Death to showgrounds
With the Baird government’s ban on greyhound racing, many country showgrounds will change their identity to whatever developments take their place.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The gallops, harness and greyhound racing have either combined or separately distributed much of their hard-earned funding towards improvements at many showgrounds across our great state.
Most showgrounds also combine other activities such as rodeos and gymkhanas, which give great pleasure and enjoyment to both participants and spectators, and also more funding to assist with employment.
The character and development of country people from children to adulthood is so different to city folk. Our upbringing on farms and country towns is the character building of who we are, and a lot of this occurs at showgrounds.
The annual country show is an arena of pride and joy for so many, yet so varied from show ring events to side show alley, with all forms of entertainment for young and old.
To prepare our array of animals for show and events takes a lifetime of time and devotion, it is all part of the character building of country children and adults.
All of the above goes on display at Sydney’s Royal Easter Show and the effort to travel and produce these wonderful animals at great expense contributes to the economy far and wide across our state.
The ban on greyhound racing is the thin edge of the wedge leading to showground closures. The result of showground closures will encourage more of our youth to go to the big cities to gain employment.
Tony Callaghan
Kearsley
Plebiscite has to be right
Australia is the envy of the world. Our preferential voting system gives each individual the opportunity to express a preferred candidate for representation. Even when the total tally of votes is revealed, at least each person has recorded a choice.
Our Cabinet-style of government gives everyone in the Cabinet room the chance to express a view about the subject under discussion. Even if the final government position is not as such a one might have wished, nevertheless the individual was heard.
Accordingly, when the plebiscite re marriage is held, there must not contain a biased or loaded question, framed in terms to favour a desired outcome - a stacked deck! (Eg Do you endorse same-sex unions to be marriage? Yes. No.)
Such a form would not give the people their rightful opportunity to express varied points of view. Like football, each type of game has its particular title - rugby league, AFL, union, soccer.
The plebiscite ballot paper must allow all voters to convey their assessment of whether the title marriage is appropriate to any form of union between two (or more) persons, regardless of gender.
A sample of the ballot paper may look like:
“Should the title marriage apply to two persons of the same gender?” Yes/No.
“Should same gender unions have an exclusive title, such as Unified?” Yes/No.
“Is the title marriage only applicable to a man and a woman union?” Yes/No.
In all our Australian elections, people are given the right to express a preference, so they should expect the same on such an important question earning the status of a plebiscite.
Peter Young
Greta
The dictator has spoken
The banning of greyhound racing in NSW from July 2007 by a weak Premier plus the forced council amalgamations will ultimately prove to be Baird’s downfall. And to prove that he is weak I am prepared to bet that he will back-down well before the deadline because of the widespread anger against this ridiculous ban. Long live democracy.