Do you have an opinion to share? Submit a Letter to the Editor at Sunshine Coast News via news@sunshinecoastnews.com.au. You must include your name and suburb for accountability, credibility and transparency. Preference will be given to letters of 100 words or less.
- Read the story: New application seeks approval for rural flying site
Peter Baulch, North Arm: The site appears ideally suited for the purpose. It’s surrounded by an extensive area of flat open land with no residents close enough to experience acoustic nuisance, involves negligible physical changes or other potential compromises to its future use and is compatible with the Blue Heart project objectives.
Glen Lait, Valdora: This supposed acoustic report was done by whom? Somebody favourable to the club? Having lived in Valdora for a peaceful 38 years, I am not prepared to listen to model aircraft close to homes in Valdora.
We have to put up with commercial aircraft destroying our lives since the east west runway came on line. More high-pitched screaming model aircraft is not acceptable. For years I was a member of the Coolum Pines MX club and the model flying club was next to the MX track.
These noisy high revving models were often louder than the MX bikes. This activity will be heard throughout the entire Valdora Valley and up on Ocean Vista and Country Coolum. I urge council to not allow these monstrosities to ruin the peace and quiet we still have.
Eta Brand, Valdora: As a Valdora resident directly affected by the proposed application of the Model Flyers Club to relocate to our area, your article failed to address the very serious omissions in their acoustic testing. Your headline was deceptive. Your readers deserve to read the full problems of this application. There was no testing on the eastern slopes of Mt Ninderry for the acoustic amphitheatre effect. This is a glaring omission.
Sunshine Coast Council failed previously to require this club to do proper testing at a few elevations up the mountain at 50m, 100m, 150m to prove that sound in fact will not be an ongoing problem as a major interference for residents.
It is basic physics that the sound from even one dirt bike at the bottom of the mountain amplifies all the way up to 150m elevation. The testing was only ever done on the flat area to no more than 1.5m. No acoustic measures on the slopes of the mountain.
There are many residents who live on this side of the mountain. Residents deserve peace and quiet. Not seven-day noise and interference in our semi-rural area. Access to their proposed site is via a dirt road. Residents have raised issues about the number of cars creating noise and dust. There is no capping the number of members of this club.
Residents are insistent that council must vote this application down again for many of the same reasons. This airfield is situated on a floodplain. Council does not approve projects on a flood plain. Model Flyers needs to look elsewhere. Close to 1000 local residents should not be affected by a club of 30 members who may not even live in the area.
Sunshine Coast councillors are well within their rights to vote this down again. They must listen to the residents.
- Read the story: Bridge closure causes ‘chaos’, hits local businesses
Woody Dass, Noosaville: The diverted traffic onto Eumundi Road from the Tewantin Bridge renovation is intolerable. We cannot be expected to put up with the traffic being backed up from Beckmans Road to Goodchap Street for the next six months. It will get even worse when tourists arrive for the Sept/Oct school holidays, triathlon and the December peak holiday season.
The current situation is a dangerous free-for-all at each roundabout on Eumundi Rd and it’s only going to get worse.
Council hasn’t thought out the impact of this project on residents and businesses. There needs to be a helpful traffic management plan implemented as soon as possible, even if it involves temporary traffic lights. The traffic chaos is far more than residents of Noosa Shire should be subjected to. Do something NOW!
- Read the story: Venue’s response to review sparks online debate
John Thorogood, Maroochydore: I’d rather sit adjacent to a well-behaved dog than a raucous toddler. Cartel Co, we own a well socialised dog and we’re coming for lunch! Your sensible policy recognising that dogs are part of many families is to be commended. You rightly point out that the hospitality industry offers choice, so those who complain are simply demonstrating their selfish self-interest.
Darren Sherlock: No dogs… they are animals, not humans.
John: You are correct in stating the law allows dogs in outside dining areas. Yes. However, the rest of that same law states that the dog must be tethered at all times and must remain on the floor or ground. That is, dogs are not permitted to be held, nursed on laps, seated on chairs or put their head on the table. Now we have all seen dogs on laps in cafes and nobody polices this.
- Read the story: Ashley Robinson: the price of democracy
John Robinson, Doonan: I am always interested in Ashley Robinson’s comments, not only because we share the same surname, but because Ashley has something missing in many of our elected politicians and councillors: common sense.
However, I disagree with Ashley on a recent comment about government. Australia is probably the most over governed and overtaxed country in the world, with three levels of government. Yes, Australia is a very large place with relatively small population. In my opinion it is the state governments which we do not need.
Back in 1900, federation was formed to represent all Australians to the world and get rid of state governments. What happened? I am sure that in this day of advanced technology available to all of us, all we need is federal government and local government. By all means keep the state borders in place, otherwise, how could we have the NRL State of Origin?
By the way, Sunshine Coast News is always a good read and impartial and I always look for it in my inbox. Best wishes to Ashley and family. I look forward to chatting with him again at next year’s Aussies (surf lifesaving championships) at Alex.
- Read the story: Software glitch blamed for crippling Telstra outage
Tom, Currimundi: Telstra are blaming a software glitch for the recent disastrous outage, however the most likely reason was their failure to properly test the software upgrade before its installation. I say this as a computer science graduate.
- Read the story: Beach wedding fees blamed for drop in bookings
Ross, Landsborough: This article captures a long‑standing problem with Noosa Council, an attitude of superiority that sets them apart from the rest of the Coast and, frankly, much of the country. It’s a pattern of behaviour that makes them look less like careful custodians of a beautiful region and more like a council convinced of its own exceptionalism.
Noosa is undeniably a stunning place, its beaches, natural assets and lifestyle are the envy of many. But none of that justifies a council culture that routinely presents itself as above scrutiny, above collaboration and above the realities facing neighbouring communities. When leaders act as though they’re operating on a higher plane, they shouldn’t be surprised when the public sees them as out of touch and self‑important.
If the council insists on carrying itself with this inflated sense of entitlement, it will continue to reap the consequences of its own behaviour. Good governance requires humility, accountability and respect for the broader region, not the pretence of being a class above everyone else.
Graham Lockey, Coolum Beach: So, the ‘Noosa tax’ hits weddings in Noosa Shire. Given the reported huge amount spent by couples on their weddings these days (estimates of $20,000 being suggested by other news outlets) a $49 rise in fees I think would be barely noticeable. However, Noosa Council may just be shooting itself in the foot by having a $799 fee, as this fee may dissuade couples from choosing to marry there. As is pointed out, the loss to the tourist industry by the loss of even one wedding is substantial, and does not factor in the on-going damage to the, perceived, ‘Noosa image’. Relying on “if you need to ask the price you can’t afford it” mindset may just be a little outdated these days.
- Read the story: First subdivision planned for Wises Farm
Barry: Regarding the Wises Farm redevelopment, why is council allowing building on flood-prone land? This farm goes under every time the it rains heavy or for prolonged periods of time.
- Read the story: Illegal camping blitz continues
Peter Elton, Golden Beach: What’s the fuss? I have travelled extensively around Australia and free-camped most of the time, as many others do. Caravan parks do not fit the budget, as I can live and travel for a week, for the cost of a one-night stay. When I was a kid, you could pull up and camp anywhere that wasn’t private land and it is time we were allowed to do this again. Those who abuse this privilege by leaving rubbish or excrement should have their vehicles impounded and be fined heavily, but leave law-abiding travellers alone.
Geoff Phillips, The Falls, Queensland: I have lived in my motorhome, on and off, for 18 years. During that time, I have driven half a million kilometres. I have gone around Australia twice and through the centre dozens of times. I am on a fixed income. I know exactly what comes in each year, and what goes out.
By subtracting expenses that are what I call ‘institutional’ – rates, insurance, registration etc… I know what I spend each day during my travels. That amount is in excess of $80; sometimes edging towards $90. This includes fuel, tyres, food, repairs, entertainment, medical, pharmaceutical, alcohol and ‘walking around’ money. It does not include overnight accommodation.
There is no doubt that the future of RV travel lies in free, or independent, camping. This is evidenced by the type of RV that is being built and sold. They are nearly all set up with toilets, showers, fresh water, solar power and holding tanks for waste. They are, to the dismay of caravan park proprietors, intended for independent camping.
Owners who do not need town facilities to those offered by caravan parks are inclined to stay in free camps, rather than pay overnight fees simply for somewhere to park. This applies doubly for self-contained and independent vehicles where the owner is travelling alone yet is obliged to pay a ‘couples’ rate. Needless to say, there is conflict and stress.
It is hard, though, to remain independent for any length of time. Eventually, even the most dedicated independent camper will want to fill up with water and gas, do the laundry, charge the batteries and watch television. So even if independent camping was made available across the board, caravan parks would still trade.
Districts which have already embraced free camping are many, and invariably, the town’s revenue is markedly increased. It follows that the towns and districts which embrace camping early will benefit more than those who follow.
Having said all that, I can understand the anguish of the caravan park industry, whose members pay their rates and licence fees, and lobby councils to persecute so-called free loaders – free-loaders who spend around $80 a day. Here is a model that might be employed. It involves a strict 12-month trial, which would end at the end of the trial. The first thing to do, is to assess the district’s existing revenue, then perform the trial, and measure again.
- Gather opinions from towns which have already embraced freedom camping. There are many: Duraringa, St Marys, Home Hill, Babinda, Benarkin, Nanango, the Burnett (North and South) and Somerset shires. The list is long and growing.
- Then measure where the town is, by asking every town business, especially the caravan parks, to supply their revenue for the previous financial year and visitation numbers.
- Advertise the district as being RV Friendly for one year and allow free camping on the town ‘common’ or similar, within walking distance to town. Power is optional, toilets are beneficial, but when combined with coin-operated showers it guarantees success.
- At the end of the trial gather the revenue figures again and assess the benefit or otherwise of the trial.
- Importantly, if the town has benefitted (expect about a 12 per cent increase) at the expense of the caravan park/s, they should be given some recompense by way rate rebates or reduced license fees.
The future of recreational vehicle travel lies in independent camping. It is futile to oppose it; cooperation is needed. If a town is not RV friendly, then it could be taken (as many already are) as being RV unfriendly. In some instances, local services clubs have built coin operated showers etc… and show a handy almost maintenance free-income. Resident caretakers might be appointed to oversee the conduct of campers and the condition of the camp.
Jennifer Gregory, Mountain Creek: Thank you Elizabeth Watson. You said it for me and so many others who have witnessed the forced “moving on” of homeless people from one place to the next. Councils and governments should hang their heads in shame. With very few exceptions, homeless people don’t want to be homeless. They need opportunity. It has been shown that when people have secure housing, they find better jobs, have better health, their kids get a better education, among other benefits. All these benefits, in turn, benefit the country and everyone in it. And that says nothing of the happiness factor, which we all deserve. Instead, council sends out people to fine those who are homeless. It’s senseless and cruel. I, too, am thoroughly sick of reading about the promises that never eventuate. We could fix this situation if we prioritised it. But the will isn’t there.
- Read the story: Bill relief flows through water pricing changes
Brad Boustead: I read with interest the article about Unitywater freezing water charges for 2026-2027. My present dealings with Unitywater do not reflect the sentiment of the article.
Approximately eight years ago, my wife and I purchased a property at Dicky Beach. It came with a semi-attached granny flat. The property has been deemed to have multiple dwellings (two). In the time we have owned the property, the number of bathrooms has not changed from two. However, in recent months, Unitywater has decided to charge us twice for fixed access charges. This is because of the multi-dwelling status. Over the last two billing periods, the extra charges have come to $533.72. This is simply not reasonable as nothing has changed with regards to our plumbing and water requirements. There is still only one meter that measures the entire water consumption on the property.
This is particularly irksome for two reasons. Firstly, a single dwelling with three bathrooms does not get billed extra fixed access charges. Secondly, in the article, Water Minister Anne Leahy said as a result of the price freeze, some families would save $130 over two years as part of the Queensland Government’s cost-of-living package. Not this family. If the status quo is maintained, we will have paid an extra $2134.88 over the same two years for no extra benefit. Hopefully, common sense will prevail.
- Monotonous monoculture
Margaret Wilkie, Peregian Beach: Which myopic, monocratic ‘monitoress’ makes a monolingual, monotonal, monosyllabic monologue about a monotonous monoculture move to monopolise a multicultural motherland? Please explain.
Do you have an opinion to share? Submit a Letter to the Editor at Sunshine Coast News via news@sunshinecoastnews.com.au. You must include your name and suburb for accountability, credibility and transparency. Preference will be given to letters of 100 words or less.
