The ULDA takes over Yarrabilba and Flagstone as Logan fails to deliver.

Yarrabliba and Flagstone could begin by the end of 2011.


This link was sent to me from one of the locals around here who is part of a group that keeps an eye on the goings on in the community as far as government at all levels and their decisions effects on lifestyle, environment and amenity, I thought you might be interested.

The link above gets you to the article in the local paper and from it you can get all the information as far as it is known.

It seems that Logan council has not delivered the goods quickly enough for a money hungry State Government who gifted them a huge portion of Beaudesert in the amalgamations and assumed that the two estates would be given the green light, in return.

Logan has dropped the ball, they weren't going to allow these major development areas to compete with one in the old Logan (Park Ridge MDA) and hadn't planned to get them going before it was well established, if not finished.

People who have invested millions in the Park Ridge area will be counting their return going backwards about now, Knowing how the other developers move once the projects are started.

I guess the work is just too hard over at Springfield, and easier country is being looked at for that developer.

Bligh is trying to sell the idea with one of the developers own lines calling the housing estates "masterplanned communities" which is demonstrative of the relationship between the Labor government and the developers.

Communities are not for sale through developers, communities are made up of people, when will governments realise that?


.

Logan ; lets talk Roads and Bridges.

We've probably all read the absolute bullshit coming out of Logan Council about the closure of Edwards Bridge on the Greenbank to Springfield road, and the extra expense it will add to truck owners and to add the extra fuel use, carbon emissions and tyre and engine particulates pushed into the environment.

Logan actually appears to be waging a war against Truckies at the moment with new draconian parking regulations complete with charges to park on your own property and now with this unthinking and uncaring closure for vehicles above 15ton GVM.

Now we're seeing the closure of a section of Chambers Flat Road between School Road and Koplick Road in Logan Reserve for an upgrade of the surface and adding wider shoulders , for a period of about 3 months assuming whether allows.


Ok so why is this making my Blog? well you may ask.


I don't know about you but it is highly suspicious that the Chambers Flat Road upgrades/repairs stop at the boundary of old Logan and the Edwards Bridge is also outside old Logan and it seems that there is a conscious decision not to spend one cent outside old Logan.

The worst part of Chambers Flat Road is actually between Koplick and Logan Reserve roads where trucks often need to still get a wheel off the road to allow another wide vehicle to pass, it is bumpy and pot holed and has large trees within a couple of meters of the carriageway in places, and yet Logan aren't going to do anything to it, instead they will do up a wide part which is to be fair not in the best condition but not anywhere near as bad.

People in the old North of Beaudesert are being short changed, charged full rates even though receiving almost zero services and when road upgrades come they are left out in the cold.

The local councillor is Phil Pidgeon and if you have questions as to why we are being avoided when it comes to spending money, I suggest you contact him.

philpidgeon@logan.qld.gov.au or 3412 5402


If you want to make a complaint about roadworks in general, the responsible chair is Ray Hackwood.

rayhackwood@logan.qld.gov.au or 3412 4471


It is obvious we are being set up to just continue to pay so that fat cats like the CEO and his deputies can get awards and reap huge salaries while we get ripped off big time, the amalgamations have left us worse off in fact we'd be better off if Brisbane amalgamated Logan now. Is that too wild a thought?


.

40% Federal govt. mining tax, . . more harm than good?

Like everyone I've been waiting to see how Rudd, Gillard and Swan would try to sell us the mining tax at 40%, but other than the initial communist line that they are digging up wealth that belongs to all Australians so wee should profit from it rather than just a few mining magnates, I've seen no good reason that we will be better off.

Firstly consider this, every time a new tax is applied, the taxpayers have to pay for it as the end user of services and products.

Ok so in that context, Ruddy taxes miners at 40% and puts the money into consolidated revenue to pay back the debt accrued by handing out $900 to everyone and to fund the nation building program, end of story? I don't think so.

When you read their statements you automatically think of the giant Bauxite miners, the coal giants or the iron ore millionaires, but wait, there's more, every quarry , every driller and every small extrusion also are classified as miners and will be taxed as such.


What does that mean for the ordinary man in the street?

Well for one thing it means that the price of any and every quarry supply, and in turn everything made from it will go up by about 40%
.Soil, sand and gravel
.Bricks and tiles
.wall sheeting
.cement
.landscape supplies
.pots and stones
.do I need to continue?


I would suggest that almost everything will increase in price and you and I will pay the 40% tax to Rudd, Gillard and Swan, not the miners who will still drive fancy imported cars, live in mansions and take home their million dollar bonuses, it will be you and I who are worse off, again as usual.


.

Rats, . . . deserting the stinking ship.

The fallout from the quitting of McLindon and Messenger has begun to settle with the party and the public left wondering what actually went down and a very coy McLindon still throwing buckets rather than admitting he was reacting to being chastised for disloyalty.

When the Party put up those big dollar campaign funds to get him elected, endorsements, introductions to people of substantial wherewithal as far as wealth and ability to fund campaigns also, and provided a very good infrastructure to back a candidate in a seat where that particular party is the flavour the people are looking for regardless of the name on the voting card, McLindon was happy to use what he they could offer to get elected.

As of today, we are privy to another desertion of the LNP ranks, in a relatively unknown Darren Power, another Logan Councillor who along with McLindon, Ban and Black were members of the LNP and councillors at Logan. With the exception of Black who it seems is to marry Ban (a city slicker, career politician and spinster looking to be elected in a safe Nationals rural seat,) they have all dumped their divisions to run for other office positions (Power has just announced it)

It seems that the ardor with which the LNP selected younger, semi profiled people to try to alter the image of the older looking Country Party type membership profile has come around to kick them in the bum, and may quite probably see Labor again win the Federal and state elections, no matter whether seats are won by some of the new LNP candidates or not.

As the bail out of LNP members continues, and looking at the trend on cannot for a minute expect more bailouts in the future, particularly those who are affiliated like McLindon, Power and Ban; and even if Ban states that it will not happen, she has already stated that she would not dump her division and run again for a federal seat and yet she has done just that and with a history of lying about loyalty you'd have to suspect her to get elected and then quit the party to join MCLindon and Messenger's new congregation of independents when (if) it gets up.

I expect that the Party is now examining Ban very closely, and looking at the past to try to decide if she is worthy of continued support, but she has the ability to convince older males of anything, somehow, so I expect she will remain as the candidate for now.

If I were part of the Liberal side of the LNP I'd be looking to close the Lib ranks and distance myself from the imploding National Party side.

With the old North Beaudesert right in the middle of this Party self destruction we are probably going to miss out big time while the political players put themselves, their careers and their greed above what should be their desire to serve the community.


.

The Money or the Box.

The recent very public split from the new LNP by two elected representatives has left questions and has also allowed some to go off half cocked in either support or attack about the reasons and the follow up from it.

But after seeing some clips on TV that were edited out of an interview (for some reason) there may be a simple answer to the question of "why quit?"

After the also very public deputy leadership challenge on Springborg by McLindon and supported by Rob Messenger which showed a complete lack of loyalty, understanding of machinations or grasp of the party membership and numbers, the playmates were put out to Coventry it seems, relieved of any useful roles and banished to keep them quiet and save the party leadership team from further publicity.

But according to these clips, there could have been more, because it seems that punishment was to continue and more, there was a request that money be given (i think i recall the sum of $12,000) to help win marginal seats.

I'm guessing that was the straw that broke the camel's back, after all we have seen other LNP candidates (even before the creation of the LNP) campaign while still taking their salary from another public office, ( McLindon did not, because the rules governing State elections require a prior public office to be vacated before becoming eligible to be elected to the State ) in what can only be described as utter greed.

Could it be so simple? asked to donate some of the big bucks that State MP's get for relatively little effort, . . and they spat the dummy? well we are asking the question now aren't we?


.

The Unions, . . . . and Work Choices.

We all know there will be a Federal election before the years end, there has to be, so it's no surprise that some candidates are already on the campaign trail reving up supporters and helpers and generally letting the general voters know they are around, in some cases at the expense of their day time job and people who depend on them.

Anyone who watches TV will have begun to see adds about Work Choices, adds by the unions and they intimate that if elected a conservative government will re-introduce the controversial legislation.

This is important, because the John Howard led conservative government was voted out for one main reason and that was Work Choices which was perceived by workers in general as putting their job security in jeopardy and handing more of the power balance to employers than ever before.

Further, it seemed that with unions not required to get enterprise bargaining agreements between employers and employees union membership was beginning to wane, . . . big time.

As far as I can see, Labor, and it's glib, smirking, gushing leader who won the election on a promise to get rid of Work Choices have really only made one significant change to it, and that is to allow workers to have union representation for and during ETA's if they want to.

Many believe that this was only a measure to keep what is an outdated and irrelevant (since they were required to be registered with the government and fulfill a lot of other restrictive regulations brought out by a previous Labor government who had a leader who cried more times than the current one has honoured promises) body alive to raise money for future Labor election campaigns.

And there you have it, we basically still have Work Choices with a few little alterations to appease the unions, and now in return we have the usual million dollar union scare campaign on our TV's and radio's telling us the sky will fall if we don't vote Labor.

Personally I'm sick of labor having all the advantage in elections, they have their own votes, the greens votes and the unions telling every worker how bad it's going to be under a conservative Government.

We really need to look at the wording of union adds carefully, because they don't actually say we have any benefit from voting Labor , they are just a scare campaign, and totally not in the spirit of democracy.


.

The Brimble verdict, what is it saying to us?

In July 2007, after a 66-day inquest, New South Wales Deputy State Coroner Jacqueline Milledge ruled there was enough evidence to charge known persons over her death.

Letterio Silvestri and Ryan Kuchel pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice, while Wilhelm was charged with manslaughter and supplying a prohibited drug.




The jury has been told the Brisbane mother died after consuming a toxic combination of alcohol and the drug GHB - also known as fantasy or liquid ecstasy - hours after boarding the P&O cruise ship Pacific Sky in September 2002.

She was found naked on the floor of a cabin belonging to Wilhelm, with whom she had earlier had sex.

The New South Wales Supreme Court jury of seven women and five men retired last Tuesday after a four-week trial, with Justice Roderick Howie urging them to "be courageous''.

After accepting Wilhelm's guilty plea to supplying Brimble with the GHB, judge Roderick Howie attacked the 2006 inquest, presided over by Deputy State Coroner Jacqueline Milledge, describing it as inciting a trial by media based on rumour, conjecture, hysteria and prejudice.

"The coronial inquiry was, to the extent to which I am aware of it, unfortunate in that it allowed a lot of material -- which ultimately was irrelevant -- to be exposed to the media," Justice Howie said.."

You readers may already have an idea that I personally believe the legal system we have in Australia is designed to deliver a lot of money to Judges, Barristers and lawyers, and certainly not about giving the people real justice.

This is a case where I believe we see that so apparently that the courts involvement is an embarrassment to justice, and the judges comments are an afront to human dignity and an oafish, personal enditement of the character of a judge who appears to believe the defendents "story" (calling it evidence) and disregarding all the other statements collected from countless others which refutes, dissagrees, and points to inconsistancies in the defence.

What seems to be a case of a group of predatory men out to drug a woman for their own gratification, sexual use and humiliation has come undone and only a few paltry charges remain, perverting the course of justice (lying under oath?) and supply a dangerous drug. (GBH)

The recording of an almost unconcious woman participating in acts with the men, apparently in no condition to give concent, not relevent.

The statements by many other women saying they were harrassed by the men and offered a "private party", not relevent.

The statements by relatives that the victim was seeking a headache releif, not relevent.

The statements by relatives that the defendant was not of the character to agree to the ensuing events of that night, not relevent.

The list goes on, the judge seems to have only considered the statements of men who could be in serious trouble if events occurred as they seemed to rather than as they have told the court they did.

Consider this story, a woman , a little bit drunk and happy, is heading out of a common area seeking a panadol, when she encounters a man who says he can give her one, she's in a good mood and has no reason to distrust another passenger and accepts his offer of help.

They say she agreed to it all, she is not there to defend herself, she could have agreed to "take a panadol" and they could have given her GBH.

The rest of the nights events are said by the Judge to have been concentual, sex with at least one of the men, recordings of gross indecent acts and sexual depravity, humiliation both verbal and physical, and all of it whilst she appeared to be almost unconcious, yet the judge seems to be saying that she had agreed to it.


We need to put a stop to judgements like this, if there is no evidence a judge should reject the case on that basis, not make statements that say it's ok to do what these men quite obviously seem to have done, and got away with doing.

The judge in my opinion is an abomination to justice, . . I hope the bastard sleeps well with his blood money.


.