Ned’s last stand?
WITH a huge degree of sadness I heard last week that one of the oldest and most significant buildings in Batemans Bay is required to be demolished to make way for another car park.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Our town has absorbed many requests and ideas from many investors and developers during the 40 years I have lived here, and none has really boomed.
A car park can go anywhere, and should not impact on the little bit of history we have left.
I’m sure other nearby towns would not tolerate this decision-making.
Many residents are depending on council to slam this request as it’s an unnecessary requirement in our community.
The building is an original structure built by the Guy family, who made a significant contribution to this town in the 1860s.
Every other bit of history in the Bay has been bulldozed or buried.
History is an important factor for this community and I ask every real local to back this and vote no to the demolition of the old Ned Kelly site.
The Bay’s unemployment rate is over the top, it has no industry to speak of, and there are empty shops everywhere and a marine park no-one wanted.
So, just to put the icing on the cake, demolish the only real bit of history left and bow down to the mighty dollar . . . tell us that's not greed and intimidation!
Bernadette Brandes
Batemans Bay
New home for Ned?
PERHAPS the advocates for retaining the Ned Kelly building might like to consider moving it to Mackay Park as the centrepiece of an historic exhibit.
The building is the important piece, not the land, which, after all, is just a piece of dirt.
The owners of Bridge Plaza might be willing to pay a little more than the cost of knocking it down to retain the good opinion of the population.
Max Lotton
Surf Beach
An open letter to Andrew Robb
On behalf of organisations representing healthcare workers across Australia, we congratulate Trade Minister Andrew Robb for withstanding the pressures of the US government and the US pharmaceutical industry in the latest round of negotiations of the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) during July and August.
Specifically, we understand that Mr Robb defended Australia’s ongoing access to affordable medicines and has not, at this stage, agreed to have investor state dispute settlement processes apply to Australia.
However, we are also aware that there is significant pressure being brought to bear by the US and other countries. We remind Mr Robb of his assurances to the Australian people that the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, and our health system more broadly, would not be adversely affected by the TPP.
We should not allow any possibility for foreign investors to sue our governments over public health measures, as they have sought to do over tobacco issues.
No amount of sugar or beef exports is worth increasing the cost of our healthcare system or limiting our ability to regulate to protect health.
We are also concerned about the possible restrictions on primary healthcare initiatives such as food and beverage labelling under the TPP.
We remind Mr Robb of his assurances to the Australian public and urge him to maintain a position that does not extend a monopoly on medicines and does not expose future Australian governments to ISDS processes.
