Get on your bike, NRMA
The NRMA’s recent bleatings about the Princes Hwy are nothing new.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Similar comments about the Princes Hwy were made years ago, and very similar media statements seem to be regularly issued by the NRMA about all the other highways in NSW.
There are three major problems with their studies:
They state the bleeding obvious.
Suggesting that improvements could be made to any highway is simply a motherhood statement – and is no more useful than simple calls for more funding to be spent on health, education, the disadvantaged, or any other worthy cause.
They do not provide any suggestions at all about where extra money for improvements to the highway can be found.
If the Federal Government had, or is likely to have, money lying around that could be spent on upgrading the Princes Hwy, they would surely have commenced the work.
The government’s prime objective, after all, is to attract votes to ensure it is re-elected!
Their focus on the Princes Hwy, in isolation, conveniently ignores other road projects that more urgently require attention or that will deliver a greater cost-benefit to the community.
I’d suggest spending resources to complete the upgrading of the Pacific Hwy, the roads around Sydney, and the Kings Hwy should be far higher Federal Government priorities (and NRMA priorities!) than attempting to significantly upgrade the Princes Hwy along the Far South Coast.
Peter Lacey
Quaama
Nature of opposition
Last year, when the South Coast Hunters Club put in an application to be allowed to display guns at HuntFest, I took it upon myself to carry out a random survey of 100 local citizens to gauge their opinion.
The survey was straightforward:
1. Is HuntFest good for tourism? 19 said yes; 75 said no; 16 were not sure.
2. Would you promote it to friends? 12 said yes; 86 said no; 2 were not sure.
3. Should there be guns on display? 10 said yes; 90 said no.
Not surprisingly to me, the results are very similar when you look at the nature of the submissions sent to council last month re HuntFest being allowed to sell guns and ammunition and run a shooting range.
Over 80 per cent of people who took the time to write a submission said they do not want the amendments to be approved!
When you remember that 930-plus local citizens had signed a petition in the previous few weeks opposing the HuntFest all together, it is pretty likely don’t you think they would have all opposed the introduction of gun sales as well?
Many probably just felt they had already managed to locate a petition and signed and did not need to do a submission as well.
Those 930 names were all cross checked by staff at Andrew Constance’s office to verify they were indeed Eurobodalla residents.
There were only 27,000 people eligible to vote at the last council elections, so that petition represents a lot of people - almost one in 30!
We have heard from the hunters about the need for the injection of capital into the area and that the “antis” are just a small group of “old whingers”.
But that is not really the way it is, is it?
Only 38 local residents put in submissions in support of the selling of guns at next year’s HuntFest.
There are not masses of supporters.
If 38 people is all the support locally, why should our Nature Coast’s name be tarnished by the will of such a few?
Why should the feel and safety of our community be compromised?
It would certainly seem the many anonymous responses to online letters to the editor have been written by a very small group of people using many different pseudonyms.
Do our councillors really care what their electors want?
Kathie Thackray
Narooma