Members' Page

For instance, what will an increase in gas useage mean ?
Will natural gas customers and those converting to gas for an alternative motor vehicle fuel find that they are INCREASING our carbon footprint, not reducing it?
What other energy and economic impacts will there be?

There is also the issue raised in Max Plummer's letter to the Editor(as yet unpublished) about heating/fuel poverty, about which we may draw upon http://www.energy-retail.org.uk/fuelpoverty.html

You can now join in a forum.
Just follow the link to have your say, or read what others are saying.

LAUNCESTON RATEPAYERS' ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED

PO BOX 2039, NEWNHAM 7248

email: info@launcestonratepayers.intas.net.au

Tel: 6328 1200

Fellow Ratepayers,
You may recall Ivan Dean's pre-election stunt - for that's all it was, an insincere, publicity-seeking, vote-catching stunt - on 19th October to call for a report to investigate a flat rate system for Launceston (like Brighton's) and the possibility of a cap on rates. I had to push the Examiner to print the response that I prepared within minutes of seeing this reported and it appeared, finally, on 25th October.

In what I can only describe as a fit of pique, Ivan Dean wrote the attached letter to me (see Inward Correspondence). Notice it is dated one day before the Letter to the Editor. I wonder how that happened.

Also note my reply, below

6th November

Dear Alderman Dean,

I refer to your letter of 24th October which was not received in our mailbox until 2nd November. On the subject of dates, I find it of interest that your letter is dated the day before our letter appeared in the Examiner. Perhaps this was a typing mistake.

I do not propose to enter a battle of words. You have your opinion and the Association has its.

Deeds peak louder than words and the voters have spoken via the ballot box.

Let's see, shall we, during the two-year term of this Council, just what rates reform takes place and, particularly, just which aldermen vote for change.

Yours sincerely,

John Henshaw, President

LAUNCESTON RATEPAYERS' ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED

PO BOX 2039, NEWNHAM 7248

email: info@launcestonratepayers.intas.net.au

Tel: 6328 1200

Fellow Ratepayers,

Our next meeting, the last for the year, will be at the Heather Hall, Penquite Road, Newstead at 7.30pm on Monday, 12th November and NOT at the Kings Meadows Bowls Club as previously advised.

This change is due to our inability to agree with the Club's conditions of hire and the presence of a guard dog!

There will be a recess for December and January and we meet again at Heather Hall on Monday, 18th February, 2008.

Now that the dust has settled and we've had a chance to come to grips with the LCC election results, while they may not be as pleasing as all of us would have wished, there are some definite positives.

In Jeremy Ball, Ian Norton and Ray Shipp being elected, we have some new blood (or in Ray's instance some old but willing blood!) who will be more sympathetic to our overall cause. In Rosemary Armitage as Deputy Mayor, we also have a voice of reason and someone who will listen - qualities that have been singularly lacking in recent years.

Nevertheless, we must keep up the pressure to get a fairer deal from Council, to see the wish-list of projects reduced to be in keeping with a regional municipality of Launceston's size and its ability to fund these from its ratepayer base.

Our website continues to develop with Clive Stott's enthusiastic assistance. Please visit it and keep up to date with affairs. Don't hesitate to make suggestions as to what can be improved, added, deleted or changed. If you know someone who is a member and has email facilities, or access to email through someone else, please have them get in touch with us and provide contact details. It is important that we build up our email registry as it is by far the most cost-effective and efficient way for us to communicate.

While we would like to get a Forum going on our website, you might care to visit Tassie Times (http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php) which contains some very interesting public commentary on matters which concern us.

Please tell other members about the change of venue and date.

John Henshaw

President

-----Original Message-----
From: Launceston Ratepayers' Association [mailto:info@launcestonratepayers.intas.net.au]
Sent: Wednesday, 24 October 2007 12:20 PM
To: Examiner
Subject: ALLEGED BIAS

President

LAUNCESTON RATEPAYERS' ASSOCIATION INCORPORATED

PO BOX 2039, NEWNHAM 7248

email: info@launcestonratepayers.intas.net.au

Tel: 6328 1200

Mr. Dean Southwell,

Editor,

The Examiner,

Dear Mr. Southwell,

At 9.0 am on Friday, 19th October, I submitted the letter, below, on behalf of the Association:

So, candidate Dean has, apparently, had a road to Damascus moment - his fiscal epiphany (Examiner, 19th October). The proverbial penny has dropped - at last! Better late than never. A flat rates system, even a cap on rates, so vigorously rejected in the past, suddenly becomes worth a look. That's one way of catching a slipping voter base and one which, of course, Launceston's ratepayers would welcome. But, a report is just that, a report, and could end up in the WPB, like so many other let's-go-through-the-motions initiatives. Don't be fooled. Vote for what's real, not for reports.

John Henshaw

President

The letter was distributed by email to our members and other interested parties, many of whom have commented that The Examiner has failed to print it.

It is the opinion of the Association and its members that, by failing to print this letter, the Examiner is exhibiting an unreasonable bias against ratepayers and towards the incumbent mayor.

This is unreasonable. Ignoring to print the letter can not be justified by the Examiner, particularly in view of the paucity of election material.

Yours sincerely,

John Henshaw, President

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---- Original Message -----

From: Editor

To: 'Launceston Ratepayers' Association'

Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:11 PM

Subject: RE: ALLEGED BIAS

Dear Mr Henshaw,

I think we spoke on the phone about your letter and I advised you that it had been accepted for publication. It will appear tomorrow.

Regards,

Edwina Yates
Editor's secretary
The Examiner
Launceston
03 6336 7351

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ms. Yates,

Thank you.

However, the matter loses its resonance with the public, when the issue it relates to is a bit hazy with readers, when it's published almost a week after the event and at the very end of the voting period.

John Henshaw, President

Dear Ratepayer,

As you may have noticed from the minutes of the AGM, there were three resolutions passed:

That a quorum be 10 members.
That the name be changed to Launceston Ratepayers' Association Incorporated
That membership dues be increased to $10.00 per member or household but remain at $5.00 for receivers of Centrelink pensions.

It is this last matter that I now write about...to remind you that, to keep going, to be able to pay for the hire of venues, to mail out to members, we need to have your memberships renewed. Of course, if you have already paid, please ignore this. If not, please send your remittance to:

Max Plummer,
Secretary-Treasurer,
Launceston Ratepayers' Association Incorporated,
PO Box 2039,
NEWNHAM 7248

And, a reminder: VOTE if you have not already done so. This is an election where we can CHANGE attitudes!

Whilst I have no concern in relation to the matters raised at the meeting, it would be reticent of me not to state my disappointment that this forum was able to be used to conduct personal attacks on myself and others.

We are after all, all passionate to our cause and seek to achieve outcomes that benefit our community and wonderful city. Hence constructive criticism can be beneficial and accepted in good faith. However, it is totally unacceptable for participants to use forums such as this to conduct their own personal attacks.

Your dissemination of my disappointment that this behaviour was allowed to your members at your next meeting would be appreciated.

RESULTS OF QUESTIONS ASKED BY GEORGE CHANDLER AT THE LAUNCESTON RATEPAYERS’ ASSOCIATION INC. MEETING, HEATHER HALL, MONDAY 15^TH OCTOBER 2007

At the above meeting I asked all candidates who attended, the following question:

“This question relates to Launceston City Council’s stated position on the pulp mill. All reports and findings have been completed on the pulp mill. The very issues raised in the Council’s own submission to the RPDC and Council would only support the mill if ALL (ie; each and every one) of those questions were answered satisfactorily. Would each candidate please respond and finish with, a definite “YES” or “NO” to the following:

“Do you believe that Launceston City Council’s key questions on the following issues have been answered: that is, transport, air pollution, health and environmental issues, water and compliance?”

“Will you move and at the earliest opportunity to reverse council’s current stance supporting the pulp mill?”

The only guide that we have to the absent candidate’s attitude is that The Examiner newspaper of Tuesday 3^rd July, page 8, reported that at the Council meeting of Monday 3^rd , “Ald. Janie Finlay and Ald.Margot Smart moved that the council toughen its stance on Gunns’ $1.5 billion project in the light of a motion passed by about 1000 people at a public meeting at the Albert Hall last month.

Ald. Findlay said she wanted the council to show leadership and strength by saying the mill should not be approved – because the new State and Federal Government assessment processes would not address the council’s concerns raised in its submission to the Resource Planning and Development Commission.

The submission said that if the issues of transport, air quality, health, water quality, water loss and compliance could not be addressed then the mill should not be apporoved

Ald. Finlay reiterated the concerns of resident Jeremy Ball, who said that 12 months of air monitoring data would not be physically collected until later this month and could not be analysed by Sweco Pic, the State Government’s consultants – which have already handed down a draft report.

The motion was lost 6-6 with Ald. Finlay as well as aldermen Frank Nott, Rosemary Armitage, Ted Sands, Albert van Zetten and Smart voting in support. Mayor Ivan Dean, Deputy Mayor Jodie Campbell and Aldermen Graeme Beams, Annette Waddle, Tony Peck and Robin McKendrick voted against the motion, with many of them saying that they wanted to see the findings of independent, expert assessors.”

PLEASE PASS THIS ADVICE TO YOUR FRIENDS, RELATIVES AND NEIGHBOURS TO ASSIST THEM IN MAKING THEIR DECISIONS ON WHOM TO VOTE FOR.

Dear John,
Attached are my questions and the responses received.
I believe that one of the most important services the Association can provide is
information to assist in determining their votes.
Please circulate the attached and thanks for a wonderful meeting. The resident I brought along signed up and paid immediately after the meeting.
regards George Chandler