Report Tourism meeting. Comment. Meeting with Manny.

Hi All,

        Please find attached report on  meeting with Riverview Tourism consultants on Friday 21^st Feb.and comments on upcoming meeting with Manny Thur 27^th Feb 3:00pm.

I would make the following points.

1) Cross Border Committee.  From Doug e-mails with Tom Gordon  and from comments made at the tourism committee I think this committee is mainly a “Riverview vehicle” to get ACT and NSW agreement on how services etc for the “peninsula “ are will be handled.   I would consider that they have no interest outside that and would not be interested in including any other “stakeholders”.   In fact I think they are very keen to restrict its activities to just the “peninsula” area.  They have no interest in a cross border committee which would consider wider cross border issues as this would open up a “can of worms” with all landholders around the ACT keen to get their land rezoned urban.

I asked David Maxwell at the Tourism meeting “what are the terms of reference of the committee?”  He replied along the lines “there are no terms of reference it is simply considering arrangements of the provision of services etc.”     Again at the meeting Tony Adams indicated they were looking to include the “peninsula” area in the ACT thus avoiding any problems with wider cross issues.

2) Responses from pollies re cross border committee.

These responses I think show them in their true colours.    The Riverview cross border committee gives them an ideal opportunity to “pass the buck”.   “Oh there is already a cross border committee…. liase with that committee we do not need another one”.  

3) Meeting with Manny.

We need to think objectively what we want out of this meeting and what our longer term relationship with Manny will be.    Potentially we are in “alliance” with Manny as we both want broader cross border issues to be considered.  However we need to think carefully about whether we want to open up the “can of worms” which this will entail.

We should think about a “virtual agenda” of issues for the meeting so we can ask the right questions and get a  better understanding of his position.

Regards John.

REPORT. GFA meeting with Riverview tourism consultants. Fri 21^st Feb 2014

Venue…Riverview office. Kippax.

Present GFA. Chris Watson, John Connelly , Vena Murray,

Present . Riverview Tony Adams , David Marshall (Director , Taskforce Media and Communications Strategists), Geoff ??? (Same organisation???? not sure)

Pre-meeting chat with Tony Adams "Future residents of the "peninsula" will likely get a 99 year lease on their property"….."there are talks in relation to moving the border of the ACT"

Meeting proper.

Chris Watson

1. gives an over view of our proposal and emphasises the need for adequate conservation corridors alon both the Ginninderra Creek and the Murrumbidgee River. He points out areas in the NSW section of the development where housing comes much closer to the Murrumbidgee River than in the ACT section.
2. Expresses our interest in being involved with the "cross border committee" and asks for details regarding the makeup of the committee.

Geoff does most of the talking.

1. No real response to Chris’s request for details of the cross border committee.
2. Lots of PR talk about how importantly they regard the need for any tourist development to be done in a sensitive manner. Also that housing should only be allowed where it does not intrude on the visual aspect of the Murrumbidgee Corridor. This gives us some leverage to limit where housing is placed.
3. They have had a lot of involvement with the Arboretum Restaurant / Information Centre and that seems to have been very successful not least in financial terms. This I think is heavily biasing them towards a similar type facility taking in views of the Murrumbidgee River..
4. He emphasises the need for any development to generate funds and be financially viable.
5. Appears to have no confidence that the national park option is a possibility as NSW does not have the funds to set it up or provide ongoing maintenance.

SUMMARY. I got the clear impression (Chris and Vena may have other views) that an Arboretum style Restaurant / Information Centre is almost a "done deal". They will go through the motions of producing a "balanced " report but the Arboretum style development will be the preferred option.