World Environment Day, Toondah planning and biased reporting

Council’s planning of the Toondah Priority Development Area (PDA), treatment of a local community organisation at the Council’s Indigiscapes World Environment Day and biased reporting are discussed in letters to Redlands2030.

Have your say by writing to theeditor@redlands2030.net

Toondah was and is a planning disaster

Toondah is a planning challenge, no sane person would voluntarily accept especially given there is a better location nearby. 

The PDA development would entail the loss of 40 ha of protected mangroves, seagrass and wetlands; impose 20-30 years of construction on a constrained area of recreational and residential use and a transit corridor; increase traffic and parking over and above the traffic and parking of the busy port servicing the island; demand infrastructure far more onerous than needed for sites not prone to storm surge and flooding (and the infrastructure would be at public expense).

The location even has the worst orientation: facing into prevailing south-easterlies. What’s good about living here, next to the constant clanging of the barges, blown off your balcony? Having to fight traffic along Middle Street to reach the railway station or wherever else you need to go for work, school, shopping? Any architect, planner or urban designer would know all this.

Toondah Harbour is the wrong location for the planned development. Should it go ahead, it will only bring a long chain of negative consequences, long term costs to the community and a lifetime of grievances.

J.A.
Cleveland

 

---

Why were local environment groups relegated to the back blocks of the Indigiscapes Eco-Markets?

I was one of the hundreds who went to Indigiscapes for their World Environment Day Eco Fair. It was a good effort all round with some great entertainment for adults but especially for kids.

Indigiscapes is something Redlanders can be proud of!

But I do query is the way the local community action groups like ACF, Koala Action Group, the Bayside Wildlife Preservation Society, the catchment group and of all things the Alexander Hills Mens Shed (and their sausage sizzle) were relegated to what looked and felt like secondary part of the event. This was the treatment meted out to local environmental groups at a function marketed around World Environment Day.

The main action was on the pathway leading to and from the main stage inside the grounds of Indigiscapes. This is where the main displays, and paid attractions were put side by side with commercial outlets. The crowd certainly got value. But why were our local volunteers not given space in sight of the main thoroughfare? It seemed like shabby treatment to me!

I didn’t make enquiries on the day but when I got home, I thought about the positioning and wondered why the community groups were located so far from the centre of the action and well away from the passing parade. It certainly looked unfair.

It maybe they mightn’t speak up themselves … so I decided to put pen to paper in a forum where considered people might see the obvious. For this forum, I thank Redlands2030.

PS I am not a member of any of the groups, but I think the questions should be asked.

R.McC
Capalaba

---

Biased ‘news’ reporting

I was at my coffee group a week or so ago and we discussed the editorial take of Redlands2030. The views of my fellow coffee drinkers were varied but some felt R2030 was about negative reporting and a biased against Council. I considered that statement and concluded most news sources do report the negative side…my guess is that good news stories don’t sell so well!

I am still undecided about the bias of Redlands2030, I for one appreciate the views they published and I find they are well researched and make sense! I also concede that it is the right of the citizen journalists of R2030 to decide what you all want to write about. So we get what we get!

Oddly some people seem to want to compare the R2030 news with the Redland City Bulletin…but that isn’t fair…. one has paid journalists, a source of advertising revenue and the other is reliant on volunteer organisers and contributors. But what did strike me was the bias in musings of the Redland City Council News. This news is paid for by rate payers and as a source of local news it never finds anything negative to say about anything the Council does! Not ever! That is surely “good news” bias!

I do question whether ratepayers are funding a propaganda sheet in the City. The RCC News is after all Council owned and operated and its focus is on the “News” coming out of the Council itself. As such the Newsletter being self titled as “News” is an oxymoron. I think residents and ratepayers would be better off, if the council paid for proper reporting by the Redland City Bulletin … an organisation with a proper mandate to write varied stories that are then published in our “local rag”. We should get rid of the corporate propaganda arm that pushes the Council line.

In my view any criticism of the bias of Redlands2030 pales into insignificance when compared to the biased reporting in the Council’s own newsletter!

In the meantime, I hope R2030 keep going…we would all be the poorer, if you dropped the ball.

R.C.
Cleveland

More Opinions Expressed By Redlanders

Lights In The Mud Rally Shows Toondah Angst

More Opinions In Letters From Redlanders

Lights In The Mud: It Was A Winner

Redlands2030 – 17 June 2021