GREENS councillor John Mackenzie must I believe be congratulated for highlighting the hypocrisy of the council in its refusal to make an assessment of the pollutants created by the Supercars event ("Councillor's race fury", Newcastle Herald 29/6).
Residents are very familiar with this kind of thing: there's been disputed figures on attendance, economic benefits for local business, and even the length of the lockdown required for the event. In my opinion it is scandalous to measure particulate pollution during the event at Newcastle West, and the council's response that the fuel has lower emissions is just as ludicrous.
The sheer volume of cars burning huge amounts of fuel at the front doors of residents more than makes up for the lower benzene level in E75 and E85 fuel. The hundreds of semi-trailers, the cranes, the road machinery used to resurface the roads for Supercars, the generators, delivery trucks and all the other support vehicles required for the bump-in, the race and the bump-out, use huge amounts of fuel and diesel. This is where the emissions are at their worst. Greenwashing this polluting event is in my view an abrogation of responsibility to the entire Newcastle population, but especially to the people directly affected who live and work in the event zone.
Karen Read, Newcastle
Questions are off and racing
FOR me the report by Sage Swinton ("Councillors race fury", Newcastle Herald 29/6), highlights the difficulty in relying on City of Newcastle's report on the impact of the Supercars 500 on Newcastle East. I was at my unit overlooking Scott Street and observed first-hand over the three days of racing the air pollution generated by the Supercars event. I supplied photographs of the pollution along with noise data to the council's KPMG consultants, so the council can hardly say that it was never aware of the burnouts carried out by Supercars on the Saturday of the race that filled the residents' zones with burnt rubber.
In addition, both the racing cars and the RAAF covered the area with unburnt fuel which, at my unit, burnt eyes and nostrils.
John Davies, Newcastle East
Don't resort to NIMBYism
I FEEL compelled to tell the truth about my experience with Raffertys Resort.
In 2000, I owned 10 per cent of the resort, in that there were only 10 properties and I owned one of them. The resort was designed to be Lake Macquarie's breakthrough tourist destination. In its first few years it fulfilled that promise, with 90 per cent of units being available for tourist accommodation and, for many years, I was on the marketing committee as the number of units multiplied.
When the original management sold out around 2006, the resort started to fail, and then the community became split to the extent that many investors sold out and permanent residents came in, leaving too few units available to support major tourism events.
Before too long, the permanent residents were calling the tune and not enough trade was left to support the business of Raffertys. Investors who had paid up to $500,000 and more sold out for as little as $250,000. In other words, incredibly cheap housing. A good example: residents complaining about wedding parties making too much noise. Always remember the prime purpose of Raffertys is a tourist resort and is zoned that way. It is a place for people to have fun.
Residents should enjoy what they have but respect the fact that, without the new facilities, Raffertys will simply fail to exist, with the burden of maintaining the resort falling exclusively on the individuals.
Garry Robinson, Manning Point
Infrastructure must keep pace
ACCORDING to recent data, Cameron Park is one of nine Newcastle suburbs that are 1.2 per cent above national average for new housing approvals. Nothing against new householders to our neighbourhood; in fact they're welcome. Maybe any new arrivals might also voice their frustrations about the lack of adequate pedestrian crossings, schools and adequate roads to cater for the ever increasing numbers of children and elderly within this area. I dare say that the other eight high-density suburbs also will/are experiencing the same problems.
I believe government and councils fail to supply the necessary infrastructures to cater for population growths. The original blueprint for this area was to cater for X people of various demographics. These plans and infrastructures should change and modify to suit higher population increases. I can only imagine the quandary for this government, with their proposed immigration increase. The infrastructure; roads, transport and shops - not to mention the building of adequate affordable housing and all the above - won't manifest overnight. So, upgrade what is already built and base your blueprints on these upgrades, not the plans made 20 years ago. Overall I think we need to move better with the times and learn from mistakes and failures.
Graeme Kime, Cameron Park
Voice's word can be set aside
DAVE McTaggart has a very valid point when he asks, "how and why the Voice will magically change things?" (Short Takes, 26/6). The validity of the question is also underlined by the fact that a Voice to Parliament is on the outside and not involved in the rough and tumble of the debate. As such, the advice is easily discarded; however, a voice (even many voices) inside the parliament have greater capacity to be involved all the way through the debates on the issues close to their hearts. Perhaps the vote should be about making the Northern Territory a state equal with all other states. Surely having 12 senators from the NT should deliver more Aboriginal senators inside the parliament for a greater impact.
Milton Caine, Birmingham Gardens
Listening starts at the top
RATHER than take sides in the debate over the Voice, it seems that there already is a solution to this issue staring us in the face. Our PM continues to argue that the Indigenous population needs to be listened to and I fully support that.
However, it is not the population at large who need to listen, it is the parliament; the Minister and Department of Indigenous Affairs plus all of those agencies living off government grants supposedly to help the Indigenous population. For many years all forms of government and political parties have failed in this. The current PM needs to grow some backbone and get all of those people off their backsides to do their job properly or move them on. We don't need a change in the constitution to achieve it, but Albo would still create his legacy if he got the job done using existing resources correctly.
We also don't need a change in the constitution to recognise Indigenous people, as the population at large already recognise them as Australians. If we can't achieve this necessary need by simply getting people to do their job properly, how will a change to the constitution achieve it? It will still need all of those responsible to carry out their roles successfully.
Allan Milton, Adamstown Heights
SHORT TAKES
FOR the better part of 12 months the only time I've spotted Sonia Hornery in the Herald has been to complain about local pools. I can only assume she's never visited one. They are cheap as chips and a bloody good day out for our grandkids. The staff are lovely, the water always clean, and for pensioners like us, just about the only all day activity we can afford. Give it a rest Sonia and get on with reopening Wallsend Police Station like you promised you would.
Scott Neylan, Stockton
IN my view, Sonia Hornery is a woman of integrity. Perhaps the council should operate in a more effective way than has been exhibited so far, instead of trying to score cheap points over a well-respected local MP ("Gloves off", Newcastle Herald 29/6).
Peter C Jones, Rathmines
WELL said, Sonia Hornery, and a great read from Michael Parris and Sage Swinton ("Gloves off", Herald 29/6). In my view, the councillors love the limelight, the kudos and talking the talk. I bet there are some emails and text messengers being sent among them in the aftermath. Keep up the good work, Ms Hornery, as you always do.
Graeme Gibson, Merewether
THERE'S an age-old adage in politics: when you're digging yourself into a hole, stop digging. I'm surprised Albo has not followed this and accepted Peter Dutton's offer of help on improving the Voice. Certainly it would be best for Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders, as well as Australians generally, if Albo did accept Peter Dutton's reasonable, sensible and fair offer.
Clive Jensen, Merewether
I AGREE with Graham Burgess ("Political divide can't be a real one", Letters, 29/6), on the division that Peter Dutton has caused by his malignant attitude towards an Indigenous Voice to Parliament. However, I think Mr Dutton can't wait to put a giant tick in the 'no' box. He'll probably be remembered as the man who said no to everything.
Mac Maguire, Charlestown
I SUGGEST the Voice 'no' voters apply the Voice basics to their concerns. It has no veto powers, no legislation powers, routinely elected by fellow Australians, no validity to High Court challenge fears as these Australians have already done so successfully since the 1970s. Approved by the Australian Solicitor-General. By comparison, who governs the Minerals Council of Australia? Who elects them and what influence do they have in our Parliament?
Darryl Stevenson, Coal Point
THANK goodness for the ABC cricket commentary with the Ashes test coming from Lords. It's just like the late 70s when Nine took control of televised rights and turned the volume down and listened to the magical voices of Jim Maxwell and Jonathan Agnew, instead of the continuous drivel of Ricky Ponting. Thank you ABC.
