Cassowary Coast Regional Council

Last week’s council meeting agenda was a long one, with much of the business controversial.

Heading the list was the recommendation of consultant engineers that the Jubilee Bridge, once part of the main road through the north, be closed to traffic over 5 tonnes forthwith and to all traffic within a year. The bridge is of course an integral part of Innisfail.

Council does not have $8M to repair the bridge or $20M to replace it (both these figures are uncosted estimates). With a 30% subsidy from the State Government, we will have to borrow the balance. Interest will have to be met by Council from its usual sources – rates predominantly. Rates are already higher than the Queensland average and ratepayers won’t be happy paying even more. Nor will the public be pleased with having to drive the long way around.

I’m sure that residents of East Innisfail, South Innisfail and Coquette Point don’t want to pay a levy, but nor do residents of Mission Beach want to have their pool further delayed and nor do residents of Tully want to see their Multi Purpose Centre deferred and the money used for a bridge they rarely if ever use.

In this job there is no shortage of challenges.

Council’s decisions will be transparent and backed by careful assessment of the facts, but the decisions won’t and can’t suit everyone. 

As a politician I know there will inevitably be criticism, but it is unfortunate when the criticism is unfounded. To give three recent examples of this:-

•  It’s reportedly council’s fault that a temporary fence along the Innisfail Corso is to be erected while riparian revegetation is established. This is not the case. This decision has nothing to do with council. The local River Improvement Trust acting under instructions from the state government Department of Natural Resources and Water is responsible.
• The delays in establishing the Child Care Centre in Tully. Unfortunately the two tenderers that had been successful have withdrawn, so it’s back to the beginning again. The withdrawals are unrelated to council.
• The need to upgrade the toilets at Flying Fish Point. A majority of councillors did not object to such works at all. They simply asked questions about usage of the two public toilets at Flying Fish Point. These councillors were, in my opinion, doing exactly what they are supposed to do. Seeking full information before making a decision. Questioning spending $15,000 to upgrade a toilet 300 metres from an existing toilet, in our stressed financial position, is hardly
  being unreasonable. If there are compelling reasons put forward by our staff then no doubt the expenditure will be reviewed.

With the distractions of recent years, the review of health standards of food outlets in the region was overdue. Future inspections, both announced and unannounced, of such outlets will ensure that hygiene standards are maintained. The reaction to our inspections has been very positive with all outlets immediately rectifying problems.

Another controversial issue is the lack of accommodation in the region and the resultant creation of share accommodation dwellings which are unlawful, unhealthy and fire hazards. Council will be closing such premises and will also inspect all authorized backpacker hostels to ensure the full compliance with the law.