Commenting on the story: Second tower proposed for Festival Plaza

This to me this smacks of weasel words from our Premier and Planning Minister.

To say that (a three-storey retail building) blocks out the connection between Parliament House and the Festival Plaza would lead you to think that they were arguing for no new retail building, or any building on that site whatsoever. Going on to propose a taller building is therefore completely illogical.

Feigning that ‘best public interest’ is served by yet more and taller development precisely here is disingenuous. This is being driven by the government letting Walker ‘nominate the building height’, to be possibly let out to the government.

The beautiful north elevation of Parliament House has always been the backdrop of Festival Plaza and it should remain so, unblighted by any development that separates it from the Plaza – even though it must now endure a massive new overbearing and over-scaled north-west neighbour. – Michael Pilkington

Commenting on the story: SA unis start consulting students, staff on potential merger

I received that communication as an Alumni of Uni SA. The tenor of the email presents more as a fait accompli i.e. you can provide feedback on the future vision statement.

This is no way gives staff, students and alumni any means to give “perspective on the opportunities, risks and considerations that we should think about when developing the business case,” as quoted in the email.

The whole exercise seems like a grab from the bigger institution to access the innovation and resources of the smaller university. Already with the proposed name change UniSA has lost any future identity. – Tony Wyld

Commenting on the story: Bombarded’: SA bid to rein in gambling ads

There goes that old line: “We use the money to fund community sports”. Hmmm and hmmm again. – David Donaldson

Commenting on the story: Super push for SA foster carers

What this article and the statements of the Minister and others fails to mention is that this only encompasses formal carers who have a legal instrument to be the carers of children.

It does not include the thousands of informal carers, such as the 1100 grandparents we support who are the full time unsupported carers of children, many of whom have experienced severe trauma.

The average age of these carers is 65. Most are unemployed women who have had to spend their super, remortgage their homes and/or sell assets to survive, keep the children in a safe place or pay for legal proceedings.

They are the forgotten carers of both this article and the review into the Child Safety Act. – Mike Feszczak, Grandparents for Grandchildren