Shire’s unacceptable ‘dictatorial attitude’
I am surprised and alarmed by Mornington Peninsula Shire Council’s move to introduce and begin monitored and paid parking for our coastal locations. First as a pilot program at Schnapper Point, Sunnyside Beach and Flinders jetty, but we all know that will be simply a forerunner to the rest of the peninsula having the same controlled parking (“Flinders keeps its spot in paid parking trial” The News 15/8/23).
This is being done by our council without public debate and traditional due process. This dictatorial attitude is not acceptable.
There are already intrusive and unwelcome surveillance cameras along our coast. Proclaiming “safety” is not a legitimate reason as the peninsula is fortunate to have a very low crime rate.
Council is introducing paid parking for tourists and out of town visitors which will include average families from Melbourne seeking a free day at the beach but which will cost them a whopping $6.20 an hour .
To argue this new revenue will keep rates down is not valid. Visitors will not come or put more pressure on other free parking areas. Fewer visitors will reduce spending in boutique shops, which are the essence of the appeal of Main Street, Mornington. It may turn into a string of corporate chain stores because only they will survive.
As an aside, rates need to be controlled by frugal spending and tighter financial management by the council.
We have fought long and hard against such “progress”. All our peninsula quaintness must remain, no hideous neon signs for us. The council is being dictatorial and doing many things without our agreement. It’s time this council did what the people of the peninsula want by having proper consultation and then acting on the results.
We say no to paid parking and we say no to surveillance.
Monica Martini, Mornington
Abandon parking trial
Mornington Peninsula Shire Council is claiming that costs are too great to maintain three beaches on our peninsula: Schnapper Point, Mornington, Sunnyside, Mount Eliza; and Flinders foreshore.
Our shire has not consulted with ratepayers and has decided to charge all tourists who visit our beaches $6.20 an hour parking with locals receiving five free parking permits for a trial.
With numerous volunteers working to keep our beaches clean and pristine, including myself, and with the hefty rates on every house paid to our shire, what is the shortfall?
Vehicle owners are fined $90 to $360 depending on how long each car overstays it‘s welcome.
There are already two hour parking signs everywhere at Schnapper Point parking bays.
Has this shire forgotten that our beaches belong to all Victorians and certainly not the shire? Besides rubbish removal and public toilet cleans what other costs are involved to maintain our coast for all to enjoy?
Could it be the blue neon brightly shining lit-up sign saying “Schnapper Point every night engraved in timber on the side of the cliff? Or could it be the cost of the 5G cameras that will take photos of every number plate? Or maybe, it’s the cost of the smart app needed to park your car in these allocated car parks set up for visitors to give their number plate and banking details and tracked and traced?
Or maybe the $44,000 electric cars the shire has purchased to drive around in while families can’t afford the petrol to come to our beaches.
Leave us alone Mornington Peninsula sneaky spying Shire. Inform constituents before making major decisions, take down your technology and trappings, employ a parking inspector if you must and stop spending our money without our permission.
Felicity Benson, Mornington
The rubbish problem on the Mornington Peninsula definitely needs to be tackled (“Cleaning up the bay trail” The News 15/8/23). Like others, my family often spends time collecting litter along cliff trails at Mount Martha. We are always surprised at just how much we collect, from plastic bottles to polystyrene, to fishing tackle. The latest series of ABC TV’s War on Waste further highlights the rubbish and waste problems confronting Australia.
Hopefully, the introduction of Victoria’s container deposit scheme, CDS Vic, rewarding Victorians 10 cents for every returned can, carton and bottle will encourage more of us to do the right thing (“Deposit refunds a waste game-changer” The News 15/8/23).
Our environment and native wildlife are struggling enough from invasive species and climate change without extra waste pollution added to the mix. Keeping Australia beautiful has never been more important.
Amy Hiller, Kew
Both ways now
The Yes campaign insists that parliament is not required to do whatever the Voice committee asks if it is successful [while] your correspondent insists that local MPs should vote Yes “because it is what Indigenous people have asked for” (“MPs should vote for what Indigenous people want” Letters 15/8/23).
Sounds like someone trying to have it both ways just to suit the argument.
Jack Wheeler, Mornington
Approach with logic
It is pleasing to see some of your correspondents calling for a more logical approach to the proposed Voice for First Nations people. I would remind them, however, that the computer programmers’ adage, “rubbish in, rubbish out” applies to the human mind too.
A person who begins with false premises will probably draw irrational conclusions.
I would suggest that before deciding to vote Yes or No, citizens should consider the following:
- Aboriginals are people who neither live for 60,000 years nor have magic powers.
- The ancestors of our non-Aboriginal citizens have been on this earth for as long as those of the Aboriginals.
- Citizens of white, Asian and African ancestry have been here for 10 or 12 generations, and I believe the rate of intermarriage has been such that most “Aboriginals” have predominantly white ancestry and live in urban environments.
- Cultures are learned. They are neither genetically inherited traits nor objects of which a person may be deprived.
- The Uluru Statement from the Heart makes no mention of remote communities. It claims sovereignty over this land and seeks special political privileges for all citizens who have any Aboriginal ancestry and claim to be Aboriginal.
Readers might decide that the claim that a group of citizens for whom a special government department exists, and for whom there is a special cabinet minister who is one of the group, has no political voice is ludicrous.
Albert Riley, Mornington
Plugging the gap
It is good to see that Frankston MP Paul Edbrooke has finally come into public focus and stopped hiding in the shadows as the Andrews government is known for because of its ongoing scandal and big debt and its decision to force developers to only connect electricity to their developments to cut greenhouse emissions.
The 500 car parks at Frankston and the 300 car parks at Kananook station will stop some cars from travelling to Melbourne by train and give businesses some extra parking even though car parks are well established at Bayside Shopping Centre.
Mr Edbrooke needs to explain the transfer from petrol guzzling cars to electric cars and how the government he is a part of will install electricity plugs to re-charge batteries and when they will start to be installed in Frankston and statewide?
It is not clear that the car parks will encourage more train users, but it may when high-rise developments are built around the station.
Russell Morse, Karingal
Letters – 300 words maximum and including full name, address and contact number – can be sent to The News, PO Box 588, Hastings 3915 or emailed to: firstname.lastname@example.org