At that age I was wandering around mount macedon.

BTW: I mentioned your name to a Christian who does research (research for a doctorate) in Tanzania at a retreat in the Blue Mountains (Hazelbrook) yesterday evening. “You’d obviously be aware of Stilgherrian and his social work in Tanzania” were the words I used.

Although he didn’t seem to know about the important work you do in remote African communites he does read Crikey so I suggested he keep an eye out for your name.

Bob

Well, they’re not quite the same. Google Maps shows that there’s still a good-sized farming gap between Gawler and the main block of Adelaide suburbia, whereas there’s suburban housing developments all the way to Campbelltown.

In any event, I was referring to my father’s family’s home town of Orroroo.

That’ll be a little while off yet, though. The first “50 to 50″ post starts at the very beginning.

@Glengyron: No cow racing for me. The Compass Cup began in 1974, three years after I left the area. But again, we’re getting ahead of the story…

You also can’t ignore the changes in Australian suburbs from generation to generation. A lot of kids now live a long way from open spaces.

I’m not quite sure if this is the end of humanity though… or if it’s entirely bad that American society isn’t building a generation of half-ready soldiers… (who knows… as a nation perhaps they won’t invade people quite so much?)

I like the 50 blog posts idea: perhaps it could mark you graduation to being a genuine grumpy old man?

Oh, and this is very important: Ever ride a cow in the Mt Compass Cup?

I was only recounting the experiences of being a ten year old riding the red rattlers on the Sydney rail system, by the door with the door open. What’s more, I told my wide eyed audience of pre-teens, as the train pulled away from a stop, it was very common to have suits running along and hurling themselves into the moving train. “No way?” they cry. “Yes way,” I say. Further, I explained, when I came to my stop at Lakemba, my mates and I would hop off the train — while it was moving — to slide surf the gravel. If you got caught by a teacher, you’d get a slap to the back of the head and they’d blast you for the lack of respect you had for your shoes, which “your parents pay good money to buy for you.”

On The Edict: Well this does force me to address the last episode’s coverage of the NSW Planning topic, because we have interwoven threads here that are suggestive of a thematic cardigan. (Memory of B. Unsworth appears. Odd.) Anyway…

Whether it be the release of the report Conroy is using to hold open the IT room door, or the machinations of the people responsible for planning and development in this fine state of ours, it is the epitome of bastardry against the public in the way that a lack of transparency still exists and is encouraged when it suits. The anachronistic government practices and government department operations, particularly as it relates to the mechanisms of information management and delivery are a failure. The moves towards opening government data is a positive sign, but still focussed on the opening up of information that’s made it through the pipe, passing through the tick boxes of intermediaries that increasingly represent blockages in the pipes, not solvents to the grime.

[/rant]

However I will pick up on point 6. I didn’t make up the connection between Aaron Gadiel and the Labor MP for Parramatta, Tanya Gadiel. I relied on the Sydney Morning Herald’s article The circle of influence:

The lobby group’s chief executive is Aaron Gadiel, brother-in-law of the Labor MP Tanya Gadiel and a former chief-of-staff to Joe Tripodi and Eddie Obeid.

Other media have also reported this connection. Sorry, but it just goes to show you can’t necessarily believe what you read in the news.

Dear Sir,

I refer to your “9pm edit” from yesterday.

You have made a number of significant errors.

1. My concerns projects should have each been accepted as Part 3A, and the proponents should have had opportunity for their proposal to be considered on their merits. As the ABC correctly reported, I do not claim that every project should have been approved — a merit assessment would be necessary before anyone could form that judgment.
2. They key thing is that the proponents were entitled to have a fair go. You say that the proponents weren’t entitled to a merit assessment under Part 3A. You are mistaken. The State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005 does give such a right. I appreciate you don’t like the fact that the right exists, nonetheless it does. If the government does not want to respect that right it should change the law, not ignore it.
3. The government’s rejections — in relation to projects over $100 million — do not mean that the proponents are entitled to go to local councils. Local councils are not entitled to assess residential, retail and commercial development valued at more than $100 million under the current law. The government’s decision to deny these projects a merit assessment means there is no mechanism for those project to go forward or receive merit assessment in any forum.
4. You seem to think that they only people who benefit from new housing, retail precincts and commercial offices are developers. There are thousands of home buyers, shoppers and office workers who would disagree with you. Shortfalls in housing supply, in particular, have serious social and economic implications for everyone. If you don’t build enough of these important property assets, Sydney residential rents will continue to rise at close to 10 per cent a year (as they have on average, over the past 5 years).
5. I was formerly a public servant. As a land use lawyer, I worked in the ministerial offices of ministers with responsibilities for land use law, including the ministers for roads, energy, ports, fisheries and mineral resources. As a land use lawyer I now work for the urban development industry. There is nothing exceptional about this. I am not a member of any political party.
6. Tanya Gadiel is not my sister-in-law and is unrelated to me. Should you wish to make assertions about my family you might want contact me first to check the facts.

I trust that you will take appropriate corrective action.

Regards

Aaron Gadiel
Chief Executive Officer
Urban Taskforce Australia

One thing I will quibble about, though. I wouldn’t say that “the issue of Peak Oil is no longer up for debate”. If some significant new evidence appeared that contradicted what we currently know, then that evidence would need to be evaluated. If it stood up to scrutiny, the concept of Peak Oil would need to be revisited in light of that new evidence. that’s how Science works.

Mind you, we’ve strayed an awfully long way from the role of the ABC Chair…

http://www.gordonmoyes.com/2010/03/18/peak-oil-is-this-the-end-of-civilisation-as-we-know-it/

quote…

For those in the audience who may still harbour any doubts about the urgency of the issue of peak oil I will quote the former US Energy Secretary, Dr James Schlesinger, who in 2006 addressed the “Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas”(ASPO) in Ireland with this comment:

“The peakists have won … to the peakists I say, you can declare victory. You are no longer the beleaguered small minority of voices crying in the wilderness. You are now mainstream. ”

In other words, the issue of peak oil is no longer up for debate, no longer controversial, no longer considered alarmist, and has been accepted as valid by scientists worldwide.

..unquote

Bob

However it is their right to express their view to their local council and have that decision made. Theirs is not the only view, though. The state government will have put an obligation into the City of Sydney to house a certain number of new residents. But the local government can decide just where those new homes will be built.

That is, one opinion is about how the process should happen, while the other opinion is about the pros and cons of a specific development.

I’ve now actually been to look at the Harold Park site and I’m even more convinced that it’ll have little impact upon the whinging residents. I’ve also read material put out by The Glebe Society:

The proposed open space along the base of the cliff has many problems. It would create a narrow wind tunnel and, because of the high buildings next to it, would be invisible unless you were actually in it. Thus there are security problems as well as major overshadowing in the mornings.

This is an assertion backed by no modelling. Looking at the site, I think they’ve got their geometry wrong.

The Tramsheds are the most distinctive part of the site and should be the focus. They can provide a range of amenities for the new residents on site as well as for the surrounding community, so all types of access, including from the new development, need to be carefully thought out.

The in-situ trams can be restored on site or used on the extended light rail.

I doubt that the rusted-out hulks sitting in that nondescript old shed could be made to work again without a vastly expensive process. Even if they could, I’m not sure I want old-fashioned, energy-inefficient trams which lack modern safety features trying to be part of a real transit system that commuters have to rely upon. It sounds to me like it’s trams-as-nostalgia instead of trams-as-transport.

@Sylmobile: Go on, you know you want to…