I just wonder if the federal government has seen this through? With an already faltering tourism industry, I wonder if they have worked out that reducing money flow in the economy, by our senior Australians, who appear to make up the majority of tourists, that they are spending our kids inheritance. 

With jobs becoming more scarce, distorted unemployment figures and the only viable jobs now being in Parliament, it’s no wonder we have elected the jokes both parties, in both state and federal parliaments, have become. 

It seems a travesty that they, meanwhile, can live happily on a superior government wages and pension scheme while self-funded retirees cannot. 

Increasing the pension age is not good enough. Most will end up on a disability pension anyway. Reducing their way of life is not great for the economy. 

It’s time to look at people with common sense, that look after locals, not MPs, who have made some of these tax money rorting environmental power schemes possible. Mr Turnbull you’re in my sights as I vote next time, as well as our Victorian State premier who is the most disastrous premier ever. 

Having walked and worked (as a volunteer) for many years in the Alpine National Park and the Bogong High Plains area, I am alarmed at the proposal to build a trail from Falls Creek to Hotham that includes accommodation to service high-yield ecotourists ("Alarm at alpine trail plan", 27/12). National parks are set up to preserve our finest natural areas (take only photos, leave only footprints), not to service ecotourism. Victorians showed in the "Save the Prom" campaign that they do not want high-end accommodation in their favourite parks.

The proposed "overnight node" accommodation areas are nearly all at the sites of old cattlemen's huts where bushwalkers camp. There is a reason why those old huts were sited where they are. They are the best camping spots from the point of view of shelter, vistas, access to water and so on. Under this proposal, the bushwalkers who regularly use these campsites would need to stay at least 100 metres away to accommodate the sensibilities of the once-off ecotourists. And what of the serenity of the area with helicopters flying overhead to service the sites? So much for the average bushwalker trying to refresh the soul with a peaceful walk in a beautiful, natural, mountainous area.

What sense does it make for Parks Victoria, when it appears already strapped for cash, to plan yet another expensive push at the "high yield" market when it cannot maintain what it already has?

Victoria's "iconic" tourist attraction must be the Great Ocean Road and the Great Otway National Park.

Every overseas tourist, from "high yield" to backpacker, "does" the Great Ocean Road experience.

Yet two weeks ago, on the cusp of the high tourist season, the Saint George River walking track near Lorne was an embarrassment.

Both sides of the track were weed infested.

And the weeds hadn't grown overnight.

Trees were across the track.

My friends and I cringed to think this was how visitors would see us as caring for our national parks.

It is better that Parks Victoria spends the $22 million looking after what it already has and where there is tourism infrastructure in place.

That is before creating something else to become weed infested "down the track".