Letters to the editor

NICK OFF: Australian tennis player Nick Kyrgios should be banned for 12 months and fined $100,000, according to Wodonga letter writer Geoff Burton.

NICK OFF: Australian tennis player Nick Kyrgios should be banned for 12 months and fined $100,000, according to Wodonga letter writer Geoff Burton.

Soft ban served up

The powers that be on the tennis scene, and who were responsible for the suspension and fine for Nick Kyrgios should themselves be suspended and fined.

The punishment dealt out is a pathetic effort on their part. Nothing more than a smack on the hand and a couple of bob out of his wallet. 

This player needs a true sentence if  he is ever going to get the message.  

This bad behaviour has been going on for years, and we as tax payers pay him through Tennis Australia. 

The ruling powers need to put him out for 12  months and fine him $100,000 and then he might learn some manners.

And none of this suspensed sentence garbage or time off if he visits a shrink. It should be remembered that he brought all the trouble on himself.

Another example of pathetic sport officialdom. 

Geoff Burton, Wodonga

Basin plan needs review

It’s been a fascinating week for anyone interested in water policy and politics.

Firstly, the MDBA finally acknowledged, after a number of years, the social and economic damage of its Murray-Darling Basin Plan.

Nothing has yet been done to protect the rural towns that are being unnecessarily hurt by the plan, but at least now we have admitted there’s a problem, so perhaps there will be attempts to fix it.

Then we had the NSW Government’s backflip on banning greyhound racing.

What does this have to do with water policy, you may ask? In fact, it has a lot to do with it.

Just like there was flawed legislation that was going to decimate a rural industry and at the same time cost jobs and economic activity in greyhounds, so is there flawed water policy that is costing jobs and economic activity.

There is, of course, one stark difference: Governments have yet to ‘fess up’ that they’ve made a mess of water policy and need a full review of past decisions and the socio-economic cost.

The greyhound drama was followed soon after by a change of direction with shark control.

Again, you may ask, what does shark control have to do with water policy, apart from the fact both have the same Minister in Niall Blair (and the obvious penchant that sharks have for water)?

Well, it was interesting to note that the scientist providing advice to the Premier on shark policy has a love of sharks and apparently believes they should be protected, even at the cost of human life.

This, in fact, is a similar view to the scientists who have been advising governments for many years on water policy.

Their priority is not their fellow human beings and as such if hard-working Australians are collateral damage for helping a tree grow or a frog breed, then so be it.

At last the NSW Government woke up to the crazy advice it was receiving on shark protection and took action to save human lives.

Let’s hope that it soon decides to take the same stance with water.

And finally, the Snowy Hydro Scheme was added to the National Heritage List.

This is the scheme that was developed to divert water and help food producers grow crops and livestock to feed people throughout the world, while at the same time developing a multi-billion dollar industry that brought prosperity to the Murrumbidgee and Murray Valleys in NSW.

Does the heritage listing mean this scheme could now revert back to its original reason for being? I suspect not.

So at week’s end we still had greyhound racing, our surfers are safer and Snowy Hydro will be protected into the future.

I wonder if we’ll ever get around to protecting those who grow food – which they can’t do without water.

Sarah Macdonald, Deniliquin

Tablet - Narrow
Tablet - Wide