The proposed change to the wording from "recognise the climate emergency" to "recognise the variable and changing climate" is worrying in that it perpetrates a denial or at least a "head in the sand" approach to the existential crisis we have on our hands today.

We have a few short years to restrict global warming to 1.5 degree increase. In short, if we do not make significant changes to our economies by 2030 then we are on a course to mass extinctions of species and mass displacement of human populations.

As Councillors you will know well how long it takes for BVSC to plan and complete projects. In that context all should be able to see what a short period the 10-11 years between now and 2030 is. Such a short time to restructure entire economies.

Some of the points in Cr Bain's rescission motion may be worthy of consideration. However it would be a regressive step in my view to remove the references to "climate emergency" and "the Council requires reports on relevant strategies .... to include assessment of potential climate change impacts".

Leadership includes calling it like it is. Changing the wording as suggested by Cr Bain is the antithesis of such leadership.

In my view it would be fair to say that the performance of all levels of government to date has been below par - hence the developing alarm among young and older people across the globe. We are all in this together. If we cannot recognise the seriousness of the issue and learn to cooperate we may be doomed to failure.

Leadership from all levels of government is required to meet the challenges of this existential crisis.

I would ask that the council opt for a comprehensive strategy for action rather than fiddle with semantics.

Council's history in relation to operation of shire pools is suspect to say the least. Implementation of the Pambula pool guaranteed no increased funding allocation to the pool would occur other than the then-current sum of approx $95,000. That rapidly escalated in ensuing years to a now unknown sum.

Work within your budgets and effect pool operational hours/seasons to within these constraints. We're a small shire which should not be burdened with funding 6 separate public pools.

I read with interest news concerning REX flights to Dubbo and the local council's decision to increase charges. This is to support investment by the council in upgrades to the airport so larger planes may be able to use the facilities in the future. These charges are now, according to REX, jeopardising their current service viability. Sound familiar?

Not so long ago similar discussions occurred in our own shire. Despite concerns expressed at the time the council has proceeded with the airport upgrade. An upgrade that will involve future and ongoing drain to general rate revenue.

At a time when our council is unable to meet current infrastructure costs and is suggesting a forever SRV, an SRV which will allow approximately $1million of general rates to be diverted to unspecified infrastructure costs. This in addition to the funds necessary for the proposed capital works.

Should we not be asking our council for more accountability? Particularly given the council undertaking to state government to better plan for capital depreciation and asset renewal by 2019, now!