InDaily InDaily

Support independent Journalism Donate Subscribe
Support independent journalism

Reader contributions

Your views: on showcasing Aboriginal culture, restaurant wage theft and Planning's disappearing managers

Reader contributions

Today, readers comment on the design and purpose of a dedicated gallery at Lot 14, hospitality industry underpayments, an exodus of Planning Dept managers and public debate over Crows and park lands.

Print article

Commenting on the story: Marshall sets 2023 deadline for Aboriginal Cultural Centre

Someone please tell the designers and the Government of the centre to ‘go back to the drawing board’ because the current design as shown is ghastly.

A concrete box that has no colour, texture, water, sun, land or character, which are pivitol cultural ingredients to the Aboriginal people.

And  to us and our tourists, to gain the appreciation of the connection to our land.

Last night I saw magnificent building designs for Jabiru in Northern Territory, for tourism. (ABC Back Roads: Jabiru, NT)

These are the plans to really enhance the tourism potential at Jabiru and the surrounding areas for when the nearby mine closes. 

They were magnificent and, will blend in with the surrounding environment beautifully.

Tell those connected to the SA Centre to look at other designs, particularly as for Jabiru, and come up with something much more  culturally beautiful. – Colleen Roberts

I am excited by the concept of an indigenous centre at Lot 14 to display appropriate artefacts held by the SA Museum.

Just a comment on language. 

There is no surprise that indigenous consultation is complex, nor that buildings need to be demolished on Lot 14.

Hence those things are not delaying the project. 

Let’s own it and say that the political process, advisers, consultants, media, politicians and public enthusiasm came up with a great concept but were over-optimistic about timeframes.

Happens often and certainly no surprise or criticism, but let’s not allow language to set the potential for a future blame game.

On a project like this, far better to get it right than meet an arbitrary “deadline.” – Chris Russell 

Once again, we have a political ego with an edifice complex getting the whole notion of visual culture completely wrong.

It makes far better sense, from a cultural perspective, to dedicate the existing SA Museum building to its globally significant but largely hidden collection of Aboriginal arts and culture.

There it will have a partnering connection with the adjoining Art Gallery of SA.

I am also concerned that the whole discussion has overlooked the international significance of the SA Museum’s remarkable collection of the arts of Melanesia and the South Pacific. 

Any museum in Europe would go crazy to have material from Oceania of the quality that exists in Adelaide. 

The cultural relationships between Aboriginal and Pacific arts should not be severed. 

It makes perfect sense to conceive the adjoining buildings of the SA Museum and Art Gallery of SA as an integrated museum experience combining the arts of Aboriginal Australia, the Pacific and the Western heritage of Australian art since European settlement.

These are not separate cultural phenomena. Rather, their interrelationships and overlaps form a matrix that illuminates the whole story.

 Think of the adjoining buildings as Adelaide’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, which has its Western and Pacific arts along with other collections under the same roof.

Anyone with any degree of cultural sensitivity should realise that the experience of Aboriginality will not necessarily benefit from its removal and isolation in a new, look-at-me, neo-modernist political shrine full of holograms, virtual reality and other such popcorn.

The museum’s collections of natural sciences would be much better relocated closer to their actual museological cousins, which are the Botanical Garden, Museum of Economic Botany and Adelaide Zoo.

Or is all of this sounding too logical? – Bruce Adams

Commenting on the story: Wage theft a restaurant menu staple

This is totally endemic in the hospitality industry, however there are some good employers meeting their obligations.

Sadly though, employees fail to take their part of responsibility in these schemes.

The young chap asking at the end of employment if he had a superannuation account with his employer – why didn’t he inquire about this in his first week?

Whilst employers need to change their ways, employees need to stand up for themselves – if all of them refused to do unpaid trials, demanded fair conditions or even reported (anonymously) dodgy employers to the authorities, less would be able to get away with it.

It’s all very well complaining about it from the outside or complaining after the fact, but those that are in this position should unionise and take their part of responsibility for the situation.

I speak as someone who has gone through the system and always found good work despite demanding the legal obligations, so it’s not the case that those who enforce their rights just won’t get ahead.

Personal responsibility has to be a part of this, for employees just as much as the employers.

We get so many young people offering to do unpaid shifts for our business, and we always tell them to value themselves – or who else is going to? – Adele Miller

Commenting on the story: Management team gutted in new Planning Dept exodus

I am wondering how this mob are tracking anything with the systems that they have in place.

Why can’t us taxpayers see how and where these projects are going? We are, after all, the main stakeholders!

Maybe someone has suggested that the bureaucrats bear some responsibility for the success, or otherwise of the project in delivering outcomes, not just spending the inflated budgets.

What is that old saying about rats and ships? – Graeme Crook

Commenting on the story: Cash for comment over Crows’ park lands HQ bid

If the proposed Park Lands Association debate is intended to inform the audience about the issues – rather than be the predictable arguments from the predictable persons – then six sensible people should be all paid their $50 to inform themselves, turn up and be allocated randomly which side of the case they must take for the debate. 

Then you’ll have a chance of an informative debate.

It’s no surprise that the proponent side isn’t keen to go to the lion’s den when the lions already seem to be quite hungry. – Rob Donaldson

Want to comment?

Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.

We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.

InDaily has changed the way we receive comments. Go here for an explanation.

Make a comment View comment guidelines

Help our journalists uncover the facts

In times like these InDaily provides valuable, local independent journalism in South Australia. As a news organisation it offers an alternative to The Advertiser, a different voice and a closer look at what is happening in our city and state for free. Any contribution to help fund our work is appreciated. Please click below to donate to InDaily.

Donate here
Powered by PressPatron

More Reader contributions stories

Loading next article