Ground surface at Brooky

[Woodsie]

Actually in the Auburn Council, it was the ones who you would identify as Greenies or at least socially conscious, who fought tooth and nail against the developers. One managed to get a lift at our train station for the disabled recently, another to have trees planted along our stark main street. There are several other issues they fought for and won a couple. They were the only ones fighting for the community at large. They may be off with the pixies in some issues Woodsie, but at least Greenies seem to have a social conscience and not be bound purely by avarice, like our developers and many members of the two major parties, of which they used to con people into voting for them..

Bear, it is difficult for me to accept your admonishment for harboring preconcieved notions about Greenies in a post in which you advance and champion preconcieved ideas about developers .....

My suggestion to ban both extremes holds ......

 

[manly al]

How many home fixture games do Manly have these days, 10 or 11 ? Can not see any major issues having other tenants using it in moderation if this can induce some improved ground and amenity outcomes . If the local respective council then and with more tenants can not direct most of this increased rental revenue into some ground improvements then they should reduce Manly "s high rental charge .Something does not seem quite right with the local council"s attitude and upgrade and maintenance approach to Brookie over many years now . Surely time to come to the party now with some improvements in the offering and for some ongoing priority attention as well . More high profile tenants should give some unavoidable obligations in addition also as well .

 

[Mark from Brisbane]

If we are worried about the Brookvale surface just imagine the Suncorp surface for the last game of the “ magic weekend”.

Thank **** we are on early.

 

[Bearfax]

Bear, it is difficult for me to accept your admonishment for harboring preconcieved notions about Greenies in a post in which you advance and champion preconcieved ideas about developers .....

My suggestion to ban both extremes holds ......

Bear, it is difficult for me to accept your admonishment for harboring preconcieved notions about Greenies in a post in which you advance and champion preconcieved ideas about developers .....

My suggestion to ban both extremes holds ......

Woodsie I don't say these things loosely and without justification. I had the advantage of attending a couple of the meetings of the council members and saw with horror, the manner in which a majority core, including the Chair, consistently ignored the smaller group, including a rep from The Battler, who tried to defeat proposals from the developers, contrary to the interests of the community. A close friend and local resident (an ex fireman) at one stage was granted permission to speak. He gave an impassioned, accurate and well presented argument against certain major policies these people (some of whom I know personally) were proposing, and was totally ignored and demeaned.

Look I'm not saying all developers are bad. I'm sure the majority are needed. But Woodsie, as I always say, look to the money, when it comes to vested interests. The Battler and his group have a vested interest but its to the benefit of the community as a whole.

As for Greenies, you seem to package them up in the one parcel. The majority of Greenies I've known, and I'm not associated with any political party, are socially conscious people. Sure there's a rat bag element. But ask what are the average Greenies vested interests. They may be misguided in some issues (and that's why I'd never join them), but their heart is generally in the interest of the many, not the few. Sure extremists are not needed, from either the left or the right. But most Greenies I've known are not extremists. That's just media talk from right wing interests, like they do attacking unions, of which at one stage I was an unpaid head of one State Gvt group.

And that's all I'll say on the matter because I know the ref is watching and says we shouldnt get into politics.

Back to the ground and its deficiencies.

 

[Woodsie]

Woodsie I don't say these things loosely and without justification. I had the advantage of attending a couple of the meetings of the council members and saw with horror, the manner in which a majority core, including the Chair, consistently ignored the smaller group, including a rep from The Battler, who tried to defeat proposals from the developers, contrary to the interests of the community. A close friend and local resident (an ex fireman) at one stage was granted permission to speak. He gave an impassioned, accurate and well presented argument against certain major policies these people (some of whom I know personally) were proposing, and was totally ignored and demeaned.

Look I'm not saying all developers are bad. I'm sure the majority are needed. But Woodsie, as I always say, look to the money, when it comes to vested interests. The Battler and his group have a vested interest but its to the benefit of the community as a whole.

As for Greenies, you seem to package them up in the one parcel. The majority of Greenies I've known, and I'm not associated with any political party, are socially conscious people. Sure there's a rat bag element. But ask what are the average Greenies vested interests. They may be misguided in some issues (and that's why I'd never join them), but their heart is generally in the interest of the many, not the few. Sure extremists are not needed, from either the left or the right. But most Greenies I've known are not extremists. That's just media talk from right wing interests, like they do attacking unions, of which at one stage I was an unpaid head of one State Gvt group.

And that's all I'll say on the matter because I know the ref is watching and says we shouldnt get into politics.

Back to the ground and its deficiencies.

I am neither an advocate for, or a voice against either Greenies or developers ..... I simply point out that to call for the banning of one for percieved bias must logically call for the banning of the other for the same reason .....

 

[Bearfax]

I am neither an advocate for, or a voice against either Greenies or developers ..... I simply point out that to call for the banning of one for percieved bias must logically call for the banning of the other for the same reason .....

Big difference between opposing and banning. I never used that term Woodsie. I never see things in absolutes. I was expressing criticism...and as I have already stated criticism about certain Greenies, I think my response has already been made. Its just that one element tends to dominate and that tends to be by way of self interest