The wind-bagging that is allowed to circle around Moyne Shire Council once a month is a storm in a teacup.
With one councillor seemingly allowed to dictate terms, bellyaching with his three cronies (outside of council) about the evils of wind turbines, and conspiracy theories about conversations that might or might not have occurred...why should we care?
The wind turbines are here to stay - they are a brilliant step forward in our fight against the climate crisis.
They pay rates, they pay landowners an income for having them, they make considerable annual donations to every community in which they operate. And they are the responsibility of the state government - not local government!
WHAT DO YOU THINK? HAVE YOUR SAY AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ARTICLE
I quite appreciate the frustration of Cr Gleeson having to contend monthly with the same negative windbag argument. I would dearly love to see and hear from some of you who understand the benefits of these wind turbines - please help us counter this waste of time.
"The environment is so fundamental to our continued existence that it must transcend politics and become a central value to EVERY member of society" - David Suzuki.
Genevieve Grant, Rosebrook
On reading that the Patagonian ice fields are among some of the fastest-melting glaciers on the planet, I was left wondering what is causing the ice to melt?
The scientific answer to this is: "when the molecules move faster, they have a harder time holding on to each other, so the stuff becomes less solid and more liquid. To melt the ice, you have to add heat". I am not a scientist but I setup an experiment with a bowl of water at room temperature, added ice cubes and timed how long it took to melt.
I repeated the sample but this time slowly applied heat and timed the melting process; the ice melted much faster when heat was applied.
Temperature increases were clearly the cause and to happen on a large scale like the Patagonian ice fields it is clearly a global change.
Not being a scientist, I read a number of similar findings and was amassed to discover that the fossil fuel industry had commissioned similar research projects all peer reviewed by world-renowned fossil fuel experts and scientists.
They replicated my primitive experiment and to my amazement the ice and water in fact froze. Their finding was a case for the climate cooling, concluding that we will need to increase the extraction of coal and gas ten-fold to keep humanity warm over the next 50 years.
I am now a supporter of coal mining on a massive scale. So much for science!
Rob Graham, Terang
Hannah Mouncey's article in The Standard (February 25) must have readers wondering about the effect the 'Save Women's Sport' bill (put forward by senator Claire Chandler and endorsed by the prime minister) will have on transgender sports people and in turn, a transgender persons effect on natural sportswomen.
While I am no expert in this area, I ponder certain aspects and welcome answers to better understand why transgender women should compete against natural women.
What Hannah fails to say is that every transgender female develops as a male. This brings with it two major differences to natural females. The first is their physique - body size - and the second has to do with their muscles. Men and women have different percentages of different muscle fibres.
Every girl who works hard to reach their full potential in sport to play in a team or as an individual does so with these differences.
We know men normally play against men and women against women. We know male skeletal muscles are generally faster and have higher maximum power output than female muscles. Conversely, during repeated contractions female muscles are generally more fatigue-resistant and recover faster.
While an emotive issue, the bill is about fairness.
Experts need to educate the general public to help them understand the underlying physiological changes that occur in transgender women - if any - to ensure fairness for all.
Louise Nunn, Killarney
Amnesty has bravely taken on the treatment of Palestinians in Israel and there has been a predictable backlash.
It is equally predictable that Palestinians don't seem to contradict the claim of apartheid. More than a decade ago, I travelled through many historical, natural and cultural areas in Israel, and was confronted with an entirely unexpected assault to my previous beliefs.
If you are in doubt about the truth of the Amnesty report, I recommend you go to Israel when it is safe to travel and check it out for yourself.
See what happens to Palestinians in the courts and the checkpoints, observe how Palestinians get access to education or employment, how they are dealt with by settlers who decide God wants them out of their homes.
Consider what you see and make up your own mind. It may then be more understandable that so many UN resolutions have tried to stop Israel behaving the way it does, and independent reports are increasingly referring to Israel as an Apartheid state.
Jo Thomson, Warrnambool
Victorian farmers waited two long years for tough, new on-the-spot fines to stop farm invasions that threaten their safety and farm biosecurity.
But last month, the Labor Party teamed up with the Greens to block amendments that would have doubled the maximum fine for illegal entry on Victorian farms.
Stopping these amendments is a move that will only embolden the extreme law-breaking activists these farm trespass laws were supposed to deter.
After the Aussie Farms controversy, NSW and Queensland quickly took a stand, introducing stronger protections against farm trespass by the end of 2019.
But here in Victoria, our farmers waited almost three years for Labor's agriculture minister Mary-Anne Thomas to finally introduce the Livestock Management (Animal Activism) Bill 2021 in the last parliamentary sitting week of 2021.
When we saw the detail of the bill, it was clear why the minister had taken so long to act. The changes simply don't go far enough to properly deter the illegal actions of extreme law-breaking activists.
Rather than standing with our farmers, Labor's proposed penalties are among the lowest in the nation. The minister has also excluded a farmers river frontage lease land from protections under these laws.
It's a bill that, if it isn't changed, will leave farm families exposed to further trauma of illegal, late-night militant invasions by strangers, clad in black, with the single-minded goal of destroying the livelihoods of our food producers.
To remedy the bill's shortfalls, I proposed two reasonable amendments that would have ensured the protection of farms with river frontage and doubled the maximum fine for individuals to bring Victoria appropriately into line with the equivalent fine in NSW.
Unfortunately, Labor and the Greens reacted by attacking the Liberals and Nationals while immediately refusing to consider our important and reasonable amendments.
It's perhaps no wonder when nearly half of Labor's MPs rely on the support of a Greens preference to get re-elected.
Labor MP Danielle Green claimed in her own contribution to Parliament the Liberals and Nationals were playing political games with our amendments.
To the contrary, it is the Labor Party and the Greens who are playing political games with the safety of law-abiding Victorian farmers and farming families.
Labor's Minister for Agriculture was not even present for most of the debate in Parliament. The Liberals and Nationals will reintroduce our amendments when it goes to the Upper House of Parliament for debate.
Hopefully next time around it will be with Labor and crossbench support. We must strengthen trespass laws to send a strong message to those who would go to any lengths to destroy the livelihood of hard-working Victorian farm families.
If the Parliament can't back the farmers who provide our food and fibre and manage much of our landscape, then it's not doing its job.
Peter Walsh, Leader of The Nationals
HAVE YOUR SAY BELOW
Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.