InDaily InDaily

Support independent Journalism Donate Subscribe
Support independent journalism

Your views: on bikeways, Crows v park lands and Govt stimulus package

Reader contributions

Today, readers comment on Adelaide City Council’s bikeways muddle, continue the debate over an AFL club’s park lands HQ bid, and suggest retailers need a hand to survive.

Print article

Commenting on the story: East-west bikeway punctured as city councillors bicker

I am disgusted at the blatant self-interest of councillors talking about the loss of revenue to council car parks if a Flinders Street-Franklin Street bikeway goes ahead.

Admittedly, the Council needs revenue, but surely a sustainable, less car-dependent and liveable city with lower greenhouse emissions from transport comes ahead of maximising council revenue. – Margaret Dingle

Commenting on the story: Council rejects move to junk Crows’ park lands push

The ACC have shown by their response to this AFC proposal how short-sighted and self-centred the ACC attitude is.

I am a ratepayer with two properties in the city and believe that the park lands are for the maximum number of the population to enjoy.

The AFC proposal helps to promote use by more and more people.

There are councillors in the ACC who have held back Adelaide for so long.

We want Adelaide to be a young and vibrant city, not a dead and staid city of the old.

Let us go for it.

Councillors stand up, be counted. Let us do it. – Peter B Hobbs

Commercial enterprise has no place in Adelaide’s park lands.

Partnership with private enterprise has lead to the current Festival Plaza fiasco.

Public places should be kept for the public. – M Isabel Storer

I reject the the self interest of the city councillors who oppose the possibility of building the head quarters for the Crows on the site of the existing Aquatic Centre.

Twenty ago the council knocked back spending money on the Aquatic Centre and they have just sat on their hands doing nothing about upgrading the swimming centre.

Now that someone is prepared to put up the money to develop the centre, suddenly the councillors have decided to stand against the progress of this city.

Remember when Lucas and Evans opposed the development of the Adelaide Oval, and what a great thing for the city. How wrong was our Treasurer at the time.

I believe that the development of the area is long overdue and needs to go head.

I believe Councillor Moran is not aware of the economic situation it will bring to the city.

Building a high rise will not produce the same income as the new Crows headquarters.

She has made no comment on the value the new Adelaide Oval has added to the city.

I say go ahead and develop the site. – John Rowley

The unsolicited proposal from the Adelaide Football Club for a corporate headquarters on park lands should and must be rejected, and the council should pursue all other alternatives to continue providing aquatic facilities.

Taxpayers from all walks of life, all ages and various health groups who look after those disadvantaged by their health conditions should not have this picturesque part of our park lands taken away from them just because the ACC does not want to take responsibility for the upkeep of the Aquatic Centre.

The corporation known as the Adelaide Football Club cannot be allowed to use federal government money, taxpayers money to fund this disastrous and selfish project.

No public money at all should even be considered.

The general public will be deprived of anytime access to the pool and its facilities, as team rehab will be given priority and the daily users will be sidelined to a time that suits the corporation.

Can anyone in their right mind imagine spending $65m on a project and having the general public wandering here there and everywhere when there is a closed training session going on, and they want you to believe this rubbish.

We must stop this from happening as the general public is being sold a pup. – John Hefford

The agreement to work together to provide a new and better facility that the public can use is a great idea.

The park lands are for everyone to use. Placing this facility is not a new build, but an enhancement of an ageing present one.

If the council oversees the public use of it I can’t see a problem. Please support the proposal. – Carol Sutton

Regarding the AFC’s unsolicited bid to privatise the Adelaide Aquatic Centre and ovals in Park 2, the council has attempted to bypass statutory processes required by the Local Government Act when dealing with park lands. 

The council does not yet know what the community may see as needed, in that the “Needs Analysis” did not survey current users and local schools.

The term “will be taken into account” used in the ‘frequently asked questions’ is hardly reassuring.

The council’s inadequate unsolicited bid process tries to bypass consultation by prematurely locking in its approval of the AFC proposal.

This is confirmed by the reported discussion at Tuesday’s meeting. 

It has thereby left itself open to legal challenge. – Damien Mugavin

 The debate in regard to an upgraded pool facility in the northern park land is most likely never able to be resolved.

The outcome of this is a facility that is rapidly moving towards the likely closure of the existing facility – and we have nothing.

The proposal by the Crows consists of them funding and managing a suitable facility for their purpose, as well as covering the needs of the public.

As I understand it – the Adelaide City Council role is that of owner of that land, and will always will be so.

To have a facility or not is not hard to understand – what is the intelligence level of the elected members that are failing to see such a simple option. – Peter Milne

Commenting on the story: Marshall’s $350m bid to protect virus-hit economy

Congratulations to Premier Marshall for moving so proactively. 

Reaction to the virus have also been outstanding. Way ahead of the other states.

But I suspect the stimulus may miss the mark.

Where have the majority of recent failures been? Which sector has been under the most pressure for the last three or four years?

Retail is a very big employer. There has been a retail recession in Australia for a number of years, as we have seen through all the closures.

Online sales, most from overseas, have been a huge cause of this.

And even if the online sales are from locals, they are still much smaller employers.

So if the Government really wants to help local employment, they will somehow find a way to help genuinely small businesses and boost retail.

Some steps to force landlords to take some of the heat would not go astray. – Bruce Macky

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.

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