Has the CRG published contradicting or confusing statements as to who the CRG members represent? More importantly, what about their ultimate goal?
There is a “Community” Reference Group. They claim they will provide a recommendation to Ergon Energy on a preferred line route for the supply of electricity to Stanthorpe. (source – Free Times advertisement Sept 20 and Web site).
I questioned the legality of the CRG members to make a recommendation on behalf of the community members – people like you and me. The answer that came back was the group members recognise they are representing themselves and cannot represent or speak for the community.
Later in a CRG document, it confirms “we are representing ourselves” and “it is a voluntary group providing advice to Ergon”. To use the word advice instead of recommendation is a play on the word for the public. It is misleading. Advice means a recommendation; counsel; suggestion; guidance; opinion or warning.
By deliberately changing the word recommendation to advice, is the CRG now endeavouring to mislead the public?
What gives these people the legal right to make decisions for us? Do you want a high voltage powerline in your back-yard just because a group of ten people determines it is appropriate? Rest assured, the powerline will probably not be near their property.
Can the CRG clarify, through this newspaper, whether or not the group represents themselves or the community?
Can the CRG clarify, through this newspaper, whether it will be making a recommendation to Ergon Energy on behalf of the community? If yes, please explain your legal right to do so? If no, please explain the real purpose of the group?
The facilitator’s recent blog of self praise and back patting, whilst at the same time belittling some community members and Lawrence Springborg, reflected poorly on the facilitator and the company he represents. Mr Springborg sponsored this CRG. Is the time right for our local member to review the CRG, the process and its goal?
Allen Kehoe
Warwick
