A SUSTAINABLE CITY
Excuse me Mr Cox ('Greens not the answer' November 17) but the Greens' definitely want to see upgrades of 'paths, road crossings and public facilities'. Among many other items Councillor Mithra Cox's vision statement says 'Build more footpaths, pedestrian crossings and cycleways, especially going east-west.'
The statement also says we should make it convenient and pleasant for people to walk, cycle or catch the train or bus and it should be safe for kids to walk to school. These are values to guide Council's allocation of ratepayer funds.
How is this dictating your personal lifestyle? If you think these are the wrong priorities, then tell us what you think ratepayer funds should be spent on. All mayoral candidates need to put a vision out there so voters can choose what kind of city they want to live in. The Greens' vision is for a more sustainable and liveable city. Council can do a lot towards making this happen.
Helen Wilson, Bulli
NOT CORE COUNCIL BUSINESS
In reading ('Greens' vision for the city' - 16/11), outlining Mithra Cox's proforma vision for Wollongong as an elected lord mayor, the alarm bells rang when I read the Greens' vision was to bring new jobs and investment in new technologies....". What does she mean? I hope she wouldn't try to set up some sort of business development department within Wollongong Council.
The attraction of worthwhile opportunities for employment or any business to a city, region, state, or nation is a complex, costly, and competitive process. Transient businesses often have more than one destination in mind and turn the process into a bidding game, requiring the bidders to have the necessary expertise and bankroll.
There is no value for ratepayers if councils get too involved in this type of activity. It would be a waste of council resources and, in true Greens' style, take the focus off core business.
Business relocation and establishment is already covered by the Commonwealth and state governments departments throughout regional Australia: they will have the expertise and more likely be able to provide what is required.
Richard Burnett, Wollongong
DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE
Richard Burnett's French Submarine letters (Mercury, Nov 16) merely follow red herrings down rabbit holes. That the contract was signed with a private company does not mean there is no national interest. Does Mr Burnett think any AUKAUS submarine contract will be signed with the US Government?
Cancelling the submarine contract would always have been a disappointment but the appalling way it was done was the major problem. Even the US President felt the need to apologise to the French they had not been notified.
The government would not cancel a contract with BHP by letting them read it in the press. No thought was given to how it should be done. Making foreign policy the residue of internal political spin will leave us with few friends.
Morrison and their apologists have been flailing around with lies and red herrings. It is surprising they have not blamed Labor for signing the submarine contract. It was actually Turnbull but who would have noticed in Morrison's plethora of lies?
David Goss, Woonona
Email your letters to firstname.lastname@example.org