Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor,

Burdekin LNP member, Dale Last, highlights a section of the Bruce Highway in his electorate that has had a-high number of fatalities over a 10-year period.

Dale is quick to point out that the Federal ALP, who have responsibility for Main Roads, have allocated monies to upgrades of the highway but there have has been nothing implemented.

However, Dale, in his 10-year time frame, has failed to say the Federal LNP was responsible for 8 of the 10 years highlighted and for a couple of years prior to that time.
Dale is quite vocal to highlight the failing of the ALP in government but in the years of the LNP in government there was not a sound from Dale, and he has been in the Burdekin seat for an extended period.

We all understand the trauma of a road fatality and the need to have up-grades to ensure safe travelling and the time frame and costs for the required upgrade will require lots of time and different Federal Governments. Hopefully the focus of one is the same as the other. Time will tell.

Dale may even retain the seat so hopefully he keeps up his vocal crusade to fix the “Bruce”.

T.P. Chandler.

Response From Member For Burdekin Dale Last

From the outset it is important to note that responsibility for the Bruce Highway is shared between the federal and state governments. “Main Roads”, as Mr Chandler refers to, is solely a state government department.

Until recently, federal governments were responsible for 80% of the cost of maintenance and upgrades of the Bruce Highway.  Well, they were until Albo decided to reduce the amount contributed by the federal government.

Other than for major projects, such as the Haughton Floodplain Project for example, the money is simply handed to the states who are left to make the decisions about where it is spent and when.

The system is far from perfect but to say that a federal government has control over how the funding is spent is simply incorrect.

The perfect example of the current state government’s attitude towards the Bruce Highway is the recent announcement of a second bridge to Bribie Island.  Perhaps Mr Chandler would like to justify the fact that the cost of an 800m bridge in the South East will be more than 3 years of funding for the entire length of the Bruce Highway.

I sincerely agree with Mr Chandler that we need upgrades for safety and efficiency and that those upgrades are not cheap and, realistically, won’t happen overnight.  At the same time I can assure Mr Chandler, and your readers, that I will continue to fight for those upgrades regardless of who is in power.

Yours sincerely,
Dale Last MP, Member for Burdekin

‍

Burdekin Life has written on Federal Member for Dawson Andrew Willcox’s support for the LNP Opposition Leader Peter Dutton nuclear plan for the Australian nation.

The LNP are also seeking net zero emissions by the year 2050 and their proposal is supposed to support this goal. The most reliable date available at this time suggests that nuclear power is a long-term proposal, and Australians would not see any benefit from nuclear power until at least 2040. It’s too late to save Australia from global warming as the critical date is 2035 when extreme damage will occur.

The present Dutton plan is in direct opposition to the plan LNP Prime Minister John Howard put in place when he and his government introduced the plan to not be a nuclear nation. Even a number of the Opposition Ministers themselves are opposed to the nuclear plan and that is without mentioning State Opposition Leader David Crisafulli’s refusal to lead the State Opposition down that path.

The cost must also be a concern 4 to 6 times that of solar and wind generation. Convincing Australians might be hard. Remember the LNP call during the Voice referendum IF YOU DON’T KNOW VOTE NO.
 
Yours,
T.P. Chandler

Response by Federal Member For Dawson Andrew Willcox

It is important for Australia to have base load power that is affordable, reliable, and available 24/7. 

Renewables simply do not provide this. So, if coal and gas are phased out, no emission nuclear technology is the only option. 

Nuclear generators can be fitted in the same locations as existing coal fired power stations. This will alleviate the need for the extra 28,000kms of poles and wires, and stop the massive destruction of good quality agricultural land and virgin native vegetation for solar panels and wind turbines. 

Labor’s reckless renewables only plan is forecast to cost between $1.2 and $1.5 trillion. Solar panels only last between 10 & 15 years, wind turbines, 15 to 20 years, not to mention neither are recyclable. Whereas nuclear technology has a lifespan of 80 plus years which I’m confident will be more cost effective in the longer term.  

‍

‍