Zed finds a solution on the power station?

This one started off badly when they lied about what suburb it was in, and just got murkier as it went along.

I’m glad they’ve come to their senses – better late than never.

Maybe Jon will realise it’s okay to change your mind occasionally, when something is really not gong well. (do the Greens have a position on the Arboretum??)

And it isn’t f’ing Hume!

Clown Killer said :

JB the land was earmarked for industrial development in 1999 when the master planning process for the Hume area was finalised – it’s been argued elsewhere so it’s not worth pursuing here.

It’s worth noting that if the facility gets physically moved to be further from homes it’s highly likely that the emissions and noise output will be ramped up so that they will be essentially have the same impact on citizens as if it went in at the original location … you’ve got to get cost savings somewhere and that’ll come from ramped up capacity and reduced emissions scrubbing.

That isn’t true – complete and utter crap actually. As of 2007, the site had been set aside, not to be used for 10 years, and was potentially reserved as a site for a future cemetary.

caf, I agree with you also. But, for the Government of the Day, this position tends to only be put when it is convenient.

Other times, they’re all in there telling their bureaucrats what the outcome is to be.

JB the land was earmarked for industrial development in 1999 when the master planning process for the Hume area was finalised – it’s been argued elsewhere so it’s not worth pursuing here.

It’s worth noting that if the facility gets physically moved to be further from homes it’s highly likely that the emissions and noise output will be ramped up so that they will be essentially have the same impact on citizens as if it went in at the original location … you’ve got to get cost savings somewhere and that’ll come from ramped up capacity and reduced emissions scrubbing.

I’d agree with you if the land was privately held and not having it’s use changed specially for the project.

“Business requires governments to make the rules, the regulations and then let them get on with it,” he said.

“For politicians to interfere and to change the rules part way through the process means there’s no certainty and that means other businesses thinking about coming to Canberra would think twice.”

I have some sympathy with this view – it would kind of suck having a project that ticks all the boxes, and then gets failed based on “the vibe”. It’d be hard to tell beforehand whether your project would be shot down, which might make it all seem too hard.

But if that’s the road we’re going to go down, we might as well go the whole way – just get rid of all the Environmental Impact Statements, Territory Plans, Zoning Rules and all the rest, and just say “every project proposal will be put to referendum”.

Stick it next to tralee – throw a dragway into the mix as well.

When is Stanhope not outraged about something ?

Good one. Someone else said it already: political interference is good when it gets what business wants, and bad if it gets in business’ way.