IF YOU and the authorities think COVID-19 is scary enough, how many new diseases will emerge and be rampantly spreading across the globe within the next 15 years when our planet warms enough to never have Arctic sea-ice again?
The last 10 days have recorded around 18C in the Arctic.
What's more important, tackling a single temporary flu which everyone will become naturally immune to or getting climate change under control?
If the latter isn't done you can kiss just about all life on the planet goodbye - very likely within your own lifetime.
ADDING to the merit of allowing employees to opt out of 9.5% compulsory superannuation is the flexibility and choice which such a policy would provide to working people.
Should one relationship partner in a couple leave the workforce (e.g., due to unemployment or parenthood), then the other partner could achieve a 9.5% pre-tax wage increase by opting out of compulsory superannuation. That could help household cash flow.
Similarly, a single or partnered employee who was forced to work reduced hours could (subject to still being eligible for superannuation) opt out of compulsory superannuation on remaining wages and take higher wages to partly compensate for reduced hours.
The "opt out" policy could serve as a type of automatic stabiliser for ordinary people and the economy and should receive serious policy consideration. A smart action-oriented government could have already implemented this policy to alleviate the economic effects of the recession attributed to the "virus crisis".
THE government has money to support sport events and sports infrastructures, however there is not enough money for hospital beds to look after our population.
Our people are prevented from coming home from interstate or overseas, yet movie stars and sports stars travel with no problems. We promote population growth and with this more houses, jobs and taxes. Wow, how wonderful! Except that the government forgets to spend the extra revenue created through this growing population on the infrastructure needed for a larger population.
IN RESPONSE to Nick Steel's comments (The Examiner, January 11) in reference to the loss of habitat due to logging by STT. He insinuates that habitat loss is 'a bit player' in the population crash of swift Parrots. Mr Steele attempts to obfucate the fact that without specific Tasmanian habitat the species cannot breed.
If the only habitat to breed in is destroyed, the species is doomed.
I TOTALLY agree with B Taylor (The Examiner, December 11) and A Lowe (The Examiner, December 26) that the future of Relbia could be ruined forever.
Community consultation held in 2019 was not about residents sub-dividing off the front paddock for a family member, putting a granny flat out the back or simply downsizing. There was always a hidden agenda without the thorough consultation of residents and it was more about the self-promoting developers who attended the community meeting that want to sub-divide this quality farming land. This is an absolute insult to the previous owners that were not allowed to use their land to build a home on due to it being zoned for rural use only and in the flight path to the airport.
The Launceston City Council, I believe favours these developers and will rezone this area to accommodate them. The residents voted unanimously to retain this unique part of the world and their rural lifestyle and to enjoy a peaceful existence with a great sense of community. The developers who do not reside at Relbia can't wait to turn it into another concrete jungle. The proposed area earmarked for sub-division is prone to flooding, will impact wildlife and have septic tank run off issues into Jingler's Creek. Relbia Road would be overwhelmed with all the additional traffic which it is already struggling to cope with, plus there are safety concerns at Relbia Road/Hobart Road.
I concur with others, who have pointed out the fact that the N/E Rail trail is a tragic waste of existing infrastructure. Why remove a potentially fit for purpose railway line? Further, it looks like most of the financial burden of maintaining the proposed gravel bike path will be carried by the Dorset ratepayers. Ironically most of us don't want the bike trail.
The timing of the road works for the West Tamar and East Tamar beggars belief. If I were a business operator at Beaconsfield or a resident I would be very disappointed with the choke hold the roadworks are having over getting to and from work and home. Summer time and people of Tasmania would like to get out and enjoy our coastlines and campsites so in their wisdom the powers to be elected to hinder access from January to May. Given their past results the roads will still be rubbish but at least they get to add more stress when we are just getting to moving about again.
Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.