Saturday 30 April 2016

NOTES FROM UNDERGROUND


Breaking News from the Landfill Front

On Friday 29 April 2016, Kay and Robyn Davies met with Premier Hon. Colin Barnett and Hon. Jim Chown, MLC for the Agricultural Region, at the Flour Mill Café in York.

You can read a report of the meeting, and view a photo of the participants standing together outside the café, at https://www.facebook.com/Stop40YearsOfPerthRubbishInYork/

The report makes clear that the main topic for discussion at the meeting was the proposed SITA landfill at Allawuna.

I was pleased to see that in addition to making known their concerns about water, threats to agriculture and potential traffic problems along the Great Southern Highway, Robyn and Kay raised with the premier the unjust impact on the WA community and environment of the rules governing the operations of the State Administrative Tribunal and the Departmental of Environmental Regulation.

Those rules were established in legislation introduced by none other than the premier and current government. Their purpose was to facilitate ‘development’ in all of its aspects by enfeebling the community’s ability to obstruct or prevent it by way of action in the courts.

According to former York CEO Ray Hooper, as reported in the media some years ago, the aim of the new system was ‘to take the emotion out’ of planning processes. 

You know what we forelock tuggers are like—when we think proposed developments endanger the welfare, comfort, safety or livelihoods of our communities and families, we get angry and start screaming and jumping up and down, pulling our hair out and gnashing our teeth in impotent rage. 

Stupid bloody nimbies, the lot of us.

I don’t know how Mr. Barnett responded to Robyn and Kay, but I think I can imagine it. 

He would have clucked sympathetically, denied having known anything about a landfill in York and what SITA is up to, then told them that the relevant bureaucracies had completed their work and there was absolutely nothing he could have done or can do now to help the people of York in their fight against SITA’s proposal.

So, despite York’s historic importance and its value as a tourist destination—not to speak of its agricultural significance—and notwithstanding that he is now WA’s minister for tourism, he is and always was powerless to intervene.

I bet that’s more or less what he told Robyn and Kay, with the Hon. Jim nodding benignly in the background.

He would have stumbled his way along the bumpy rhetorical track pioneered by his minister for water.

Since Premier Barnett can’t help us, perhaps the Almighty wouldn’t mind stepping in to take his place.   Surely He could organise a minor earthquake or flood, or a series of major traffic pile-ups—no injuries, Lord, please, a few harmless truck roll-overs will do, so long as they inconvenience dozens of politicians and bureaucrats wending their way homewards to Perth—to demonstrate some of the dangers of permitting a landfill to be sited at Allawuna.

Meanwhile, back at the farm…

Not long ago I mentioned a rumour flying around York that SITA intended to pull out of the Allawuna deal.   The rumour predicted that this would happen because the company had bought Perthwaste’s much bigger landfill at North Bannister, thereby rendering Allawuna superfluous to its requirements.

Is that rumour true?  I’ve still no idea.  Until I receive confirmation from an unimpeachable source, namely SITA itself in the person of its state manager, Mr. Nial Stock, I shall go on burning candles to St Jude, the patron saint of lost causes.

What I can confirm, after closely examining a sheep’s entrails, is that Allawuna is still the property of Mr. and Mrs Chester.  The sale to SITA hasn’t yet gone through. 

After four years of uncertainty, this must be a trying time for the elderly vendors and the real estate agents representing them.  For their sakes as well as ours, I hope another rumour does turn out to be true, that somebody is waiting in the wings with an offer to buy the property and farm it without converting part of it into the site of a noxious industry. 

Now that would be providential—and a well deserved poke in the eye for anybody hoping to profit, at the community’s expense, from a rubbish-led recovery in York.


POSTSCRIPT Readers, I was wrong to imply above that Colin Barnett had simply washed his hands of the landfill issue.  He told the Shire and members of AVRA as well as Robyn and Kay that he intended to investigate the community’s concerns and discuss them with SITA.


See the report and accompanying photograph on the front page of the current edition of York and District Community Matters.
 

 

Robyn and Kay Davies, farmers of York


Hon. Colin Barnett, MLA for Cottesloe, Premier of WA, Minister for Science and Tourism

                     Hon. James Edward (Jim) Chown, MLC for the Agricultural Region

33 comments:

  1. The daily dose of rubbish:
    A comment made by Mr Scott Leonhardt on the 'Stop 40 Years of Perth Rubbish in York'..quote: "And ladies where 'dose' your rubbish go?"
    Scott is one of Avon Waste's loyal outspoken workforce, on many occasions he has previously been publicly vocal in favour of Avon Waste, a fine example of this was during the October ordinary Council meeting, when he and his cohorts turned up en masse to support the Ashworth Road application.
    Some members of the gallery were visibly shaken and felt intimidated at the appalling display of snide off the cuff remarks from the contingent of heavies representing Avon Waste.
    Mr Leonhardt has made his potion on SITA and Ashworth Road crystal clear, and why shouldn't he, it's his democratic right after all.
    What Mr Leonhardt should consider is; where does the rubbish come from? Without it, he wouldn't have a job, so perhaps he should be grateful and show a little humility.
    So why the interest in Mr Leonhardt and his political views?
    No particular reason other than the slow infiltration of his spouse onto committees and the sudden interest in the Woman's Wheatbelt Hub and close association with Dr Gale Fergerson. Classic entryism tactics, it shouldn't be too hard to work out what's coming next.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As Mr Leonhardt must know, wherever York's rubbish is going, it won't be to Allawuna. SITA has withdrawn its offer to accept York's waste free of charge. So presumably our rubbish will continue to go where it goes now.

      Delete
    2. Jim, since my earlier response I have discovered that Mr Leonhardt is married to someone my wife and I have met in a professional capacity. We have found Mrs Leonhardt to be pleasant, courteous and efficient in exercising her duties. She is a very intelligent woman who does a damned good job.

      I can't believe she would join a local organisation, or make friends with someone serving the Shire, for the purpose of promoting the interests of her husband's employer. I think you were implying something of that kind in your comment. If she were to join any such organisation, it would be to contribute her talents to the furtherance of its objects and activities.

      I've also met Dr Ferguson, for whom and for whose work I have great respect. Even if somebody did befriend her for the wrong reasons, she is smart enough to protect herself and her reputation from unwanted pressure. However, I would aver that in this case it would simply be a matter of two intelligent women making friends.

      I don't know Mr Leonhardt. I accept that he has exposed himself to critical attention by intervening on the side of his employer in the landfill and truck depot arguments. I am not alone in having good reason to be aware of unsavoury tactics indulged in by his employer to counter opposition and get its own way.

      You may recall that after writing about the Ashworth Road development I received several illiterate and insulting comments posted anonymously by a supporter of Avon Waste's Ashworth Road venture. They included threats to poison my dogs. They began with a comment from somebody who appeared to have had a good education. I published those comments on this blog, with a few tart comments of my own. I was unable to attend the OCM at Greenhills, but I don't doubt that the heavy presence of Avon Waste employees at that meeting was intended to intimidate councillors and other members of the public. I'm not saying that was Mr Leonhardt's intention in attending. It's more likely that he was demonstrating loyalty to his employer, to whose proprietors he may well have cause to be grateful.

      While I fully understand and share your dismay about the waste disposal issues confronting York, and would never discourage you or anybody else from expressing it, I have to say I think it's unfair to point an accusing finger at the spouse of someone who has weighed into the argument on what we would consider the wrong side.

      My own wife supports my running of this blog and making my opinions public, but she doesn't always agree with what I write. I would hate to see her denounced for something I said or did that was solely down to me, and I'm confident that if she were to join the Women's Hub or any group or organisation she would do so from the best of motives. I think the same is true of Mrs Leonhardt. Moreover, I fail to see how joining the Women's Hub is likely to advance the interests of Avon Waste!

      Delete
  2. It appears Rob and Annie Chester have attracted attention to their farm Allawuna for all the wrong reasons.

    Allawuna is a productive farm of high conservation value. Ideal location 72 ks from Perth in the Avon Valley Mundaring Water Catchment.

    What respect does Colin Barnett, Mia Davies and Politicians of the day have for Allawuna allowing it to become a rubbish dump. What value do they have for Conservation, the Mundaring Avon Valley Water Catchment or the impact their actions will have for other agricultural land.

    I understand Mr Barnett has an interest in farming, a property of his own for that purpose, I suggest it should be used for the rubbish dump for metropolitan waste. What about it Mr Barnett?.

    ReplyDelete
  3. How would Premier Barnett like it if the Peppy Grove council decided (with the blessing of the SAT) to create a Landfill in Cottesloe, just up the road from him?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Premier Barnett has shown in the past that he has an unusually benevolent attitude to the aristocratic denizens of Peppermint Grove. A few years ago, when advocating the amalgamation of metropolitan councils, he was at pains to assure them that their tiny council would be exempt from the amalgamation process.

      Delete
  4. Just read AVRA's newsletter. Gee I think it's a pretty defeatist attitude to state: 'We can’t turn the clock back, decisions have been made.' Of course we can change things. Nothing is impossible!

    We all thought we would be stuck with Ray Hooper forever. We just needed someone with the courage to take control and that someone was Matthew Reid! He achieved what everyone thought was the impossible!

    Now we have some really good female Councillors with Cr. Saint, Cr. Ferro and Cr. Walters and a new CEO.

    I believe in the impossible!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is no surprise that AVRA has a defeatist attitude to the Landfill proposal. In 2015 after the State Administrative Tribunal concluded to deliberate their decision AVRA members hosted a wake. Yes I did say a wake!
      Obviously the members thought that the proposal was no longer worth fighting against and their fight was dead.

      Delete
  5. I'm told that Mr Barnett used to own a farm in Toodyay, not far from the present Opal Waste site. Does anyone know if that's true?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes it is true and he still owns it. There have been various rumors to the contrary but he does still own it. It came from the horses mouth - so to speak.

      Delete
    2. you mean the sheep's mouth......baaaaaaa net

      Delete
  6. perhaps he can buy one in ashworth road next to the Avon Waste lifetime rubbish depot they will build, thats worse than next to alluwana

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a good idea Barnie living in Ashworth Road. He will be out of work when he gets dumped at the next election he can get a job at Avon Waste and won't have far to go to work or he can go down the road and sort the rubbish at Allawuna.

      Delete
  7. As a York Councillor, It is unacceptable for Trevor Randell to pose in a photo (behind) Premier Barnett, put it on his Face Book, then let his friends post disrespectful comments about the 'official guest' in the photo.

    https://www.facebook. (name deleted) com/963?fref=ufi
    Nice photo of you Trev, shame about the thing in front of you... lol..

    ReplyDelete
  8. I am not surprised by anything Trevor does, he has a lot of growing up to do.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you're out of order picking on Trevor all the time, he is a talented young man and wonderful chef, many of you would not know he is also gifted at backgammon.

      Delete
    2. Backgammon, eh? That's my game, too. Good to know we have something in common.

      I don't know why he attracts so many adverse comments. He's not without courage. Even these days, it must take guts to come out as gay in a small country town.

      He's loyal as well, as he showed at Greenhills in October. I'm told he always sticks up for his friends.

      Delete
    3. Someone has just told me that in Australia 'backgammon' has a double meaning. I've never heard it used other than to refer to the ancient game known in the Middle Ages as 'tables'. Obviously I move in more refined circles than the folk who've hijacked the word to mean something different.

      Sometimes ignorance really is bliss!

      Delete
    4. Obviously I belong the upper echelon, I haven't a clue what the alternative meaning is, pray tell?

      Delete
    5. No, Mike, I'd rather not. It's possible, though unlikely, that my informant was mistaken. As a devotee of the game, I hope so.

      This unsavoury topic is now closed to further comment.

      Delete
    6. ummm, James, did you notice the name of that 'upper echelon' commentator you responded to? I don't know if you've watched The Simpsons, but picture Bart making a prank call to Moe's bar asking for a patron by that name.

      Delete
    7. I've never watched the Simpsons. I don't know Mr Hunt. What on earth are you trying to tell me?

      Delete
  9. On the topic of "honest, open, and accountable", here's a couple of links all York ratepayers ought visit.

    For York: http://www.mycouncil.wa.gov.au/council/viewcouncil/144
    (16.06% rate increase 2014/2015)
    For Northam: http://www.mycouncil.wa.gov.au/Council/ViewCouncil/157
    (5.81% rates increase 2014/2015)

    Q: Are York rate payers in general getting fair value for their rates and rates increases ... or merely a select few?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I am a bit concerned that our rates are being thrown out the window by lazy staff.
    How long has that bloke on the bobcat taken to shift a couple of truck loads of dirt for the footpath along avon terace. Spends more time standing round picking his nose than he does actually working.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't stress little mouse our Works Manager Allan Rourke will have protected the community from bludgers by calling quotes to carry out the works.
      He will have measured up the works, calculated the volume and gone to the market to get 3 quotes to carry out the works.
      If you look closely you will notice that the paving contractor is going hammer and tong, he has a family to feed and a reputation to maintain.

      After all it is a job on the main street of York :)

      Delete
  11. No, York Ratepayers have not had fair value for their rates for the last 15 years. We have been screwed into the ground by mis management and an Administration overloaded with inept unqualified staff who contract out work they are paid to do.

    Is it any wonder so many people have put their homes on the market.

    Solution: Sack 1/3 of the staff and keep the promise that our Rates won't be increased this year.







    ReplyDelete
  12. Ear to the ground4 May 2016 at 03:00

    Can someone please tell me if it is true the people running 'Settlers' are planning to remove and sell off the Heritage 'convict made' paving bricks from Settler Court Yard?
    I have been told they plan to sell them on line.
    These paving bricks are part of York's Heritage and must be protected against greedy fly by night business owners.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ear to the ground, you may be right to worry about the bricks, I don't know anything about it, but it's not right to call those people fly by night business owners, they're doing their best to make the place a success. We need business people like them in York. Don't forget Settlers was closed for a long time before they came along.

      Delete
    2. I've received the following comment by email from my good friend Bill Cebula.

      "Dear Ear to the Ground

      I was very pleased when Settlers finally opened and yes I enjoy their coffee .

      The " fly by night" owner has been in York since
      1968 and her children and grandchildren attend the school in York,

      She has been involved with York community organisations for years.

      She lives on the premises and has spent serious money doing up Settlers .

      Yes some bricks have been lifted up so a dance floor can be installed . This is a result of requests by patrons of the various functions held in Settlers. The owner is very cognisant of the value of heritage as this is a draw card for both intra , inter and overseas visitors to our heritage listed town

      She is very approachable and I suggest you meet her and discuss her plans for Settlers which we all know is an icon in York.

      The future of York resides in agriculture and of course tourism. I have not yet met a business owner who does not wish to promote the unique features of York

      I do understand your concern which is no doubt sincere but local businesses always welcome an approach by the locals to get the facts. Obviously they want to promote their business which is a win win for both them and the residences of York

      Yours Sincerely

      Wilhelm ( Bill) Cebula"

      Bill, remind me some time to show you how to post a comment directly on the blog!

      Delete
  13. Dear Mickey Mouse,
    For yours and anyone else's information this is a quoted job, therefore, whether it takes a week or a month to complete the cost to rate payers will be the same. Also this job would be expected to take longer than usual due to the fact of the heritage rocks as we are taking care not to damage or desturb or them!
    In future, before slandering anyone on this blog, maybe you should check your facts.

    Signed
    David Tanner

    ReplyDelete
  14. James it appears mister tanner has forgotten than the shire is responsible for the works, the traffic management, the safety management and the general supervision. So if the job takes three weeks instead of three days surely that means it costs the community more.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Dear Anonymous,
    These are interesting points you have raised !
    I do agree that the points you have mentioned could in certain situations have a major influence to the final cost of a job.
    However in this situation there is negligible cost to the Shire of York for the points you have raised.
    I'm sure that if the Shire has any issues with the way the work is being carried out by myself and the prime contractor we would be the first to know.
    Regards
    Dave

    ReplyDelete
  16. It is on the main street and it is a major job,done cheaply and not too badly for what it was,well done on that.Three quotes,cheapest price,get it done well its something,still plenty of room for improvement.

    ReplyDelete