So this person Jenna has written a very biased account of the protest and made a big thing about people not staying until the end of the council meeting.

Perhaps some of the reasons they didn't last for the entire meeting were:

a) it was difficult to stand in that cramped space up both sides of the room for more than an hour;

b) most of the protestors were aged over 50, many over 60, one had a walking stick but was not offered a chair by any of the 4 council employees (not councillors) comfortably seated at tables on both sides of the room;

c) they took so long to articulate one sentence to be added to the petition that the thought of lasting for the whole debate was too terrifying;

d) they realised from the antipathy of councillors that not much was going to be decided in their favour;

e) they were disgusted at how poorly our councillor represented us;

f) they had to race back in the hope of getting one of the very few parking spots available at Weinem Creek!

Either these thousands have accepted the changes are happening and are not wasting their time in a futile fight or while not happy about having to pay to park, realise this is the way forward.

IE this cost can be factored in when evaluating the viability of renting or purchasing on the islands as opposed to the current situation where the current parking/ car storage has a limited future.

Certainly not going to be parking in the park.

The Islanders were perfectly behaved until Cr Townsend refused to accept a very reasonable amendment to her motion about the Islander petition.

A few comments were made by Islanders at this point.

This amendment was not as Jenna describes it.

It was important to have Council accept that it must make no changes at Weinam Creek that affect parking for Islanders until the intent of the petition is addressed satisfactority.

All of the studies presently contained within the Plan might affect elements of progress, but none will change the final outcome as specified.

It is this final outcome that must be changed.

However, the Islanders became incensed when Cr Ogilvie insulted them by calling them unintelligent rabble.

The Mayor asked him to retract that statement, but Ogilvie declined.

a) it was difficult to stand in that cramped and confined space up both sides of the room for more than an hour;

b) most of the protestors were aged over 50, many over 60 and perhaps older, one had a walking stick but was not offered a chair by any of the 4 council employees (not councillors) comfortably seated at tables on both sides of the room;

c) they took so long to articulate one sentence to be added to the petition that the thought of lasting for the whole debate was too terrifying to contemplate;

d) they realised that not much was going to be decided in their favour at that meeting;

e) they were disgusted at how poorly our councillor represented the islands,

f) they had to rush back to try and get a parking space at the ferry.

Firstly on leaving the chamber these were elderly folk, many soaked to the skin from a heavy downpour as they exited the ferry. They stood 1 1/2 hours until the petition debate was over.

If Jenna had read the 200 page Plan as these folk had she would know that 1700 folk had reason to Petition as is their democratic right.

Councillor Ogilvie was insulting of perhaps the largest crowd to pack the Chamber.

He called a very well ordered assembly an "ignorant rabble".

He was censured by our Mayor who asked him to withdraw his remark. He refused to do so. Our petition gained the respect of The Mayor, Cr Williams & Cr Burns.

Although Jenna was handed a full printed copy of my speech she misquoted me in a way that could have a negative impact on the people I represented "The Macleay Island Community Church" and the Councillors attitude toward Islanders, I was quoted as accusing the Councillors of "rubberstamping" the Plan.

If Jenna rereads my speech she will see that I said "Did not realize the consequences".

I ask for a printed correction and my speech to be fully published.

Lorraine Taylor

34095356

I said "you run the risk of becoming an obsolete, ignorant rabble".

It's accurately recorded by the journalist and accurately recorded by the Council audio transcript. (If anyone wants to spoil a good story and check.)

In my view, no one in our community – regardless of their place of abode or their socio-economic conditions – will ever be regarded as "obsolete".

Everyone in our society is important and has the right to their opinion.

Comments that serve to cause emotional harm by suggesting that they could become subordinates within our society only hiders the negotiation process.

These people were obviously upset, and your comment didn’t help matters at all.

The 200 page master plan is available and I strongly suggest all read it.

Consideration for ALL has to be taken into account and calmness between our current Council and Island residents must be restored.

Once this is done - and mutual respect is given - then non-ambiguous and fair negotiations can take place.

But I feel his 'warning' that the mob were about to cross the line and become exactly that 'an obsolete, ignorant rabble' was timely.

While it got up a few over-sensitive nose it possibly averted a over-reaction by the few.