Response From Kate Mackaness to Bart Bassett
Dear Mr Bassett,
Thank you for providing such a detailed explanation of your refusal to meet with CAWB, a community organisation fighting to save Windsor’s Macquarie Era town square. As you are aware, CAWB has been calling for a sensible long-term solution to the Hawkesbury's traffic issues with the construction of a bypass.
The time you have taken to outline your concerns is appreciated.
I am responding because you name me on three separate occasions in that correspondence as the focus of those concerns.
I am, I must say, perplexed. You appear to have only recently recalled we met when I represented the then Minister for Planning and Heritage at a meeting with you at Parliament House in 2010. Your group had unfortunately travelled into the CBD on the wrong day. As you would appreciate, it was not possible to squeeze in an additional meeting during Parliament, so you and your delegation spoke with me instead of the Minister.
Having realised a member of CAWB was someone you had met as a policy advisor to a former Minister I am further puzzled by your reaction. There seems to be a degree of hostility in your correspondence, based on the incorrect assumption I am a member of the Australian Labor Party. As it happens I am not a member of any political party. What's more, it is entirely irrelevant whether I belong to a party or not and I find your rhetoric extremely offensive. It was also, last I checked, not an offence to publicly express an opinion, even when it contradicts the views of a Member of the NSW State Parliament. Additionally, I was unaware it was not possible to be a member of any political party, other than Liberal or National, and still be treated as a citizen of this State.
Whilst your attempts to discredit me in some obscure way by naming me in the context of an ICAC investigation are unworthy of any Parliamentarian, your description of me as a 'known operative' of an opposition party is positively hilarious. However, you do thousands of loyal public servants a disservice. The vast majority of public servants serve the Government of the day, Liberal or Labor (as did I), with loyalty and diligence.
It has not been uncommon for high calibre policy advisors to be drawn from the Public Service for their knowledge and experience, providing the Government of the day with the best possible advice. Public servants are non-political. Do not make the mistake of judging them by your own manifestly inadequate standards.
In the interests of accuracy, I have listened to a recording of the program you cite and can confirm I said, in response to a question from a journalist: "If it’s knocked down? I think it clears the way for a four lane highway right through the oldest public square in Australia”. However, you quote me as saying "the destruction of the hotel will almost certainly pave the way for a four lane highway to be built right through the middle of Australia's oldest town Square". Were you not to have included quotation marks as a direct quote, attributed to the Channel 7 broadcast, I would not raise the issue.
It is disappointing you refuse to meet with CAWB. The request for a meeting was made in good faith and the ridiculous contortions you have gone through to score points against a request from such an authoritative, well-known and respected group are astonishing. Of particular concern to voters will be your insistence there is no direct correlation between the bridge replacement and your vision, as a Member of Parliament, for Windsor by 2020. It is evident the proposed two lane bridge is already inadequate; a solution experts have repeatedly warned the Government will destroy Thompson Square. There must therefore be, in your mind, other matters that mitigate the looming disaster. Your advice was simply being sought on these matters.
As a matter of courtesy, please be advised I will shortly be seeking a meeting with you to discuss how you intend to assist to save the Jolly Frog in Windsor, a heritage building recently damaged by fire. Any reference to politics (should you again decline to meet with me) might lead a reasonable person to conclude you are once more discriminating against me on the (incorrect) basis of some wrongly assumed political affiliation.
In conclusion, as soon as the NSW Government passes watertight legislation that permanently and irrevocably guarantees there will NEVER be four lanes of roadway across McGrath’s Flats; across South Creek at today’s Fitzroy Bridge; from the Fitzroy Bridge to George Street; through Thompson Square and/or across the Hawkesbury River at Thompson Square, I would be delighted to issue a humble apology and full public retraction of a personal belief, as stated on Channel 7.
I, on the other hand, am entitled to an apology right now, Mr. Bassett. I await it with some interest. The Chair of Community Action for Windsor Bridge has writing separately to the Premier on this matter.
Yours sincerely
Kate Mackaness
Thank you for providing such a detailed explanation of your refusal to meet with CAWB, a community organisation fighting to save Windsor’s Macquarie Era town square. As you are aware, CAWB has been calling for a sensible long-term solution to the Hawkesbury's traffic issues with the construction of a bypass.
The time you have taken to outline your concerns is appreciated.
I am responding because you name me on three separate occasions in that correspondence as the focus of those concerns.
I am, I must say, perplexed. You appear to have only recently recalled we met when I represented the then Minister for Planning and Heritage at a meeting with you at Parliament House in 2010. Your group had unfortunately travelled into the CBD on the wrong day. As you would appreciate, it was not possible to squeeze in an additional meeting during Parliament, so you and your delegation spoke with me instead of the Minister.
Having realised a member of CAWB was someone you had met as a policy advisor to a former Minister I am further puzzled by your reaction. There seems to be a degree of hostility in your correspondence, based on the incorrect assumption I am a member of the Australian Labor Party. As it happens I am not a member of any political party. What's more, it is entirely irrelevant whether I belong to a party or not and I find your rhetoric extremely offensive. It was also, last I checked, not an offence to publicly express an opinion, even when it contradicts the views of a Member of the NSW State Parliament. Additionally, I was unaware it was not possible to be a member of any political party, other than Liberal or National, and still be treated as a citizen of this State.
Whilst your attempts to discredit me in some obscure way by naming me in the context of an ICAC investigation are unworthy of any Parliamentarian, your description of me as a 'known operative' of an opposition party is positively hilarious. However, you do thousands of loyal public servants a disservice. The vast majority of public servants serve the Government of the day, Liberal or Labor (as did I), with loyalty and diligence.
It has not been uncommon for high calibre policy advisors to be drawn from the Public Service for their knowledge and experience, providing the Government of the day with the best possible advice. Public servants are non-political. Do not make the mistake of judging them by your own manifestly inadequate standards.
In the interests of accuracy, I have listened to a recording of the program you cite and can confirm I said, in response to a question from a journalist: "If it’s knocked down? I think it clears the way for a four lane highway right through the oldest public square in Australia”. However, you quote me as saying "the destruction of the hotel will almost certainly pave the way for a four lane highway to be built right through the middle of Australia's oldest town Square". Were you not to have included quotation marks as a direct quote, attributed to the Channel 7 broadcast, I would not raise the issue.
It is disappointing you refuse to meet with CAWB. The request for a meeting was made in good faith and the ridiculous contortions you have gone through to score points against a request from such an authoritative, well-known and respected group are astonishing. Of particular concern to voters will be your insistence there is no direct correlation between the bridge replacement and your vision, as a Member of Parliament, for Windsor by 2020. It is evident the proposed two lane bridge is already inadequate; a solution experts have repeatedly warned the Government will destroy Thompson Square. There must therefore be, in your mind, other matters that mitigate the looming disaster. Your advice was simply being sought on these matters.
As a matter of courtesy, please be advised I will shortly be seeking a meeting with you to discuss how you intend to assist to save the Jolly Frog in Windsor, a heritage building recently damaged by fire. Any reference to politics (should you again decline to meet with me) might lead a reasonable person to conclude you are once more discriminating against me on the (incorrect) basis of some wrongly assumed political affiliation.
In conclusion, as soon as the NSW Government passes watertight legislation that permanently and irrevocably guarantees there will NEVER be four lanes of roadway across McGrath’s Flats; across South Creek at today’s Fitzroy Bridge; from the Fitzroy Bridge to George Street; through Thompson Square and/or across the Hawkesbury River at Thompson Square, I would be delighted to issue a humble apology and full public retraction of a personal belief, as stated on Channel 7.
I, on the other hand, am entitled to an apology right now, Mr. Bassett. I await it with some interest. The Chair of Community Action for Windsor Bridge has writing separately to the Premier on this matter.
Yours sincerely
Kate Mackaness
