Bega District Letters to the Editor: Land claim compensation raises issues

Cr Mitchell Nadin is quoted as saying he is livid that council is paying compensation for land affected by a land claim. He feels the land should be donated for the benefit of the community.

However, he needs to explain what he has donated for the benefit of the community.

In 2016, he distributed election material promising to donate, if elected, any income he earned from council to local community organisations.

He was duly elected but there has been silence about any donations? Has he made any? He needs to be held accountable.

Cr Nadin needs to make good on his election claim and keep the promise about donating for the benefit of the community.

The payment offered by council is a result of ongoing land claims Australia wide which now sees our First Nation people having control of more than 50 per cent of Australia and claiming compensation for existing services that affect that land.

The passing of legislation to allow a referendum to potentially enshrine a First Nation lobby group in our Constitution is likely to lead to increased financial claims made against government which affects all Australians and is also likely to exacerbate racism in what is today a successful multicultural Australia.

What a load of absolute tripe - here we are about to be slugged rates rises over two years - and this council goes and blows $116,000 on a small parcel of land which it can't afford.

What is this con to pay compensation to Aboriginal Land Council for dispossession of Crown Land? What a load of absolute rubbish. Has everybody gone crazy with all this Indigenous baloney?

The obvious question: If Merimbula Eden Liberals could list the issues they wanted fixed (BDN 28/3), why didn't they do this when the Liberals were in government. How many years did they want to rectify things?

Yes, nominating Russell Fitzpatrick as their candidate was an absolute no-brainer. He demonstrated, by championing the ridiculous 90+ per cent increase in Bega council's rates against very clear opposition throughout the shire, he was unwilling to listen to the views of locals. So why would they want him to 'represent' them in parliament?

Cost of living, being able to get a house was a major issue - not, as the Liberals pretend, "a sleeping issue".

And, yes, "Baralaro was a drag on us". Not just a drag - an enormous drag! His ridiculous support of keeping feral horses in Kosciuszko NP had absolutely no community support, yet the solution was so simple: the government could have purchased an adjoining property, opened the gates, allowed brumby-lovers to rehome feral horses to this property within three months, then closed the gates and destroyed any remaining feral horses. The environmental problem would have been solved within six months. Australians would have applauded the government for its action. The new Labor government are the beneficiaries for Baralaro's (and the Liberal government's) insanity.

And, yes. Andrew Constance and an unwanted, expensive by-election. At least the Gilmore electorate was sensible enough to reject his efforts to become their federal member.

Our re-elected Bega electorate member has suggested integrity will be a priority for his government. Currently, the NPWS falls well short of this aspiration. Their claim that broad area burning in Mimosa Rocks NP will improve protection for distant properties (BDN, 3/4), contrasts with the scientific findings, indicating such burning does not assist in fire fighting and fuel reduction is best employed adjacent to rural properties in this bioregion.

Much of the park was logged prior to its dedication and in many areas eucalyptus species have not grown back. In the adjacent Murrah Flora Reserves, the NPWS's own research has found the most abundant tree species is black forest oak.

All the evidence confirms Forestry corporation predictions back in 1983, that many logged areas will be suitable for 'uses not related to timber production', due to management that doesn't encourage the growth of eucalyptus trees.

In its recent 'Insights for NSW forest outcomes and management' report the Natural Resources Commission suggests that "Business-as-usual management approaches and reactive policy decision making will lead to sub-optimal outcomes at best, or ecosystem and industry collapse under worst case scenarios."

The NPWS claim forests they manage are essentially 'old growth'. Based on this claim they were able to mislead consultants on fire management in the Murrah Flora Reserves. We are yet to see if the new NSW government's commitment to integrity also includes NSW government departments, but if the past and present is anything to go by, it won't.