Support for new facility
It has come to my attention that there are rumours circulating that I am against council support for the proposed redevelopment of the Sporting Bodies facilities in Cleve. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact if anybody cares to read Item 15.3 of the minutes of the council meeting in March you will see the following:
15.3 Cleve Sporting Bodies Inc.
Moved Crs Tarran/Jones that Council complete the Landowner Consent Form and provide a letter of support for the Cleve Sporting Bodies Inc. application to the Office of Recreation and Sport for grant funding through the Community Recreation and Sport Facilities Program – Major Facility Development.
That subject to the Cleve Sporting Bodies Inc. being successful with their application through the Community Recreation and Sport Facilities Program, Council agrees to provide a financial contribution of up to $50,000 provided in either cash, through the provision of in kind support, or a combination of both.
Cr Trigg calls for a division.
The Mayor declared the vote set aside.
Members voting in the affirmative: Crs Nield, Siviour, Tarran, Rayson, Fennell, Jones and Burton.
Members voting in the negative: Cr Trigg.
The Mayor declared the motion CARRIED
The original is on the council website at www.cleve.sa.gov.au/page.aspx?u=675&year=2017&month=3
I think this clearly indicates that I support the redevelopment and while the amount pledged was deemed unsatisfactory by many, my support continues.
I have also been advised that there have been many representations from community members to the CEO that, as an owner of the hotel business, I have a conflict of interest in that we are benefiting from the lack of trade at the clubrooms. Again untrue.
Our business, like many in Cleve, has been negatively impacted since the destruction of the Cleve facilities.
We look forward to completion of the redevelopment of the clubrooms and the resultant increase in traffic in the town.
However perception is everything and I accept that there is a perceived conflict of interest. As a result, in all future deliberations of council on this matter I will declare a conflict and will not participate in any debate or decision relating. I have already done so at the May meeting.
If anyone wishes to know my opinion on any matter I would appreciate it if you would ask me rather than rely on unfounded rumours.
Nuclear waste - too good to be true?
For nearly 20 years, the government has been trying to find a place for nuclear waste.
Aboriginal communities one after another rejected the money the government was dangling in front of them, saying correctly that they are entitled to good health, education and other facilities regardless of whether they take waste.
The government has reassuring displays of low level waste – gloves and gowns in storage drums. But very seldom mentions the plutonium and enriched uranium that will need nuclear safeguards and security for as long as it is stored.
Plutonium is the material used to make nuclear weapons.
The government encourages groups to tour ANSTO but nobody is taken on a tour of the leaking drums stored at Woomera, nor the abandoned lands at Maralinga where they have failed so badly in the “clean-ups”.
There is an old saying - if something seems too good to be true, it is usually is.
The money will be long spent and your children and grandchildren will live with the consequences.
Does Kimba really want to be famous for being the nuclear waste dump of Australia?
DR MARGARET BEAVIS
Medical Association for the Prevention of War, Australia
Meeting with minister fruitful
We would like to thank Minister Canavan for the productive meeting held with our committee last week, and also for happily obliging our request to use the opportunity of his visit to meet with some of our financial members to discuss their concerns.
Whilst the room was a little crowded, we trust that given his full consent to their attendance, the Minster did not (in fact) find the meeting “over attended”.
We would also like to thank Member for Giles, Eddy Hughes for joining us for the meeting and investing his time afterwards to meet at length with our members.
Some of the important topics discussed in the meeting were our concerns regarding the decision to use the district council line as the boundary for the vote as opposed to a geographical distance from the site.
We understand why this leaves Kimba-based families living along the outside of our council boundary feeling disheartened that their opinion is not of consequence.
We also again raised our concerns regarding the inability of the department or the minister to guarantee that this facility would not impact our livelihoods by way of loss of value to our property or commodities.
Despite staunch claims by the Working for Kimba's Future Group that it will not, we are unable to secure such guarantees from the government.
We strongly encourage all those who have been given the opportunity to ensure they utilise their vote, and those who have not to express their opinions in writing to Minister Canavan prior to June 21.
KELLIE HUNT on behalf of the No Radioactive Waste on Agricultural Land in Kimba or SA Committee
Letters to the editor
- All submissions must include an address and contact number. (The address and phone number are not for publication.) Letters must carry the writer’s name for publication. The editor reserves the right to edit letters and not to publish them.