Opinion

Letters to the editor

By Shepparton News

Grab for cash

- Alan McLean, Kirwans Bridge

Congratulations to Myles Peterson (News, May 9) for exposing the audacious attempted rip-off by Goulburn-Murray Water.

I know landholders adjacent to the Goulburn River who purchased their properties many years ago.

A jetty or boat ramp was already fitted on the bank margin, which is public land. These people obviously do not own the jetty or ramp. G-MW is now planning to punish them annually with serious fee hikes.

I know others who assist G-MW. They rid the river bank of blackberries and other weeds, destroy rabbit habitat, remove fallen branches which may impede water flow, stabilise the bank with small retaining walls, beautify the zone with terraces, pathways and rock walls, and construct a barbecue.

G-MW should be paying these people for their maintenance labours, not slugging them with annual fees for each and all of these installations.

Within the new fee schedule is a yearly charge for anyone who has the gall to tie up some shade cloth between a couple of trees.

Who dreams up these blatant grabs for cash? Which boss endorses them? Or is it the board of directors?

What a pity G-MW has declined to attend a public meeting near Nagambie on Friday evening to answer these questions.

Is the concept of consultation with their clients an idea just too challenging to consider?

Do they fear that the fee schedule will cop heavy criticism? Are they frightened of the landholder with a jetty and boat ramp whose annual payments will now exceed $2000?

A free ride?

- Ron Poole, Shepparton

I am cynical of the story in Wednesday’s News reporting that ‘‘There is no contamination’’ on the old lakeside petrol station site.

Every other service station closed down has always had contamination and has taken years sometimes to clean up.

I have no proof or reason to fault the tests carried out, but as I said I am very cynical.

I did voice my opinion early in the piece that the time frames council had laid down for the demolition and start of building SAM seem to be optimistic.

Is this project getting a free ride?

I am realistic enough to know that despite any voices of dissension SAM will go ahead and I do hope that it proves to all of us sceptics that the arty-farty and council were right in their decisions.