“Attempts by golf courses to generate income from land sales of their concessional leases on the basis that they cannot establish a sustained longer-term existence is unsustainable and should be rejected,” says letter writer ALBERT OBERDORF.
I support the decision to set aside the development approval for 125 homes on the Federal Golf Course.
It reinforces the importance of public open spaces to the community and environment.
Put simply, such open spaces are effectively held in trust by small groups, such as golf clubs – a privilege these groups hold on behalf of the wider community.
However, some of these groups take undue advantage of such privileged arrangements and grab these spaces for private gain.
Attempts by golf courses to generate income from land sales of their concessional leases on the basis that these clubs cannot establish a sustained longer-term existence without gaining private profit, is unsustainable and should be rejected, because such actions represent an irreversible loss of amenity to the wider community.
A common argument put forward by golf club management is that they don’t have enough money to support the continuation of the club into the future.
For example: “Murrumbidgee needs an ongoing revenue stream to ensure the future survival and development of the club” or “The development proposal is critical to the future viability and sustainability of our golf course.”
The harsh reality is that these golf clubs simply do not charge realistic fees sufficient for the development and maintenance of their facilities. Consequently, they have to resort to converting community open space into commercial use and selling these off to raise money to repair or upgrade those facilities. This reduces the amount of community open space without solving their ongoing problem – insufficient income to maintain the said facilities.
Consequently, within a relatively short time, they will be back seeking to sell off more community open space as the Yowani Club is doing (previously converted open space to a motel site, now looking at residential development of 1200 units).
Albert Oberdorf, via email
Selby truly hit the nail on the head
It was interesting to read Hugh Selby’s article about the ACT Ombudsman (‘Ombudsman falls well short on fixing FOI angst, CN April 10), and the “bureaucratic jungle” experienced by people who make a complaint about a government service hoping to receive answers to their questions, including FOI requests.
He well and truly hit the nail on the head describing an organisation that does not deliver the goods, nor provides what it should.
Having made repeated complaints to the ombudsman, my experience is that they search only for ways to do nothing of value by finding “nothing to see here”.
On October 19 2023, I submitted a complaint (a second one) about the conduct (or lack of) of AFP officers who “investigated” the death of my daughter, Brontë.
The ombudsman stated in their acknowledgement of my complaint that it could take up to 35 weeks for the complaint to be allocated to an investigating officer.
After waiting seven months (some 30 or so weeks), I asked about the status of my complaint. I was advised that the ombudsman no longer states the “35 weeks” in confirmation receipts; it can take even longer for a complaint to be allocated! Holey moley. You wouldn’t want to be in a hurry!
And you certainly wouldn’t want to be ill or dying.
Their e-mail goes on to state that “we may make suggestions to agencies if we identify opportunities for improvement. However, we cannot direct an agency to change a decision or take a particular course of action”.
That has always been the case for the ombudsman: to recommend but not to direct.
However, mere recommendations, if any, that take months or longer to be made may well be out of date or superfluous when finally delivered.
That makes the process farcical and pointless.
However, recommendations are better than nothing at all. After more than 12 months, so after more than 52 weeks, I received a response from the ombudsman, stating that no investigation was conducted into any (of the multiple) elements of my complaint.
In their opinion there was simply nothing to see and it was fate accompli.
Janine Haskins, Cook
Blind eye to ratepayer-funded cruelty
Shocking details have emerged recently relating to severe cruelty that was inflicted on a female kangaroo in Bywong.
The kangaroo was severely beaten by a 60-year-old man who tied a rope around its neck and then dragged it behind his car for 400 metres along the road. The kangaroo died from its terrible injuries.
There has been a public outcry about this incident and so there should be.
What people need to understand is that cruelty towards kangaroos is not an isolated incident committed by an individual monster.
In Canberra, the cruelty is being committed by the ACT government using millions of ratepayers’ dollars under the guise of the so-called “conservation cull” of kangaroos.
While there is a code of conduct to supposedly ensure the welfare of the animals, the reality is the shooters are not supervised, therefore the code is meaningless.
Animal welfare groups have documented the shooters’ cruelty including the decapitation of fully furred joeys.
The minister responsible, Suzanne Orr, is turning a blind eye to ratepayer-funded cruelty.
Rebecca Marks, via email
Poor road design affects wildlife, too
Recent letters by Rebecca Marks and John Lawrence raise some important issues about the way the ACT government treats Canberra’s precious wildlife.
For kangaroos living in our urban nature parks, they are in a desperate fight for their very survival. Not only does the ACT government terrorise kangaroo mobs every year during the cruel and unnecessary “cull”, it has failed to balance road construction with environmental conservation. This has resulted in a fragmented habitat not only for kangaroos but other wildlife such as possums, wombats and wallabies.
Instead, the cost of this failure is being pushed back to Canberrans in the form of insurance claims and damaged vehicles.
For the kangaroos it is far worse, they lose members of their families. Like people, kangaroos are highly social and live in family groups.
The most effective approach to minimising the negative effects of building roads through wildlife habitat and on biodiversity, would be to retrofit structures such as connective overpasses, virtual fencing, slower speed limits, alert signs with flashing lights and speed bumps into Canberra’s existing road system.This will allow animals and people cross our busy roads without being hit and killed.
Canberrans should be angry that the ACT government has not only failed them with a poorly planned and implemented road design, but also sadly our precious wildlife, whose lives are being so tragically taken.
Robyn Soxsmith, via email
Free book on the women behind the Bard
Columnist Robert Macklin has written that Shakespeare did not write Shakespeare’s plays (CN April 17). Robert – and the world – should read my book, The Woman Behind William Shakespeare (available for free on researchgate.net/PaulKauffman)
I have also written a play, performed at ANU, about William Shakespeare that was directed by Dr Cate Clelland.
Dr Paul Kauffman, via email
What about a word on explorer de Vlamingh?
Having been brought up in WA, I read David Turnbull’s profile of Dutch migrant Peter Reynders (CN April 17) with great interest.
However, I was disappointed that he failed to mention Willem de Vlamingh, who, in December 1696, arrived on the west coast of New Holland in the frigate Geelvink where he discovered ‘t Eylandt ‘t Rottnest (“Rats’ Nest Island”) which we now know as Rottnest Island.
He named it so when he mistakenly thought the quokkas were big rats. He also sailed up the Swan River to the site where Perth is now situated, observing the black swans on his way.
Yet another great Dutch seaman/explorer who the current generation of kids have no clue about!
Dave Jeffrey, Farrer
Why egotistical Albanese has to go
As someone who has an ANU degree in politics and economics, who has been engaged in politics for much of my life and who has worked with Commonwealth ministers from Gareth Evans through to John Anderson, I would like to suggest to Labor supporters that they do not vote Labor unless Albanese undertakes to stand down in his second term.
With Dutton doing his best to lose the election, a lower vote for Labor should not result in it not being returned, but would give more impetus to Albanese standing aside in favour of at least three people who would do a better job than him.
This is something that has not been canvassed at all in the media, which is a surprise to me considering how unpopular Albanese is.
His problem is his ego, which was seen in the way he handled the referendum on The Voice, his acceptance of upgrades and various Qantas perks, his attendance at just about all major events from sports to concerts and his fulsome praise for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
On top of that we see weaknesses in his responses to China and Trump and he has done little or nothing about issues such as gambling advertising, salmon farming in Tasmania, the Integrity Commission, cost of living issues, housing, interest rate rises and the conflict in Myanmar, etcetera.
It is time we had a new head of the ALP who is more attuned to the needs and wishes of the general populace rather than to the elite.
Ric Hingee, Duffy
The answer is vote for Dutton or be sorry…
Re letter from Douglas Mackenzie (CN April 17). He referred to Sue Dyer claiming Dutton was proposing to slash 41,000 Canberra based public servants.
Albo and his cohorts are also spouting this, yet Dutton has already stated on a number of occasions, he is not going through with that, he is going to use natural attrition. He said he made a mistake, which is more than Albo ever does.
Answer, vote for Dutton. He is more honourable than Each-way Albo. Do you really want to be stuck with Albo for another three years, with prices going up? He has done nothing about the cost of living, power cuts, the economy, lack of military defences, very slack immigration, keeps everything to himself and never answers a question without going around in circles. No, do not vote him back in, you will be sorry.
Vi Evans, via email
…But Dutton isn’t on the ballot paper
Dr Mackenzie (letters, CN April 17) exhorts us to not vote for Dutton.
In the ACT he isn’t on the ballot paper.
Instead we have 14 House of Reps candidates across the three electorates and 14 Senate candidates for us to choose between.
Voters who want to know more about them can watch the Canberra Alliance for Participatory Democracy’s videos at canberra-alliance.org.au/2025-federal-election.
Peter Tait, convener
My choice is for the lesser of two evils
Max Flint (letters, CN April 17) is critical of my support for the Labor/Greens at the upcoming election.
My inability to support the Coalition stems from the superficiality of its policies in a wide range of areas especially the public service, housing, immigration, climate change and energy.
I applaud Max for his persistent exposure of the deficiencies of light rail. I am appalled at the Labor/Greens hypocrisy and the ongoing Commonwealth funding for the extension to Woden in the absence of a business case.
My grievance with the project (and the government’s land use planning) stems from the lack of supporting evidence, the same reason I cannot support the Coalition. Labor and the Greens also have their policy deficiencies. My choice is for the lesser of two evils.
Mike Quirk, Garran
How non-votes can count more
Michael Moore’s “Votes do count” column (CN April 17) of the voting pattern that caused Trump to mount the winner’s podium this year is yet another example of the old adage about interpreting statistics and reveals how, in rounded up figures, only 64 per cent of eligible electors turned out of whom just 50 per cent voted Republican.
Thus Trump became president with the active support of about 32 per cent of the US voting population or, otherwise calculated, 68 per cent of American electors didn’t vote him in.
The same can be said for UK’s Brexit where, out of 46.5 million people on the electoral roll, 37.4 per cent voted to leave, 34.7 per cent voted to stay and the remainder not voting at all, rendering the now much regretted decision to leave the EC being made in the absence of an active vote of 62.5 per cent of enrolled electors.
Contrary to the headline, both events illustrate how non-votes count more than those cast by public spirited individuals.
John Murray, Fadden
Voting for a club that won’t allow us to join
Columnist Michael Moore is correct (CN April 17), and yes, we should all vote, if eligible.
But consider how, as individuals, we have to contend with preference deals over which we have no control, big-spending political donors, the cost of attending fundraisers to get into a political ear, politicians who dodge (if they reply) substantive issues when you write to them, and, ifa dual citizen by dint of parents’ birthplace, having to vote for a club that won’t allow us to join.
John Godwin, Downer
A trillion dollars is a lot of money to owe!
Throughout this election campaign I have heard politicians from all sides promising voters fistfuls of money left right and centre.
I have also heard financial experts warning that we are heading for a national debt of $1.2 trillion. Like many, I can’t comprehend how much a trillion dollars really is, and like many, I think a million-dollar lottery win is a huge amount.
So, I did a bit of research to get my head around a trillion dollars and I was staggered by what I found. According to financial and mathematical experts it’s a massive amount of money.
A trillion dollars is a million times a million dollars. If I had a trillion dollars in one-dollar notes and laid them end to end they would reach beyond the moon and the sun. I could lay them in rows and they would blanket the ACT three times over with some to spare.
If I had a trillion dollars in one-dollar notes and I spent 40 of them every second it would take me over 790 years until I was left with nothing in my pocket.
We have been warned that if we don’t start living within our means and stop putting everything on the credit card, we face a $1.2 trillion national debt. That means that every Australian will owe someone else almost $40,000. Our grandchildren will be paying it off long after we are gone.
Darryl Johnston, Tuggeranong
Nature strip parking damage in Deakin, too
Elizabeth Kovacs (“Nature-strip parking threatens trees”, CN April 24) reports on the parking of vehicles on the nature strips of Hawker. This problem also affects the streets of Deakin, especially Hopetoun Circuit, a major road link between Deakin and Yarralumla.
In Deakin, some residents have two or more vehicles parked on their nature strips every day. This practice is also common in my street, which intersects Hopetoun Circuit at the Deakin shops.
In both cases, the nature strips are stripped of vegetation, or even soil. In a dry period they turn into dust bowls. In rainy periods, especially in the downbursts of torrential rain that are increasingly common, the dust turns into mud and is washed away. This is particularly noticeable on the sides of footpaths.
In some places, bedrock is exposed: no vegetation can survive in these conditions, and trees lose a significant part of their hydration and nutrients when their roots become ineffective.
In extreme cases, which are also increasingly common, the trees die. It can be several years until the ACT government removes dying or dead trees.
Dr Douglas Mackenzie, Deakin
Leave a Reply