Author Credits: [show_post_categories parent="no" parentcategory="writers" show = "category" hyperlink="yes"]
Ralphs Bay …
By
Posted on
William Boeder
October 22, 2009 at 15:31
In this instance Richard Dowling has it all wrong.
Tasmania does not need the hyped up splenetic comments from those in favor of turning Tasmania into another plastic or synthetic State as is the case of much of the Coast of Queensland.
Quite simply put, Corporate Hucksters such as Walker Corporation are all about gaining control of whatever they lay their grasping hands upon.
A quick comparism to see what is currently happening in Tasmania by the duopoly of Gunns Ltd and Forestry Tasmania, what constraints are there in place to the marauding plunder of the State’s resources, absolutely none, even this lily-livered State government supports this form of rapine?
The realities are: we now have the out of control poisoning of our waterways, the massive reduction to the State’s iconic tourist industry drawcard, through the continual degradation of
our Ancient Forests, followed by the idiotic concept of Forestry Tasmania attaching itself to the Tasmania Tourism Industry, then of course the massive infestation of B-double log trucks churning up our highways and byways, all of these idiotic concepts are being looked upon and treated by this government as good business.
Look to the state of affairs in Tasmania’s dairying Industry at the hands of corporate greed and control mechanisms?
Follow this up with the corporate Supermarket Duopoly behaviors?
Corporates are ruining the world of small business, to say otherwise is both pointless and foolish, to say we must just live with this new form of commerce is inviting the eventual decline in so much and so many of our prior self sustainable small business entities.
No! There is no need to move with the times, if the current product of corporatization is already a ruinous purpose, surely there is no need to blindly follow this form of business ruin by strangulation, merely to embrace change for change sake, so as to weakly appease the would be do-gooders.
So Richard Dowling, take a step back from championing the dominions of corporate empowerment, as you will soon realize, they are a an odious infesting pox on all societies world-wide.
I invite you to do some accurate research on what has become of Australia, since corporatization arrived upon our shores from the glitzy hyped up world of American business-styles and its boatloads of greed propagandas?
A look into the present moment in history of America, shows that they are on the verge of self-inflicted ruin and bankruptcy?
William Boeder.
Concerned Resident
October 22, 2009 at 16:44
I don’t think it will spoil Tassie’s reputation. If Gunns had gone through the proper planning process we would not be stuck with a stinking pulp mill, possibly, to be built in the Tamar Valley. Developers might get the message that they can’t just rock up to Tassie with some ludicrous development and expect to have it automatically approved regardless of who they know or what incentives they give.
Peter Bright
October 22, 2009 at 19:05
This decision shows that Tasmanians keen on Green can zap the crap.
Butler
October 22, 2009 at 20:29
Dowling is in part correct. Tasmania is considered an odd place full of the most abhorrent inconsistencies, and for its abuse of the law through the Pulp Mill Assessment Act. It is considered a joke, and where many things are done on the basis of some archaic old boys network of jerks and croneys who wouldnt last 15 minutes in a larger city, place or enterprise.
If the permit decline costs Walker millions, that helps reinforce the farce. And one day all those who comprise the decision making process will get to be held accountable.
What a joke – an industrial chemical plant planned for the north, and a suburban development rejected in the south.
Michael Figg
October 23, 2009 at 00:39
The RPDC or what ever it is called now needs to go!
First we had the redicul-arse rejection of the Lauderdale shopping centre development at the Harmony nursery site because it the RPDC refused to rezone the area and said that it could be built in Rokeby; and now the rejection of the Lauderdale Quay Marina.
One of the comments of the commission was that we reject it because there maybe more spotted hand fish that we don’t know about. What a Lot of Crap.
Lets all go back to the caves and throw our empty sea shell on the ground so someone in the future will say Oh No a white mans midden we cant build here.
It makes me sick to see Lauderdale used as a scapegoat for other people’s egos and petty rivalries.
Pete Godfrey
October 23, 2009 at 02:00
Maybe one of the chamber of commerce folk could enlighten me on why a proposal to fill in a shallow bay that is a conservation zone, to make a few housing lots for rich bastards in a state that has vast areas of terrestrial land available for development should have even gone this far. I can tell you it went this far because a super pro development at any cost (and at great gain to them)government is happy to push any rubbish on us as long as they get some kickbacks. Even if the kickbacks are only political donations, or house renovations, or overseas trips to look at other ridiculous out dated and stupid developments. Really this was a dead duck and should have been called that before the battered sav even tried to get himself re elected.
Stephan
October 23, 2009 at 10:58
Planning process or no a bad development is a bad development. A remarkably similar canal estate was started in Raby Bay in Qld about 3 decades ago. While that area has the climate and population to support the lifestyle that goes with a canal estate Ralphs Bay doesn’t. And while it’s not ugly there are and continue to be a number of quite concerning issues about silting and ground stability in Raby Bay. What would happen in Ralphs Bay after 30 years of southerly weather, sea level rise and general wear and tear?
salamander
October 23, 2009 at 23:29
It is the shonky state government that has sent the wrong messages. Our ministers think encouraging big business to believe they only have to ask nicely, and a way will made to solve all problems – not by changing the proposal to make it more acceptable, but by deceiving the public with false information or refusing to permit full public consultation.
Don’t forget, Bartlett nearly gave the ferry pier to Federal Hotels. It was only the public uproar that prevented it.
nerreman
October 24, 2009 at 12:16
get over it you people who consider that life is not worth living if you are not in the “Club”
There is more to life than business. what exactly are you going to make money from when you have killed enough species, stopped growing enough food, poisoned enough water, and caused to contribute to the creation of suffering from enough life threatening illnesses and diseases that there will be no strong and mentally fit people left to guide those who know nothing other than what you will teach them.
I for one am glad that some one had the sense to say no.
My aim is for balance between all things so that the equilibrium can be maintained amongst all things, not just between the major banks and businesses.
Greg James
October 24, 2009 at 19:42
I read the TCCI’s comments on investment in Tasmania; and gaming is a classic case in point of why no one would want to invest in Tasmania. It is also why the TCCI has little credibility when it comes to political statements about investment, because it is hypocritical in its application of slurs.
Please leave aside all your judgements about the negatives of gaming and take on the fact that the ALP and the Liberals have clearly favoured one family, the Farrells since 1975 over the other 200,000 odd families in Tasmania. Not one Tasmanian has ever been offered a chance to have the gaming license. Indeed the rumour that Jim Bacon renewed the license in gratitude, because Greg Farrell introduced Honey to Jim, seems to fit all the rationality that can be ascribed to the extension of the gaming license, after Bacons last successful election.
But my point is that if I was a mainland or overseas investor and I wanted to invest in the Tasmanian hospitality industry with a portfolio that included gaming, I could not do so without the approval of my possible main competitor Federal Hotels. Where else in Australia does a private family firm have such control over an entire industry? Where else is an industry so in need of revival. Where else would you allow a private family company to decide the success or failure of a competing business? The peak tourism boards are controlled by Federal hotels with their ‘talking head’, lackeys and subservient, scared agents. People, who know which side their bread is buttered on and they know criticism is not tolerated and is suppressed, just like a fascist state. Where else would lay claim to being a modern economy but allow feudal competitive policy to rule an entire industry?
The TCCI are duplicitous hypocrites of the venal kind, picking and choosing whom to attack, but never able to face the facts that the enemy is within. Like a boy crying wolf every time a political event stymies their sense of propriety, they cry out but fail to mention the core problem, monopolies.
I am a former President of the AHA, founding Chairman of the Salamanca Merchants Association, a former Trustee and Chairman of Host-plus the now $6billion Hospitality industry Superannuation fund and with 23 years in the hospitality industry, I call for an independent Inquiry into the Hospitality Industry in this state and the effects of monopoly control of gaming in this State, the stifling of investment, the lack of growth and choice, the advantages given to one organization over many by Parliament and their GROSS income of $600,000 per day advantage from gaming and the effect on Tasmania’s high Street of this disposable income disappearing down the non-productive drain that is gaming. I’ve said it before and I say it again: ‘Gaming is for losers, parasites and bogans’