Commenting on the story: Government considering rent relief deal for households, business
We have a beauty therapy business, trading seventeen years.
The business had twelve hours notice to close. We complied with the directive. This has been and is a very stressful time, the biggest stress being fixed-cost lease/outgoings.
In the seventeen years of trading all fixed costs have always been met, even in a heated overpriced market.
To be fair, the cash flow was ceased via a directive that went from good to $0 overnight. The business could sustain three months of outgoings/rent. We have decided to hold.
To be fair on all parties the burden must be shared via rent hold/holiday. There is no current set start-up date. The business needs current funds for start up, whenever that may be?
There needs to be instruction/law that puts these costs to hibernation, if not many small businesses will cease to trade.
I am very hopeful the government will work on the issue with urgency. Revenue burdens must be shared via a trickling-down stream. If not, it is disaster for the Australian economy and Australian small business. – Carl Edwards
For me it signals disaster, for I rely on the income stream generated by my residential rent to operate.
If I cannot get this income, how can I accomplish my obligations to other service providers or retailers?
I see it as the bank’s will be hit hard and everyone is affected by some degree.
Six months is half a year and how can ATO cope with no revenue?
I hate to think what the future holds. – Frank Pakravan
I am concerned and would like to know and be reassured that none of the hoarded items stripped from our supermarket shelves are being exported overseas.
I trust that the Australian Government and all of our agencies such as Border Force, AFP and port authorities are on the ball with this and that these activities won’t slip through the cracks as these activities need to be prohibited.
They need to keep their eye on this ball.
There are many of us who did not panic and hoard, and we are now not able to purchase the necessities taken by the selfish few. – Bill Novak
Commenting on the story: Park lands booze ban “discriminatory and racist”: poll
This issue has been around for years. The same group is always affected
. They were moved from West Tce, they then went in to one of the squares, then North Tce and now the south parklands.
The establishment of the dry areas has always been a whole of government approach. The only problem is that the government agencies mandated to contribute to this issue, don’t.
It is left up to the police. That’s like putting the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff.
Holding these other agencies accountable by having them identify how they are going to contribute to resolving the issues and then reporting their activity to government would be a good start.
This is not just a police issue. – Graeme Adcock
As a South Terrace resident living opposite Veale Gardens and running businesses in the city I use the parklands twice a day for exercise with my dog. I have expressed my opinion in the surveys.
I 100% agree with the findings of your article and in particular the bias of the first survey undertaken – they merely went about rigging it to achieve the end they desired.
We risk taking away our hard won freedoms in the name of Nanny State do-gooders who won’t solve the underlying problem.
It is becoming more prevalent in our society where those that are comfortably well off don’t want to be reminded of the fact we live in a society made up of all sorts of people with varying backgrounds and economic circumstances.
If I so choose to take a couple of deck chairs across the road to enjoy a bottle of fine South Australian wine with my wife, why should I have to cut through red tape and contribute to council’s coffers for the privilege of exercising my freedoms?
I’ve had other residents suggest to me that “I’m not the target” and that my behaviour would be ignored by authorities, to which I’ve asked “So you are advocating I break the law and that there should be one rule for me and another rule for others?”.
The hypocrisy of their position is hard to fathom.
As you can tell, I’m quite passionate about this issue – just another example of the Nanny State encroachment on the liberties our grandparents went to war to preserve. – Michael Hart
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.
Make your contribution to independent news
A donation of any size to InDaily goes directly to helping our journalists uncover the facts. South Australia needs more than one voice to guide it forward, and we’d truly appreciate your contribution. Please click below to donate to InDaily.