Letters past and present....

 

INFORMATION EXCHANGE WITH A TWIST

From The Echo archives, May 2021:

A confusion of letters in Ocean Shores

Apparently, there is another Ocean Shores in another part of the world, and they have deer…

The Ocean Shores & District Garden Club secretary, Claire, was a little perplexed when she was replying to a lady named Marilyn who showed interest in coming to the club meeting last week.

Marilyn wrote

I moved to Ocean Shores in September and was hoping to find a garden club.

I was hoping to learn more about how people garden, especially with the deer population here.

Deer?

Claire was very curious and intrigued about the possible deer of Ocean Shores. She responded to Marylin with all the club details of time and location of meetings and other events and was happy to welcome the new member to the Far North Coast club.

This came from Marilyn…

Looking forward to first meeting

Thank you, so much, for your reply. I’m looking forward to attending my first meeting Monday.

I’ve never been to a club meeting. I haven’t had time for gardening in years.

The house we moved to had no plants at all. I just started planting 80 pots of daffodils, lilacs, snowball bushes, and a few other plants.

Have to get several peonies still, too. I’m planning on building a greenhouse this year too. I’m sure I’ll have lots of questions going forward.

See you Monday!

Claire wrote

I think you have us confused with another garden club.

Ocean Shores is in the Northern Rivers 30 minutes past Byron Bay.

Deer aren’t a problem here and the flowers you mention we would love to grow but aren’t suitable for a subtropical climate.

Intrigued to know where you live.

Uho-oh!

Marilyn wrote:

Oh no! Are you in Australia?!

I’m in Ocean Shores, Washington USA! I thought I finally got the right one. I typed in my city and state and thought it sounded right. Darn!

Well, I’m sorry for taking your time, and the confusion. Thank you anyway. The search will go on, I guess.

Marilyn

Ocean Shores

Washington, USA

What Marilyn may not know is that Ocean Shores was originally a land holding owned by a company – Wendell West of Washington.

The development had the backing of American singer Pat Boone. Ocean Shores was named after Boone’s residence in Ocean Shores, Washington in the United States.

It really actually is a small world after all.

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR - THE LONG AND THE SHORT OF IT

Clarence Valley Independent, Letters, 26 July 2023:

Can I begin by thanking Oscar Tamsen for his considered and respectful letter regarding the upcoming referendum and The Voice (CVI 12/7/23). I am certainly no one of authority but I offer the following as a means of hopefully clarifying some issues.

The referendum if passed will require the government to establish a body, The Voice, which may make representations to the parliament and executive on matters of concern to First Nations Australians. Very senior constitutional lawyers and former high court judges, in spite of being misquoted by some politicians, have made it clear that this could not be interpreted as going beyond providing advice and definitely does not imply any sort of veto. As to what “matters” The Voice might proffer advice on, trying to place definitive limits beyond “matters affecting First Nations Australians” could be problematic and really quite unnecessary. I’m confident indigenous Australians would reject Voice members who did not concentrate on critical issues like health, housing, education and justice, and of course the parliament and executive would be unlikely to give a lot of time to advice that was not pertinent to those issues. The check and balance is the ballot box.

Now to the details of the structure of The Voice. Our constitution is not a weighty tome. It was largely a power sharing agreement between the six founding colonies. What they were prepared to cede to a commonwealth parliament and just the barest details of how that parliament would be structured, again in order to protect the interests of the states. There is a lot of detail not enshrined in the constitution, quite deliberately, in order that it be flexible enough to cope with changing circumstances and needs. For instance, much of the workings of the parliament is left to convention, not constitutional prescription. Only very broad guidelines are given on the structure of the parliament or indeed the voting system. The details were left to the parliament to implement and modify over time if desired and they have been modified a number of times. It’s when you do put a lot of detail in a constitution you run the risk of unintended consequences down the track. The classic example is the provision in the American constitution of the right to bear arms. It seemed fine 250 years ago in the context of just coming out of a revolution and war of independence but is very problematic now and very problematic to remove.

So, it should come as no surprise that the referendum question itself is very light on for detail. Instead, it is designed to enshrine the principle of a Voice. So why doesn’t the government put forward the detail it intends to legislate should The Voice get up? Two points. You can imagine that if they did many people would assume that at the referendum they were voting for, or against, that detail. But this would be wrong as the legislated detail could be changed by future governments. You can also bet that certain politicians would go through that detail line by line looking for points to argue on, even though they know very well that any detail they don’t like could be altered should they find themselves in government. Legislated detail is a political issue to be debated in parliament and if necessary, resolved at elections. It is highly likely that the detail of The Voice will be modified over time to improve it or meet changing needs, but no future government will be able to simply abolish it without reference to the people by means of a democratic referendum.

The referendum has come out of a process of years of broad consultation and expert advice. We can summarise this as the Uluru process. First Nation Australians are asking for recognition as the original custodians of this land going back tens of thousands of years, but they want recognition which is meaningful and practical, not just nice words in a preamble. They are tired of advisory bodies being abolished at the whim of the government of the day. A voice to parliament is a practical way of improving policies and outcomes. We know that programs with local input work better.

What has been put forward is very modest, generous really, and it provides a pathway towards true reconciliation and an opportunity to address the disadvantage which is so apparent in the Closing The Gap annual reports.

Graeme East, Yamba

Clarence Valley Independent, Letters, 26 July 2023:

Ed,

In his lengthy dissertation (CVI 12/7/23) Oscar Tamsen answers his own question i.e., details of the voice is to be the duty of the incumbent government and rightly so!

By voting Yes, we are constitutionally recognising the 65,000 years of First Nations tenure of the continent – such advisory bodies are in operation in Canada, Finland, Sweden, Norway etc.

The naysayers’ (e.g., Dutton et al) insistence on more detail and the accompanying mis/disinformation and vitriol, collectively, is simply a political ploy to sink the referendum.

This tactic is no more than a continuation of the annoying Aussie classic to deny First Nations progress i.e. “I’m not racist, BUT ——!”

Naysayers cite Māori influence in Kiwi politics – completely irrelevant as Māori legislative rights are supported by the Waitangi Treaty.

A No vote denies progress in Recognition and Reconciliation of our First Nations people i.e., ‘if not, when?’

Advice to Oscar and others is to be sceptical of conservative hogwash, treat SkyNews with the disdain it deserves and make sure you catch up with the ABC interview of Prof Ann Twomey (16/6/23) – Twomey from Sydney Uni is one of the country’s leading constitutional lawyers.

Ted Strong, Seelands

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Byron Echo, online, Letters, 30 July 2023:

Byron Shire Council determines the policy for sewage treatment for the shire. This is not the prerogative of the Northern Rivers Reconstruction Corporation (NRRC).

Brunswick Valley Sewage Treatment Plant (BVSTP) is designed to treat 3,800kl/day of sewage, not stormwater. The current daily dry weather inflow at BVSTP varies between 1,400kl/day and 1,800kl/day. The previous elected Byron Council implemented a five-year investigation of the inflow infiltration (I/I) problem occurring in the Mullumbimby sewer gravity mains collection system and the stormwater collection system. A company that specialised in this field and also relining existing gravity mains thus solving the I/I problem.

The five-year period is up and the I/I still remains; this is very visible during rain events in Mullumbimby and the substantial increase of the daily inflow into BVSTP. Five years with no improvement to the existing problem.

Council’s water and recycling division (W&R) is persisting with their plan to close Ocean Shores Sewage Treatment Plant (OSSTP) and pipe the sewage from OSSTP across Brunswick Valley to the Mullumbimby plant. Ocean Shores STP also has infiltration problems which are obvious in the inflow increase during rain events. OSSTP’s capacity is 1,600kl/day.

The current design concept of BVSTP is a biological reduction. These plants depend on their hydraulic load remaining below their design capacity to operate effectively. The extra load that will be transferred from OSSTP during dry weather risks adversely affecting the hydraulic load at BVSTP, during rain events it will most definitely overload the BVSTP’s hydraulic design capacity.

There now is the proposed Saddle Road development. If this is approved the sewage from this development will go to BVSTP.

The Water & Sewer Advisory Committee has not discussed or been asked to discuss these issues and the effect it will have on the BVSTP. Why not?

It is time the elected council asked questions of W&R: why after five years of investigations by a company retained by W&R to fix the I/I problem in Mullumbimby has nothing changed? How does W&R intend BVSTP to cope with the increased hydraulic load and still operate satisfactorily?

Alan Dickens, Ballina

Byron Echo, online, Letters, 28 July 2023:

Hijacked: residents’ car park Mullum

I note his [the mayor’s] reference to the loss of the residents’ car park just left of the roundabout from the railway crossing. Residents are aghast at Byron Council’s secret decision to sell that car park for a really large housing development – plus Council staff are to live there!

People are not happy at all about this, shocked and very disgusted! Authority has been handed to our general manager by Byron councillors, except Duncan Dey, to ‘handle’ the tender process.

This is not a ‘done deal’ and, as residents have not been consulted on this, it needs to be challenged. It’s such a secretive decision – hence the question: why? With no one allowed (except if speaking in public access) to attend Council meetings because the Conference Room (since the 2022 flood!) is too small, residents do not know what is discussed at those meetings!

‘The 2022 flood drainage’ is the vital subject, as has been reported extensively by so many residents. However, Council continue to deny anything needs to be done about it, except for a few areas. The North Byron Flood Risk Management Study, October 2020 states: ‘Ongoing maintenance of the drainage network is important to ensure it is operating with maximum efficiency to reduce risk of blockage or failure… Modification of drainage – installation of new or larger channels or culverts can increase conveyance and help reduce upstream peak flood levels or reduce duration of inundation. ASSESSMENT – existing drainage network is believed to be well below capacity for current development.’ A drainage assessment was undertaken for New City Road in 2018 (Ref 20), and identified a number of issues at this location. The entrance to Marshalls Creek is constricted by rock walls.

This flooding ‘jigsaw’ can be solved.

Jillian Spring, Billinudgel