government admits that carbon emissions are a problem. However, instead of solving this problem with existing technology (renewable energy), they favour a barely-tried, risky, pie-in-the-sky option. Base load power from renewable energy is available with existing technology. It requires a re-design of our power distribution system, but it can be done. We are approaching the climate problems with the wrong question. Instead of asking, "How can we avoid having to change?" we should be asking, "What can we do to solve these problems?" If it weren't for uninformed climate deniers that have obstructed progress for decades, we would have solved the problems by now. Let's get on with it.
Joe Boin, Invermay