[Siliespiriulk]

Continues on from here

[seodiary]

So which one do we use?

[Siliespiriulk]

So which one do we use?

This one please

[elton]

So which one do we use?

this one...

[KLhdfskja]

So which one do we use?

Looks like we don't have a choice now

[seodiary]

Ah, I see that the old one has been deactivated now.

[KLhdfskja]

Thousands rally against NSW land use policy
By Sally Block, staff
Updated May 01, 2012 14:33:47


Thousands of people from farms and environmental groups have gathered in Sydney for a mass rally against the New South Wales Government's land use policy.

The unlikely alliance, which has formed under the name Protect Our Land and Water, marched to State Parliament at lunchtime.

The marchers included members of several green groups and the lobby group GetUp!, standing shoulder-to-shoulder with the Country Women's Association (CWA) and farmers.

They were there to show their displeasure at the Government's draft Strategic Land Use policy.

"City and country, united we stand. Protect our water, protect our land," they chanted.

The protesters say the Government is giving priority to coal seam gas and mining operations with the policy.

Deputy Premier Andrew Stoner sought to respond to the criticism by addressing the really but he struggled to get his message through, clashing with one protester.

"It will be if you'll just shut your mouth for a minute, mate. It will be, don't worry," he said.

Elaine Armstrong from the CWA says it is the first time they have protested.

"In the past we've achieved much by rolling up our sleeves to get on with the job. This is more than tea and scones, believe me," she said.

Planning and Infrastructure Minister Brad Hazzard was also defending the policy this morning.

"I should express a degree of concern that perhaps the message is not getting out as clearly as it should to the broader community that the Government is trying to strike a balance," he said.

Energy and Resources Minister Chris Hartcher took a harder line before the rally, writing an open letter to newspapers condemning the alliance of farmers and environmentalists.

"If these groups succeed in stopping exploratory drilling, how long will it be before they reduce farming viability and stop farmers from drilling bore holes?" he said in the letter.

Drew Hutton from the Lock the Gate Alliance was among those who rejected Mr Hartcher's criticism.
"I think he's been blind sided by the fact that environmentalists and farmers have come together," he said.

Greens MP Jeremy Buckingham also hit out at the Minister.

"It's completely appalling that we've had senior cabinet ministers attacking the New South Wales Farmers' because they're voicing their opposition to this Government's plans to turn fantastic agricultural areas of New South Wales into coal seam gas and coal mines." he said.

"We want our food producing areas protected and it's bringing together farmers and environmentalists who see the common sense of looking after our agriculture."

The NSW Minerals Council has also placed newspapers advertisements today arguing its case.

The council says mining operations take up 0.1 per cent of land in NSW.

But the president of the NSW Farmers' Association, Fiona Simson, says the draft policy is overly focused on the mining industry.

"The state needs royalties and the state needs the mining dollars," she said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-0...policy/3983096




Last bit of the story has me baffled, going on this

But the president of the NSW Farmers' Association, Fiona Simson, says the draft policy is overly focused on the mining industry.


"The state needs royalties and the state needs the mining dollars," she said. Another case of poor journalistic skills, or am I missing the point somehow?

Edit: I get it now, brane's a bit slow this arvo

[eocavrWM]

Does she mean that the state govt treats the concerns of the farmers as secondary because it needs the dosh from mining royalties? As a result policies are always weighted in favour of the mining industry.

Edited: Oh, Woolly's on the case.

[opelayday]

Yep ... You are surprised to hear it could be so I am sure

[KLhdfskja]

Does she mean that the state govt treats the concerns of the farmers as secondary because it needs the dosh from mining royalties? As a result policies are always weighted in favour of the mining industry.

That's my take on it

(Oh, I see jenna got there before me).

[eocavrWM]

Yep ... You are surprised to hear it could be so I am sure

Stunned.

O brave new world! That has such people in't.

[KLhdfskja]

Well I only popped in to post that, better get back to important stuff...

BBL

[eocavrWM]

Gak! I am tidying up the house for a viewing on Friday. It will take me that long to make a difference.

[eocavrWM]

Reading an article about Peter Corris. For once, I'd like someone to write an piece about a crime fiction author without presenting it in an appalling mock-Chandleresque style.

[sniskelsowwef]

too tired to think ... ca
cyazn't keep up!
bbl, but you guys have a good evening

[eocavrWM]

I don't think anyone but me would be interested in this, but this is a Google Maps link to the proposed location of one of the SAM batteries for the London Olympics. (It would liven up the pole vaulting no end.) It's part of the old Bryant & May factory complex, which is now fancy apartments. The only reason I link to it at all, is that it's very close to where I used to live. And I all know you're desperate for that information.

The putative SAM site is the complex on the right, with the black tiled roofs. Where I lived is in one of the complexes on the far left with the dark grey roofed buildings running NW-SE and the light grey roofed buildings running SW - NE or thereabouts. Nowadays, they are all genteel and called 'Lacey Mews', although there weren't any stables in the area. It was all slums and housing estates back in my day.

*tugs forelock, calls everyone guv'nor and starts singing about being a chimney sweep*

[KLhdfskja]

The putative SAM site is the complex on the right, with the black tiled roofs.

Ahhh, that'd be the good ol' Lexington Building residential complex by the looks

[pipojambo]

'Lacey Mews', although there weren't any stables in the area.

I had noticed mews being used in fancy housing estates, usually to describe some place with incredibly narrow streets and houses squeezed in that close that if someone roles over in bed the neighbour in the house next door has to roll over too.

I just looked it up and it does mean a row of stables, I wonder if the people squeezed into those places know it.

[eocavrWM]

I had noticed mews being used in fancy housing estates, usually to describe some place with incredibly narrow streets and houses squeezed in that close that if someone roles over in bed the neighbour in the house next door has to roll over too.

I just looked it up and it does mean a row of stables, I wonder if the people squeezed into those places know it.

They were formerly council housing estates. There were once two dirty great big council tower blocks to the west of the now gentrified 'Lacey Mews', but they've now been knocked down and replaced with high-density apartments and townhouses, which don't look all that low-cost rental to me. I can't imagine all that clearing for the Olympics has helped ameliorate the poverty in Tower Hamlets.

The only stables I can remember in the area were the police horse stables on Addington Road, near the corner of Bow Road. The police would actually let you pat the horses. Things have changed.

[alenbarbaf]

Surface to Air Missiles?

Really