Cc: The Hon Roger Jaensch MP, Premier, Leader of the Opposition, Media
Dear Michael,
Thankyou for your letter of October 20th.
When I first heard the electoral promise years ago, I immediately thought the location of any underpass in Campbell Town would be between Banjos and the Lolly Shop.
I had no idea that good planning was being bent by a narrow cluster of stakeholders.
I was keen to make a representation on the underpass, once all the discussions and ideas had settled down to an actual development proposal, with a development application advertised by the Northern Midlands Council.
This year I have been involved with developing ideas to keep the Town Hall in public hands, and wondered if it would be possible to create a larger civic and cultural centre, including the Town Hall, with the public land next to the Town Hall.
Seeing the need for a safe crossing of the Midlands Highway, I wondered if an underpass could be needed, which could also provide access to an underground car park beneath the proposed civic and cultural centre.
Imagine my shock and horror, totally gob-smacked, when the Tasmanian Government, possibly you personally, asked the Northern Midlands Council to set aside due process with a development application, which would have then been advertised for public comment, where there would be a right of appeal.
I and everyone else was silenced and denied our democratic right to have a say on a $6 million under highway junket in Campbell Town, which I find to be extremely dangerous in its current location.
Did I mention extremely?
The term extreme is used because there is no view into the tunnel from either end, so anything could be lurking in there, day or night.
I would never allow a child in my care to use that tunnel, alone or in my company, or use it myself.
If the underpass plan was so fantastic, why were you so scared, perhaps terrified, of public scrutiny?
Were you aware that there were holes in the head with this scheme?
The real need was for a safe access between Banjo’s and the Lolly Shop, a location used by more school children, residents and visitors, risking life and limb with cars and trucks.
It seems that you don’t give a rat’s rear end about public safety, or democratic process with a development application with a council, where real people and voters would get to have their say, examine all documents, and perhaps reveal any faults in the planning, leading to a far better outcome.
Isn’t that what development Applications are supposed to be about?
I assume that we still do live in a democracy, don’t we?
You mention an amazing level of debate, with a restricted number of stakeholders.
What a good way to avoid critical scrutiny where real decisions are made?
Is this the Animal Farm approach, where all voters are equal, but some stakeholders are more equal than others?
You may love Animal Farm, but we are not living in China, or do you want that to change?
There is a council committee in Campbell Town, but were they included in the great stakeholder debate, or only those that agreed with a political promise by the Government and the opposition?
The Campbell Town District Forum came out in strong opposition to the underpass and its current location.
There is a simple solution to the problem, even now.
Move the underpass to cross the Midlands Highway between Banjo’s and the Lolly shop.
The money will not be lost then, and all school children going to the sports ground and swimming pool will be able to use that crossing, as well as anyone at the health centre.
The Anglican Church, next to the Town Hall, are making big improvements on their land, so the new location will serve them as well.
The Town Hall underpass could be designed to work in with a proposed civic and cultural centre, should this proceed, thus bringing together the best of all worlds.
Name the largest public building in the central Midlands.
It is the Campbell Town Hall.
Where is Service Tasmania located for the central Midlands?
In the Campbell Town Hall.
I have worked out how to make the Campbell Town Hall viable, creating a place that will inspire enterprise and civic culture, but where do I go?
Your approach to governance, run in collusion with the Northern Midlands Council, serves to suppress civic culture, leaving people feeling quite powerless, even helpless, even angry.
You suggest that I speak with the Northern Midlands Council about the Campbell Town Hall.
Are you aware that they don’t communicate beyond a limited circle?
They talk to the Tasmanian Government, and they talk to their council Committees, but they ignore ratepayers, unless they come with a large sledgehammer of money or public support.
I have repeatedly asked the council to discuss public options with the Campbell Town Hall, but the council and the elected councillors refuse to communicate.
Do you get that?
I have experienced this refusal to communicate repeatedly with many proposals, spoken at council meetings many times, and find the process is like speaking to a brick wall.
Look at the new meeting room and function facility at the sports ground in Campbell Town, built at a cost of $4 million.
It does not include a stadium to watch sport.
There was a grandstand, but that was demolished, with no plans to build a new one.
Looking at the photos, the grandstand looked pretty solid to me.
Have you seen the stadium and function centre in Longford, built at a cost of $2 million?
Isn’t that the kind of building that should have been built at the Campbell Town sports ground, at half the cost?
Has Campbell Town and the central Midlands been ripped off, twice over?
If the council cannot get their planning in order with a sports ground, how can you expect them to think clearly about a town hall that is not in Longford, or the best location for an underpass?
It makes me wonder if the Central Midlands needs its own municipal council, so that planning blunders and negligence can be avoided, as seen with the Campbell Town Hall, the sports ground, and this dangerous new underpass.
Walk with me in Campbell Town, and tell me how you believe democracy works, not to mention good planning with an underpass and public safety.
You said, referring to the current location of the underpass, that it would ….. “only be a matter of time before a child or elderly person would be injured or killed.” (The Mercury, 18 September 2021)
Would you like to get scientific on that assessment, and have a mathematician work out the odds on injury or death at the current underpass location, or on the Midlands Highway between Banjo’s and the Lolly Shop?
Where do children cross the Midland Highway to go to the Lolly Shop?
Where do the elderly cross the Midland Highway to go to the Lolly Shop?
Talking to a limited number of stakeholders about an underpass is fine, to hone the first stage of a plan, but the greatest number of stakeholders are all the residents and visitors, children and elderly, who cross the Midlands Highway between Banjos and the Lolly Shop, and we have been left out of the debate.
What a swifty, like the pea and thimble trick.
That is not democracy.
As one councillor observed at the September meeting of the Northern Midlands Council, this underpass will be a white elephant.
Do all the councillors feel that way now?
That white elephant can be avoided, by slamming the brakes on and getting serious with planning.
You can still have an underpass, in a location where the greater number of people will use it and be safe.
I suggest that the current underpass may need to be gated, or bricked up, due to public safety issues.
What kind of planning legacy would that be, and all so avoidable, if due democratic process had been followed?
This current outcome really does make it look like you are walking above the law, and even citing the support of the opposition to do that.
Meet me in Campbell Town, and look at the raw reality, and enlighten me about how democracy is supposed to work.
Yours sincerely,
Kim Peart
