Commenting on the story: Deputy Lord Mayor calls for legal review of Hutt St Centre upgrade approval

You would think Deputy Lord Mayor Alexander Hyde would be more focused on showing compassion and helping the homeless and disadvantaged as he once promised.

Instead “Team Adelaide” is wasting more money and time. To think the Adelaide City Council are trying to recoup $24 million because they are cash-strapped.

The Hutt Street Centre (been there for 65 years) is an organisation supporting our most vulnerable in the community, providing them with the tools to rebuild their lives.

They will be putting money back into the economy and providing work through the construction sector with these renovations, at a time it is greatly needed.

Deputy Lord Mayor Alexander Hyde is more focused on the “look” of the street than the compassionate spirit of the street. – Kelsey Freemantle

Considering the many abominations that the Adelaide Council allows to be built in the CBD, that this small and socially useful development could be causing so much concern within its ranks is hard to credit. – Cathy Chua

Commenting on the story: Shops reopening with hope after lockdown gloom

It is clear Rob Lucas has no compassion for landlords.  

Following on from his badly managed land tax foray last year, Rob Lucas has clearly demonstrated no interest in working with landlords, many of whom are suffering the same misfortune as their tenants.  

With mortgages to pay, the banks have said they will defer mortgage payments, yet all this does is accumulate interest and the banks benefit long term by collecting more.  Interest rates have remained unchanged.

There have been no changes to the emergency services levy, council rates and the 25 per cent reduction on the land tax liability is simply putting more work on landlords with no benefit, except the savings are passed onto tenants, which is to their benefit.

Not only is all this a huge imposition to landlords, but landlords now have no power to exercise their rights.  

Some tenants I have been dealing with have taken the pandemic as an opportunity to renege 100 per cent on their rent.  

One tenant I know is still trading 7 days a week, yet is refusing to pay any rent or outgoings based on “so-called hardship”. We have repeatedly asked, over the past several weeks for financial data to support their claim. None is forthcoming. There is nothing we can do. We are helpless. 

Not only do I as the landlord receive no rent whatsoever, but also have no ability to take action to recover at least some rent which is due under the Mandatory Code Of Conduct Guidelines set out by the government.

I have nowhere to go. Rob Lucas does not care. The government has made this process entirely unjust and unworkable. They don’t care.

I have repeatedly said to our tenants: “We understand the issues, we want to work with the you and are prepared to be fair and reasonable, yet this can only work if both parties agree to cooperate”.

Unfortunately, “we’re all in this together” does not apply to Rob Lucas or his government. 

Landlords are being treated, seemingly with disdain. – Kim Baker

We visited IKEA on Saturday thinking they might be open with restrictions on numbers entering, as with Bunnings, Coles, etc.

We were gobsmacked. IKEA was open but there was no management or limitation on numbers entering.

Lip service was paid to social distancing by PA reminders and signs, but the place was packed and it was impossible to keep appropriate space between yourself and others.

We couldn’t wait to get out and left asap without buying anything. Went home feeling a bit shocked actually. – Harry Dewar

Commenting on the story: Will extra staff help Centrelink cope with virus demand?

As someone who’s been within the Centrelink system now for 4 years, since having a child, I can vouch for poor operations prior to the pandemic. 

The long wait times existed prior to this outbreak and increase in demand; the high-volume of calls announcement is not something Centrelink users are unfamiliar with. 

When I began Centrelink services, the process back in 2018 took 6 months to finalise! Of which, employment opportunities reduced and left me in a position of sole reliance on Centrelink through no fault of my own. 

Now, as relatives have lost their jobs, they too are being faced with the debacle establishment and its loopholes. 

Many say, for those on Centrelink services, “beggars can’t be choosers.” However, what isn’t realised is this fault-filled system often forces the working class into becoming the beggar. 

Then they are petrified to make any work/income related changes for fear of a system “glitch” (as the staff will inform you) and payments being stopped.

Those that go from an advanced working wage to a predicament that leaves them in a position of government need, as a short-term means of rescue (as is the intended purpose) quickly becomes a poverty driven necessity to survive due to faults and setbacks and delays. 

With staff relying too much on a faulted system, unable to make changes or being too afraid to do so due to lack of skill. 

The system and its operators all needs a vast revision. – Shannon Ghioni

Commenting on the story: Don’t return to $40 a day JobSeeker after pandemic: poll

I agree that unemployed should not return to the old payment amount after COVID-19, as I had to try and live on that amount for nearly 10 years after being made redundant.

I found it impossible to support myself and had it not been for my adult children helping to support me financially I would have been homeless.

I am now on the aged pension and still rely on my children for a little support as I don’t have enough for food after paying rent and other necessities.

My main complaint is jobseekers now temporarily receive more than aged and disability pensioners fortnightly. I don’t begrudge that for the jobseekers who lost their jobs so suddenly from COVID-19, without  any chance of financially preparing for it.

If the government is giving the extra money to those that have been on jobseeker before COVID-19, it is unfair on pensioners who now receive less than others on welfare, it must nearly come down to discriminating against the sick and elderly. We should all get the same payments temporarily. – Catherine Glur

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.