Stretching the facts
I believe Mr Pennisi’s latest Emu Swamp Dam comments are a bit stretching of the facts. He claims that the dam was supported by the last 4 councils. If this was true why did SDRC hand over the project to The Chamber of Commerce? [Who then handed it over to a private organisation]
Did the council actually originally ‘pass’ on the project because the consultants hired by council ranked Emu swamp as only the 5th best option? The concept of a joint council/irrigators dam was ranked similarly low also. The GHD report in fact cautioned against a public private dam proposal. Each time consultants have suggested other options were better.
Mr Pennisi will also know that previous council’s interest was in a completely different dam proposal to what is currently on the table. The original dam was to be publicly owned & of a significantly smaller size than the current proposal. There is also the issue that once town water is transferred to Emu Swamp private dam we Ratepayers /SDRC will be like a drug addict, hooked & forced to pay an annual fee of approx a quarter of a million dollars per year to keep access to that water. The annual cost could rise in subsequent years compromising future council’s budgets & our access to that water.
Surely we would be better off leasing the water to the dam proponents and using those payments to fund a better option?
John Morison, Stanthorpe
*Footnote: It is on public record that GBIP were surprised that they were asked to pay market prices for our town water. Their actual words were “that is not our expectation” This is why many people were concerned when SDRC met in secret [and without listing it on the agenda] to determine a price to sell the water for. The fact is it took public pressure to get more ‘orthodox’ quotes than the ‘unorthodox ‘one they originally obtained. Well we may never know but we presume SDRC now have more industry appropriate othodox quotes.
*Clarification: This letter did not fit in last week’s edition but the footnote was mistakenly shown with another letter. This footnote was not part of Brian Gibbons’ letter.
Reply to Mrs McDonald
I refer to Mrs McDonald’s letter in the 19th May Warwick Today in response to her original decision not to attend the 150th birthday re-enactment. I understand how difficult it is raising a family, working etc. I worked for the Federal Govt, had 3 children 1 with special needs a disabled husband and was required to travel from my home to my normal place of work (35mins) to get a work vehicle then drive up the coast approx 1.5hrs spend 7.5hrs running training return to my office another 1.5hrs (this all dependent on the traffic on the Bruce Hwy not country Hwy’s) drop off the work vehicle then return home approx 35 mins. This happened over a course of 4 weeks at a time. Not always was my husband there he was often in hospital on the other side of Brisbane so no visiting.
This was not my regular job it was in addition to my usual role. However, it was one I was asked to do and I committed to do.
I then had to make the decision to give up my high paying career to become my husband’s full-time carer, but still manage to find time thanks to the wonderful support we receive from the Granite Belt community to volunteer and give back to this community that has welcomed us.
In the end the choice to participate was taken away for many with the horrendous flooding experienced in the SDRC with many events postponed. This was a once in a lifetime experience not an ongoing commitment.
Carol (last name withheld)
We should all work together
After reading your article Samantha, in Warwick Today 12th May, I felt I had to add some background to your article. I was born in Stanthorpe nearly 70 years ago. My father’s family were soldier settlers at Bapaume and my mother’s family came here in the tin mining boom. In the 60s Stanthorpe was a wonderfully diverse place to grow up in. On Thursday afternoon after school you couls walk down the main street and not hear English being spoken. It was that diversity that was its strength back then. I have lived in Warwick now for 40 years.
I applaud your thought that we should all work together and I wholeheartedly agree. Unfortunately that does not occur. Previous to amalgamation, for those of you who have not lived here long, relations between Warwick and Stanthorpe were amicable. There was a friendly sporting rivalry and that was all. My father played tennis and cricket against Warwick and enjoyed those matches.
After amalgamation in 2008 the mood in Stanthorpe changed to one of anger at being forced into this predicament. That anger became channelled at Warwick.
I work in a situation where I deal with the public of both Stanthorpe and Warwick. I would ask people what did they think. Warwick people would would say Stanthorpe is a go ahead place, I’ll be giving my vote to councillors from there with the result that Warwick only had 3 councillors in the first council and Stanthorpe had 6. The mood from Stanthorpe did not improve. They felt Warwick’s will was being imposed on them. Stanthorpe, the town I grew up in, is a very proud and parochial town. Everything the council did ( which was equated with Warwick) was wrong.
Warwick is a laid back rather laconic region and realised that Stanthorpe was struggling with the issue so voted them in again for the second council – albeit with one less Stanthorpe councillor. I wholeheartedly supported deamalgamation when it came along. I could see Stanthorpe had lost that ability to accept change and was no longer happy. The verbal abuse from Stanthorpe residents and wild accusations about how much debt Warwick had been in, abounded.
Samantha, I am pleased that you are willing to try and work together but not all residents have your good intentions. About this time last year, I was with a group of people in Stanthorpe. The vote for the Warwick Saleyard upgrade had been taken and there would be no major renovation undertaken. I asked a Stanthorpe local* what they thought of this and they replied with all the venom that they could muster: “that’s what Warwick deserved!“ It was such a shocking statement. I felt I no longer know this vindictive Stanthorpe. It displays so much anger at Warwick still. We were hoping that time would help but that is not the case and the situation is worse, not better.
My Stanthorpe brother-in-law on the way back to Stanthorpe was moaning about the Emu Swamp Dam saying the Council (Warwick) did not support it. It was the Queensland Government that took a long time to come to the party. All the way back he was chanting “we will not co-operate” with the council (Warwick). This spiteful attitude is ruining the whole region. The Saleyard happens to be in Warwick but it is the only sheep saleyard in Queensland. Sheep mostly come from the Traprock and Dalveen areas. Cattle come from all over not just Warwick. The $4.5 million given for the upgrade was less than the two feasibility studies put together. That’s a slap in the face with a cold fish. Council admin workers who come to Stanthorpe from Warwick are verbally abused by locals if the workers admit they come from Warwick. I would hate to be a councillor. After that incident I would not willingly go back to Stanthorpe. It is depressing and disappointing to be treated in such a manner. I fully understand why councillors made the decision not to partake in the 150 year Stanthorpe event.
Please people be kind to each other. Speak with kindness not anger. Warwick did not force Stanthorpe into amalgamation. We are all in this together and need to work together to diffuse this toxic atmosphere.
Lois James, Warwick
*This portion of the letter has been lightly edited to remove the identification of a local resident.
Dear Mr Gibbons
Last week we read Mr. Gibbins rather impolite reply. Seems he has a bit of catching up to do. No we don’t have a website. Our point is the POW group are unnamed. There is no list of their members and who this individual is or these individuals are. We haven’t lied to you or been Hypocrites Mr. Gibbons. Do you know these people ? Have you been introduced to them ? Why haven’t they made themselves known to the public when they write letters representing the rate payers ? They run around telling whoppers to anyone who will listen.
As for the name ” Emu Swamp Dam Bridage” it’s the sarcastic term given by one of the vocal POW supporters to anyone who supports the dam, water security and job’s. There is alot of people supporting the project. Way more than the secret mob against it. We’ll keep writing as the pseudonym “Emu Swamp Dam Bridge ” for as long as it’s necessary. We’ve seen how badly people are treated by some when they publicly name themselves in letters and online supporting the dam . Now you’ve caught up get behind behind the project.
Now wouldn’t it be great if POW called a public meeting and introduced themselves ? Also presenting their qualifications and roles within the community. They could then explain the difference between
“Supplemented and Unsupplemented Water ” in regards to the cost while everyone is there. Maybe voice their alternate plans and costings ? Maybe even a detailed business case for water security ? Don’t hold your breath.
Regards,
ESDB.
