@Dodgy I think your insinuations that this is designed to sidestep …

Comment on Pastoralists can now diversify by Daniel Davis.

I think your insinuations that this is designed to sidestep native title are missing the mark by some way.
The changes to the system still tie the ‘non-pastoral use’ to the original pastoral lease and do not change the primary use, i.e. you cannot sell one without the other and the majority of income must continue to be earned by pastoral use. In the case that the non-pastoral use becomes the primary earner, the change to the primary land use would still need to be consistent with native title arrangements, this has not changed.
What this does do is provide certainty to lenders. The previous five year terms made it very difficult to obtain finance for a ‘non-pastoral’ venture as there was no guarantee that the venture would be able to continue after five years, thus the opportunity to prove the suitability for other uses just didn’t exist.
The new system gives pastoralists certainty to diversify their business and allow dual income streams to support the business even when the cattle market is doing it tough.

Recent Comments by Daniel Davis

PM’s visit poorly planned political stunt: Snowdon
Turnbull was here for one day, he’s probably spent more time in Alice Springs this year than Snowdon!

And now, your friendly neighbourhood prison
This will be fantastic for the parents of these kids.
They will now be able to visit them by just stumbling over their sleeping companions adorning the footpath and crossing the road so calmly in front of oncoming traffic, before purchasing their daily rations of Chardonnay stored in an ethylene polymer vessel, from that classy purveyor of high-end liquor conveniently located right next door.

‘Anzac Oval not for sale’: govt under pressure on gallery plans
A new rugby facility within walking distance of my house would be fantastic. However, I’m somewhat sceptical of it ever happening and can our government actually afford it?
Gunner has routinely stated that we are in a race with SA to get this done, surely then the most logical option would be an unencumbered site with services already in place that places the least amount of strain on an already stretched budget.
The ANZAC Hill site requires a new rugby facility to be planned and built (12 months to 2 years at least, maybe $15m), demolishing ANZAC Hill School and the ANZAC oval facilities and preparing the site (another 3+ months and more millions). So we’re looking at least 2 1/2 years before work can kick off on actually building the gallery.
The Desert Park site, as recommended by the steering committee, can see work start immediately with little to no cost for relocation of existing facilities. Services already exist there (parking, cafe etc) so works could be done in a staged fashion and it would encourage more use of an under-utilised tourism asset.
The argument for revitalising the CBD is misguided. It’s likely that the gallery will have it’s own cafe and restaurant and the majority of hotel rooms are outside the CBD. Visitors will have very little additional incentive to spend time in our CBD than if the gallery was located at another site.

Jacinta Price ready to turn her back on the Town Council
Erwin, come clean on what? Your assumption that Jacinta must resign could very well be incorrect.
Certainly the only argument to exclude someone from serving concurrently as a councillor and federal politician it seems, is whether being the position of councillor amounts to an “office of profit under the crown”.
Recently the High Court found that being a member of local government in Tasmania did not amount to holding an “office of profit under the crown”. (Case C17/2017).

Jacinta Price ready to turn her back on the Town Council
I think that unless Jacinta has specifically stated her intention to resign from council, you’re jumping the gun somewhat early here, Erwin.
I can’t see in the Local Government Act anything specifically disqualifying an elected council member due to their preselection or election for either NT or Federal Parliament.
The only mention of this is a clause allowing a member to resign for the purposes of running in an election and rejoin council if they are unsuccessful.

Be Sociable, Share!

A new way to support our journalism

We do not have a paywall. If you support our independent journalism you can make a financial contribution by clicking the red button below. This will help us cover expenses and sustain the news service we’ve been providing since 1994, in a locally owned and operated medium.

Erwin Chlanda, Editor