Re: Surprised! Posted March 15, 2018 at 8:36am: I admit …

Comment on Government alcohol policies a giant hangover by Paul Parker.

Re: Surprised! Posted March 15, 2018 at 8:36am: I admit am cynical about political meetings, so much spoken is rhetorical, open to various interpretations.
IF the Big Five (Town Council, Chamber of Commerce, Congress, Tourism Central Australia, Arid Lands Environment Centre) do agree on specific changes, they should publish clearly what they expect, with specific call to Chief Minister and other politicians to issue publicly and clearly their responses.
The real benefit of written words is meaning of the words do not change so quickly.
Related to politics is reading (and thinking) being replaced by listening?

Paul Parker Also Commented

Government alcohol policies a giant hangover
The Banned Drinker Register prohibits a person from the purchase, possession or consumption of alcohol.
It is an offence to supply persons on the Banned Drinker Register with alcohol.
It is an offence for a person to supply a person on the Banned Drinker Register with alcohol.
It is the responsibility of Licensees to ensure no person on the Banned Drinker Register obtain alcohols at their premises.
If police have evidence alcohol was supplied to banned persons at licensed premises, their superior should order the licensed premises immediately closed for remainder of the day.
When premises closed this way, everyone will be aware it may well happen again.
Behavior of most persons reflects perceived risk.
Being aware police likely to close premises shall encourage licensees, their staff, even customers, to ensure persons on the Banned Drinker Register avoid seeking alcohol there.


Recent Comments by Paul Parker

Mantle of mental health care withdrawn
Once again the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory president Marty Aust claims people on custodial supervision orders are almost always housed within prisons because nowhere else is suitable for them.
Is my opinion the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory wears racist blinkers on this.
The Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory’s attack upon the NT Government ignores simple facts.
Decisions to provide leases to provide suitable housing placements for these mentally disadvantaged individuals within or closer to their communities rests with their relevant corporate Land Trusts.
Have these relevant corporate Land justs provided the relevant long term leases?
If not, why not?
What efforts and what successes achieved by the Criminal Lawyers Association of the Northern Territory towards obtaining relevant required leases to accommodate these individuals?
At this time the NT Government is unable to resume land, despite Constitutional requirement for payment of “just compensation”.
Are these really needed sites?
The sounds far to much like pass the buck.


Make Oz Day a celebration of the future, not the past
The logical and legitimate historical relevance is that Australia became an independent self-governing Commonwealth nation with Federation on January 1, 1901.
Our formal functions need to stick with the first Federation timetable, nothing before noon, as logical to enable majority recover from their New Year celebrations in time to attend and enjoy.


Australia Day: Alice’s role in it
Fit as well for Northern Territory to lead promotion to replace 26 January with 1 January which is anniversary the establishment of our Commonwealth of Australia.
IMHO requirement we would need to ensure NO ceremonies before noon to ensure all recover from their New Year celebrations in time to attend.


NT and SA amalgamation: Would they have us?
A treaty proposal as little more than a promotion of permanent racism, a promotion of permanent apartheid, a promotion of the ongoing disadvantage of many, within Australia.


Miners are spreading myths, says environmentalist
Re: Alex Hope Posted January 22, 2019 at 11:23 am
Perhaps Alex can explain what each Land Trust as corporate land-title-holder and owner, actually spends building and maintaining housing being used by their shareholders “traditional owners” who do live on their land-title-held land ?
Perhaps Alex can explain what each Land Trust as corporate land-title-holder and owner actually collects as rent to be spent building and maintaining housing used by their shareholders and “traditional owners” who do live on their land-title-held land?
Perhaps Alex can explain the Commonwealth and NT Government financial contributions to benefit each land-trust-titled area?
Please include also the dollars per resident.


Be Sociable, Share!