WE would like to refer to this redress scheme in the Anglican Church.
Firstly, we the parishioners have never been told how many paedophile priests there were or how many children were abused.
It has been stated that $8.6 million is required for this redress but then we are told that only 25 per cent will be required for payment.
Therefore as we understand it the diocese would only then need two million for the payment.
It would be interesting to know how much the bishop and clergy are willing to pay personally into the scheme as it was not the parishioners who offended but members of the clergy and it is now the parishioners of the churches under threat of closure who are now the ones persecuted, upset and saddened at this time.
It seems that the synod has not taken into consideration the feelings of those parishioners who have worked so hard for many years to keep their churches going and you may be sure that quite a number will leave the church altogether over this.
If these churches are sold what will become of all the prayer books, bibles and items that have been dedicated to the precious memory of family members.
Are all these things going to be stored somewhere or sold off to the highest bidder or returned to the respective families.
An answer would be appreciated by those concerned.
W and M Robinson, Launceston.
AFL players may or may not be aware of how their behaviour may affect their young fans.
While listening to the recent game from Alice Springs on ABC Radio, the final siren seemed to be the highlight for the young attendees, who invaded the ground with such enthusiasm and joy, (with no doubt of emulating their favourite players), that the commentators seemed to be fading away in the distance.
The signing and giving away of small footballs at the end of games is a nice touch, especially when witnessing from afar the excitement of a young girl who received a football from Essendon’s Jake Stringer.
Hopefully, York Park in Launceston, will retain its policy of allowing parents and children on the ground post match, albeit the parental risk of stray Sherrins to the back of the head syndrome.
Kenneth Gregson, Swansea.
JOHN Denne of Longford wrote “On September 13, 2007, a resolution was adopted by the United Nations regarding The Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.
One hundred and forty-four countries voted yes, four voted no.
They were Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the United States.
"Is it just coincidence these four nations were colonised by British settlers, and ever since the Indigenous Peoples of these nations have been treated like dirt?”.
John, this lazy approach does nothing to improve the chances of an Indigenous Treaty.
Firstly, Australia declared support for the UN Declaration in 2009.
Secondly, the fact Britain colonised the four countries you named has little to do with the current plight of Indigenous peoples.
Those four countries are now world superpowers, with established democratic principles, excellence in education, globally superior healthcare when compared to other countries, and the intelligence to hopefully stand on their own two feet.
It is not Britain’s fault that since Federation, Australia cannot act to build a better future for itself by becoming a Republic, getting a new flag, and developing a treaty with the first people of this country.
Greg Sweeney, Launceston.
BULLYING and verbal abuse against anyone with a different political philosophy to our own seems to be OK.
This behaviour is demonstrated at question time in Parliament daily in Canberra.
However, physical attacks like the one in Braddon on Jarrod Edwards’ car reminds me of the Gestapo tactics used in the country where I was born, to get Hitler into power.
No one would want to go there again. I’m sure everyone is horrified and outraged by such disregard for the principles of our democracy.
Horst Schroeder, East Devonport.
I TRAVEL to Launceston frequently.
The baggage retrieval times at the Launceston airport are painfully slow. It is quite common to wait more than 25 minutes for the baggage. This is the slowest operation of any airport in Australia (and most overseas airports). This sends a very poor message to visitors to Tasmania.
I understand the aircraft unloading is subcontracted out. Their minimal staffing is inadequate, especially so, if there is more than one aircraft to unload. This focus on cost saving is making Launceston look very inefficient. Something needs doing, and soon.
The management of the airport and the airlines need some serious attention.
David McMahon, East Melbourne.
THE government says it is committed to continuing live exports.
One export licence has been cancelled, which will do nothing to prevent recurring cruelty. It seems the issue is to be addressed by reducing animal density and appointing an observer.
Unless penned animals are tightly packed, they suffer injuries from being thrown around on a slippery deck as the ship rolls and pitches. An observer is powerless to do anything at the time and there seems to be deafening silence from the RSPCA.
The only proper answer is to ban live exports and pay compensation. The government is condoning cruelty as well as exporting Australian jobs.
John Snooks, West Launceston.