murbul
cOaLiTiOn Of ChAoS
Ugh. Might need to turn this into a drinking game to make it through this meeting.
She has been fighting for that crossing for years. The Fairfield station upgrade is part of the Cross River Rail project, but the fight started long before any of that construction began.
She claimed its budget is four times the homelessness program budget, but not sure the dollar figure. It was a stunt motion really and she kind of poisoned it by claiming it’s marketing for the mayor and LNP councillors. Maybe there’s some bias there but whenever I’ve looked at it, it’s mostly just generic what’s on and what happened kind of content.
It was in response to Cr Howard’s stunt motion again calling on the state govt to use Pinkenba for crisis accomodation. And to round it off there was another stunt motion from Cr Cassidy calling on BCC to support the federal govt’s Housing Australia Future Fund.
Cr Johnston is being especially fiery today, butting heads with the Chair multiple times. She was formally reprimanded multiple times and in turn she dissented against his rulings.
“Mr Chairman, you are a grub and I dissent in your ruling”.
LNP members calling for her to be removed from the meeting but so far the Chair has resisted.
Cr Massey:
It’s clear the St Lucia to West End bridge is going to disappear
Council says ‘Yeah we want to do it, but now we need the other levels’
Please don’t listen when they say our promise was only $550 million. They talked about five bridges, the delivery should be five bridges.
Cr Collier moves a motion to reallocate all funding for the Living in Brisbane newsletter to the Pathways out of Homelessness program for the remainder of the year. Voted down of course.
I’d really like to see the speeding fines formally challenged in some way. You hear stories from cyclists that they or their mates have had them overturned, but I haven’t seen any actual evidence of this. Maybe it’s the case that police just choose not to proceed when the fines are challenged, and avoid setting a formal precedent in the courts.
It would also be interesting if this specific case was challenged. Like you say, it sounds like the 10km/h is supposed to be advisory, but the sign they have used is a regulatory sign which can be enforced by a literal reading of the rules. Not sure if it would hold up in court, and might come down to the judge’s attitude towards cyclists.
