Letter to Ms. Anthea Tinney
Chairwoman,
Sydney Harbour Federation Trust,
From Peter M. Wargent
Dear Lady,
Re: Proposal 10 Terminal to Aged Care/Retirement Facility.
I made my submission on the above proposal on 29th November 2013. After consideration, I have observed further details of the proposal and the Trust's position, and direct this missive to you because of serious concern.
Amongst many objectives, the SHFT Act specifically states:
"to maximize public access to Trust land"; and "to establish and manage suitable Trust land as a park on behalf of the Commonwealth---- II • (Section 6).
Amongst many objectives, the Comprehensive Plan (the Plan) specifically states a vision:
"To provide a lasting legacy for the people of Australia by helping to create the finest foreshore park in the world---".
Also:
The Plan, page 6, item 4: "The plan proposes the creation of an exciting Headland Park at Middle Head, Georges Heights and Chowder Bay. The Park will link the natural and cultural assets of the site. Regeneration will double the area of bush land, a network of tracks will link the various military precincts, and facilities and buildings will be adapted for educational, community and recreational uses".
Many other items clearly indicate the legislated vision, spirit, and intention of the Act and Plan.
I cannot state too strongly, it is the responsibility of the Chairperson, of any Board, to ensure that all Board members understand and ultimately direct their decisions according to the rules and responsibilities that govern any individual board.
Regardless of any technical and/or elastic interpretations, the above proposal contravenes the spirit of the Act and the Plan to such an extent that, with respect, I believe the Trust Board, in its entirety, fails to acknowledge and understand its core responsibilities.
(And, regarding a proposed amendment, I do not think it defensible, morally or otherwise, that the Trust should ever shift the goal posts set within its governing legislation, if such shift interferes with the original spirit of the SHFT Act and its Charter. The latter spirit should be non-negotiable).
As stated in my original submission, I acknowledge the difficult compromise of balancing the conflicts of undisturbed bush and retention of buildings etc to provide income; but notwithstanding such income may be (and may always be) in short supply, the above proposal is a step too far.
Yours faithfully,
Peter M. Wargent.
cc. Mr Peter Lowry OAM. Board Member.