The Tigers article in the herald is being proclaimed as investigative journalism at its
best and a reason why Gina Reinhardt should not have editorial control of fairfax.
In the opinion section TWICE.
Please write a letter in 200 words or less to the opinion section that the author is
not acting as an investigative journalist, is digging for dirt out of self interest and that she
is nothing but a nimby. Make the point that if the herald is passing it off as investigative
journalism then they may as well have Gina Reinhardt with editorial control if that is
the best they can do.
It would be 20 minutes out of your day. Get it in by 1:30pm, include name, address
and telephone nos (or they can't publish). It is best to fight this where the articles
are being written. The attacks are constant. email
letters@smh.com.au.
INCLUDE SOME OF YOUR OTHER STUFF, push it out to 250 words max.
Another ill informed article from Burke.
"Figures quoted in the report are wrong in many cases and many points are just overlooked completely to give the article the slant wanted.
This was always a commercial development project and, big suprise, developers get a return on their capital investment. I really dont think anybody involved went into this with a thought that anything other than this would occur.
2% interest on the debt accrued and the fact that the relocation costs involved the purchase of two new sites which are not listed as capital is a very good deal.
Simple reality is if the council had given the original proposal the go ahead there is no issue. Hell if the Council had not given assurances that a development would be approved if they club purchased surrounding properties the club would not have been in such debt in the first place.
This is a commercial arrangement in which all parties concerned have a financial gain to make upon completion. To make it out as a former Balmain player being a white knight and than turning villain is laughable"
