Broader picture needed with Beauty Point park issues

Whereas the Park was depicted as a "last option before homelessness", this does not accurately reflect the experiences of many long-term residents, including my Mum, who have chosen to make the park their home, rather than renting or buying elsewhere.

Despite referring to concerns about the "safety of all those involved in the park", management have failed to act in relation to reported fire hazards bordering park property. I also cannot understand why my Mum should experience difficulties in gaining permission from management to have safety modifications installed in her bathroom (at her expense) - or why she must use a service provider specified by the park.

Although changes may be necessary to "better protect those living in caravan parks", consultation with residents is vital. For instance, recent park office opening hour changes may have a detrimental effect on elderly residents who cannot drive, such as my 90-year-old Mum. Community transport volunteers who collect my Mum for appointments need to be able to easily access the park. Likewise, following changes to park mail deliveries, residents are now required to collect their own mail from the Beauty Point post office, which is unrealistic for my Mum who needs a walker to move around safely.

When considering the 'broader picture', the needs of the elderly who have served our community well need to be kept at the forefront.

Sharon Wagner, Launceston

AS A proud Tasmanian currently living interstate, I was overjoyed to see Leonardo DiCaprio raise the profile of Tasmania's magnificent forests ("Hollywood star slams Tasmania over giant promise" The Examiner, March 20). That Resources Minister Felix Ellis is threatened by a person of international influence highlighting the facts about Tasmania's ongoing logging of native forests, speaks volumes about the government's poor and irresponsible management of said forests. Not only is Tasmania's clean, green tourism image on the line, but so too are species on the brink of extinction like the Swift Parrot. As they did in Hobart last weekend, the people of Tasmania and the world will continue to speak up until the government listens and ends the tragic destruction of ancient forests.

Amy Hiller, Kew

STUDENTS with disability are the only under-represented group in the Report whose participation rate the Government is not seeking to increase. In fact, the Report explicitly excludes students with profound disability, assuming that they are unable to participate. Included in the report's definition of profound, are people with disability who use assistive technology which is an utter misuse of the term.

The Accord has inadvertently perpetuated low expectations around students with disability by removing people with profound disability from the data set.

This is not only an insult to the hard work education advocates have been undertaking with their students with disabilities to succeed in higher education, but also of particular insult to students.

The Accord needs to immediately a) revise the language used in the Accord relating to disability that is inclusive and empowering; and b) revise the parity target relating to disability.

This adjustment will enhance the overall impact and effectiveness of the Accord, ensuring equal opportunities and representation for all individuals, including those with disability.

People with disability and people with the expert knowledge of disability also need to be at every working group that is dedicated to addressing the priorities identified in the accord and the current architecture of implementation of each of the recommendations.

James Newton, Newstead

AFTER 10 years of Liberal Government failure and infighting, the election should have seen the Tasmanian Labor Party romp home.

Instead, they had a terrible result after running a scared, mean-spirited, small-target campaign replete with dirty tricks. And knifed a very good leader in Rebecca White.

Where is the Labor Party of Whitlam, of Hawke, of Gillard? Where is the vision?

How can the Campaign Manager justify keeping his job after this debacle?

John Barrenger, Ulverstone