Mitsubishi cuts Oakajee port project
The decision to mothball plans for the Oakejee port project, and heritage issues prompted the following letters to our website: www.wabusinessnews.com.au
I PRESUME in their annual reports they have some form of asterisk saying that even though they have mooted these developments they reserve the right to put them on hold and this must be taken into account when purchasing their shares?
Otherwise could someone give me the names of their attorneys. I might have to contact them.
Michael Ratner Perth
IT is time to say get rid of this nonsense; the millions spent to date are waste second to none, but let’s not waste more.
We need to change the premier and the transport minister, and undertake a major review of port management skills and the makeup of the directors. The last port review cannot be taken seriously.
The Oakajee move seems to be another case of a company building up its image, attracting investors and then saying ‘oh sorry’.
Michael Orlov Melbourne
Eye on stocks
With regard to the article: ‘US stocks dive after Obama win; Dow loses’...
JUST a note; I am in Singapore listening to a lot of high-level global analysis of this situation.
The article provides a pretty inaccurate report of the situation. I base this view on analysis by CNN and others, which clearly stated that this dive was due to the concerns over the German economy slowing and the implications for Europe and consequently the US. The market had, in fact, been up slightly up on the back of the Obama win. A bit more accuracy please.
Liz Harris Perth
Policy vacuum
With regard to the article: ‘Business thinks carbon tax poses risk’...
IF Tony Abbott and the Liberal Party want to compete in the Australian marketplace to gain more support at the next election, much more information will be required with specific initiatives to address how the carbon tax will be ‘decarbonised’ and what direct action initiatives will operate under a Liberal government
Jason Bouwhuis Perth
Heritage issues
With regard to the article: ‘Token preservation leads to poor outcomes’...
I AGREE with your comments in the August 9 article that the developer of 192 Newcastle Street is being asked to do something ridiculous to save something common.
It would be far better for the government to designate a heritage precinct where buildings of historic value could be re-erected after being removed from a development site. That way the community finishes up with a group of heritage buildings situated together.
There could be a plaque in front of each house explaining the original location and purpose of the re erected building. 192 Newcastle St will look silly with a modern office building surrounding an insignificant little house from the 1890s.
It would probably cost the developer less to demolish the old house and rebuild it than it would to support the house on stilts like it has at 192 Newcastle Street.
Ian Greenham Willetton
