I must immediately agree with Glen Gaudron ("Road rating idea divides", April 12). Rating roads as a road safety measure is near enough to a total waste of time and certainly an ineffective use of funds.
Roads will vary too much to be assigned a single rating that means anything. No one disagrees with the fact that improved roads improve safety. One hard fact remains: The person ultimately responsible for the safety of a vehicle and its passengers is the driver.
Anything that allows the driver to avoid actively safe choices in all conditions is not a safety positive. Just driving on a five-star rated road means nothing if you're incompetent or uncaring.
Silly mistakes still account for far too many serious crashes and fatalities. What are the authorities doing to improve the skills of the everyday driver, and make them aware of where real risk is? Obedience of rules is only the beginning of a skill level that minimises risk.
It is time for our worthy councillors to consider some proportionality when making decisions on council policy and strategy.
Currently the council is considering a new target aim for emissions within the Wagga Wagga City Council area, by both council and residents. This is at the behest of a petition signed by over 300 (verified?) residents of the council area. The projections for population numbers for Wagga Wagga by June 30, 2022, is 66,500. So the WWCC is considering taking on board and implementing the wishes of 0.5 of 1 per cent of the total population of the city area.
This will involve staff time and salary expenditure to provide strategies to meet the desires of less than 1 per cent of the city's population. Not a good look, I would think.
The proponents of this strategy have enthusiastically stated that they think the proposal will be "well supported by the councillors".
Well, that may be, but I can assure you that there is a large proportion of the other 99.5 per cent of the population of the City of Wagga Wagga area who do not want to see their rate money expended on staff time and salaries on purposes promoted by a very minor section of the community.
It is hardly a fair and equitable use of resources on balance. Whether it is for "their own good" as is often arrogantly quoted, or for some dubious target that is supposed to be needed, council should take a very cool and level-headed look about their apparent enthusiasm and consider the bigger picture of the entire population.
READ MORE LETTERS:
Not sure if David Muir AM reads the news or not ("Give us certainty on poll date", April 12). Scott Morrison would have been silly to set an election date before the court ruling on the candidates was settled on April 7. He went to lock it in with the Governor-General three days later, on April 10. Only a fool would think he should have called it before that. Thank goodness he had to see the Governor-General and not the President. People wanting a directly elected head of state is a worry. We could end up with Ray Hadley, Kyle Sandilands, Eddie McGuire or similar.
They have the higher ratings in their professions and the public like them. I'm not sure our constitution is broken.
HAVE YOUR SAY: Do you have something to get off your chest? Simply click here to send a letter to the editor.
Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.