Vic How would you rate Daniel Andrews' performance as Victorian Premier?

[Kwality]

Dont believe it even got a 2nd thought from the swinging voter, railway crossing removal was happening in front of their eyes ... fodder for the political chatterers, non event on polling day.

 

[Kwality]

Might be a tad embarassing for Dan:

Victoria | Breaking News and Headlines | The Sydney Morning Herald

The latest Victoria breaking news, comment and analysis from The Sydney Morning Herald covering Melbourne and around the State

www.smh.com.au

probe-into-potential-for-misuse-of-market-power-by-port-of-melbourne-20190926-p52va8.html

The port – Australia's largest – was leased to the Lonsdale consortium for 50 years by the Andrews government in 2016 for $9.7 billion, a record sum for an Australian port privatisation.

 

[Frank Bunn]

introduced 2010. Dan elected 2010. Line ball if its squarely on dan

The Melbourne Bike Share was introduced under the John Brumby Labor government. Andrews was a senior cabinet minister at the time and has been leader since Brumby.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Nice little fix.

Hand it off to a independent body, perfect deniability and no accountability. Plus get rid of the downward pressure from the voters.

The members of the Remuneration Tribunal are themselves on a nice little earner for a part time role that compliments their other highly paid part time roles.

Where was the transparency in how they came up with 12% pay rise? Of course O'Brien wasn't going to knock back his big increase either. The whole charade was a big circle jerk.

 

[CM86]

Well down here you can argue about what Dans is doing, but he is doing it & aint going anywhere because the other mob are moving so slowly & most Victorians know it

Melburnians’ damning verdict on their own city

Melbourne may have more hipster cafes, crowds at the footy and bars that open after midnight but in a crucial respect it’s a least a “decade behind” its big rival Sydney.

www.news.com.au

Melbourne may have more hipster cafes, crowds at the footy and bars that open after midnight but in a crucial respect it’s a least a “decade behind” its big rival Sydney.

And that’s not the opinion of smug Sydneysiders, it’s the judgement of two prominent Melburnians, including Federal Minister for Cities, Urban Infrastructure and Population, Alan Tudge.
The infrastructure backlog would hamper efforts for Melbourne, which has some of the highest growth in Australia, to cope with a swelling population.

Another speaker at the event said Melbourne was one to two “economic cycles” behind Sydney and was still focused on its crowded CBD core while Sydney was making progress in decentralising and de-congesting the city.

IF Melbourne is to fix it, Dan will fix it, & I dont even like him.

Alan Tudge.
What a rort of an article.

 

[go you pups]

Dont believe it even got a 2nd thought from the swinging voter, railway crossing removal was happening in front of their eyes ... fodder for the political chatterers, non event on polling day.

I never even noticed it was an election policy/pledge

All I ever heard really was Crime Crime Crime

Alan Tudge.
What a rort of an article.

This, as if he'd ever say Labor were doing enough for the state, or doing a good job or whatever

 

[Kwality]

I never even noticed it was an election policy/pledge

All I ever heard really was Crime Crime Crime

This, as if he'd ever say Labor were doing enough for the state, or doing a good job or whatever

which mob are you with ...

 

[go you pups]

which mob are you with ...

Not LNP

Labor generally for the lower house, Senate vote varies

 

[Kwality]

Not LNP

Labor generally for the lower house, Senate vote varies

You clearly follow State politics closely.

 

[go you pups]

You clearly follow State politics closely.

My voting habits in both state and federal elections are similar, I'm more likely to give independents/smaller parties votes/higher preferences in the upper house in both.

I'm happy with Dodgy Dan building rail infrastructure, the state needs it, short term pain for long-term gain imo.

 

[Bombermania]

Meh, they're doing the Lord's work. Unless we want to be building suburbs out to Warragul and Geelong a few of those quarter acre blocks need to be divided up into higher density living. The amount of "historically significant" houses that should be immune from further development is a much smaller number than what planning departments seem to believe. The NIMBYs are going to have to lose at some point.

There are plenty of places that are ideal for development, European and American cities seem to get the mix of heritage and development far better than Australian cities do.

 

[nobbyiscool]

There are plenty of places that are ideal for development, European and American cities seem to get the mix of heritage and development far better than Australian cities do.

I find this whole "heritage" notion to be bullshit.

1) just cos something's old doesn't make it worth saving
2) saying that some European-style building less than 200 years old has heritage value perpetuates the fallacy that Australia's heritage only started in 1788, not thousands of years ago.
3) the same people that kick and scream about some old house in Hawthorn are silent on Djab Wurrung

I would posit that Melbourne actually has very little genuine heritage that must be saved at all costs. I could probably count them on my hands. Heritage in Melbourne shouldn't be defined by age, cos nothing is that old - it should be defined by community attachment, which is based on what's happened there.

 

[swingdog]

I find this whole "heritage" notion to be bulls**t.

1) just cos something's old doesn't make it worth saving
2) saying that some European-style building less than 200 years old has heritage value perpetuates the fallacy that Australia's heritage only started in 1788, not thousands of years ago.
3) the same people that kick and scream about some old house in Hawthorn are silent on Djab Wurrung

I would posit that Melbourne actually has very little genuine heritage that must be saved at all costs. I could probably count them on my hands. Heritage in Melbourne shouldn't be defined by age, cos nothing is that old - it should be defined by community attachment, which is based on what's happened there.

Personal bugbear. I'd like to see heritage overlays done away with only if the building can be replaced with 9 star energy efficient equivalent. The notion that we're going to be living in wooden workers cottages in a hundred years time is ridiculous.

 

[Pessimistic]

Pentridge should immediately have its heritage stripped back to the absolute minimum. It was built to be ugly and ugly it is
It’s one area where there’s stacks of development land. Mainly coz the developer bailed
There’d be dozens of pentridge type parcels in melbourne

 

[Pessimistic]

Btw how energy efficient are tilt slab multi storey dog boxes?

 

[Bombermania]

I find this whole "heritage" notion to be bulls**t.

1) just cos something's old doesn't make it worth saving
2) saying that some European-style building less than 200 years old has heritage value perpetuates the fallacy that Australia's heritage only started in 1788, not thousands of years ago.
3) the same people that kick and scream about some old house in Hawthorn are silent on Djab Wurrung

I would posit that Melbourne actually has very little genuine heritage that must be saved at all costs. I could probably count them on my hands. Heritage in Melbourne shouldn't be defined by age, cos nothing is that old - it should be defined by community attachment, which is based on what's happened there.

1) just cos something's old doesn't make it worth saving

Agree but if something is architecturally significant or linked to local history then it ought to be protected.

2) saying that some European-style building less than 200 years old has heritage value perpetuates the fallacy that Australia's heritage only started in 1788, not thousands of years ago.

Heritage doesn't only apply to post European style buildings, it also applies to Indigenous history.

3) the same people that kick and scream about some old house in Hawthorn are silent on Djab Wurrung

Many of the people upset about the lost of one house in Hawthorn wouldn't know about Djab Wurrung and if they did they might share the concerns of those that know about the Djab Wurrung.

 

[go you pups]

Don't they do ghost tours at Pentridge?

Or is that only at Geelong and the Ararat asylum?

 

[swingdog]

Btw how energy efficient are tilt slab multi storey dog boxes?

Can be good, can be bad. Some developers do it right.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Personal bugbear. I'd like to see heritage overlays done away with only if the building can be replaced with 9 star energy efficient equivalent. The notion that we're going to be living in wooden workers cottages in a hundred years time is ridiculous.

The planning approvals based 'sustainability' are totally rorted. It's not about workers cottages. Some of Melbourne's historic buildings are being knocked down and being replaced by featureless tower block monstrosities.

 

[nobbyiscool]

The planning approvals based 'sustainability' are totally rorted. It's not about workers cottages. Some of Melbourne's historic buildings are being knocked down and being replaced by featureless tower block monstrosities.

What makes them historical?

What you're describing isn't some injustice - it's what we have to do to limit urban sprawl, and to allow people to live somewhat close to where they work. This "featureless tower block monstrosity" might hold a few dozen apartments. That's better from an urban planning perspective than a 100-year old place owned by a pair of squillionaires.

As I said earlier, the number of places in Melbourne that are truly historic because of public attachment or significant events can probably be counted on your hands.

By the way, watching the cricket at the Junction Oval today reminds me of the nearby apartment tower... maybe rectangular monolith isn't such a bad thing...

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

There are plenty of places that are ideal for development, European and American cities seem to get the mix of heritage and development far better than Australian cities do.

That's because most of those cities were designed for higher density development from the outset so things like heritage facades could be protected and incorporated. Most of the conflict between development and heritage in Melbourne originates from the inner eastern suburbs that were traditionally large houses on big blocks, not from the likes of Fitzroy which was typically terrace houses.

Further, I'd argue there are few areas of Melbourne more ripe for development than the inner-eastern suburbs between the Monash, Eastern and Eastlink freeways considering how close it is to the city and that it's serviced by four train lines. It's probably the best area of the city to handle high density living and yet it's woefully underdeveloped.

 

[swingdog]

Further, I'd argue there are few areas of Melbourne more ripe for development than the inner-eastern suburbs between the Monash, Eastern and Eastlink freeways considering how close it is to the city and that it's serviced by four train lines. It's probably the best area of the city to handle high density living and yet it's woefully underdeveloped.

That would cue mass pearl-clutching.

 

[swingdog]

By the way, watching the cricket at the Junction Oval today reminds me of the nearby apartment tower... maybe rectangular monolith isn't such a bad thing...

Quietly...."I actually don't mind that."

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

That would cue mass pearl-clutching.

Meh, **** 'em. We all know their kids are just holding out for mum and dad to drop dead so they can sell the house to some developers anyway.

 

[Bombermania]

What makes them historical?

What you're describing isn't some injustice - it's what we have to do to limit urban sprawl, and to allow people to live somewhat close to where they work. This "featureless tower block monstrosity" might hold a few dozen apartments. That's better from an urban planning perspective than a 100-year old place owned by a pair of squillionaires.

As I said earlier, the number of places in Melbourne that are truly historic because of public attachment or significant events can probably be counted on your hands.

By the way, watching the cricket at the Junction Oval today reminds me of the nearby apartment tower... maybe rectangular monolith isn't such a bad thing...

That would suit St Kilda but would look out of place in a suburb like Hawthorn.