The Moruya Bypass Action Group : a response

The Beagle Editor, Sir, I read with some interest the article in the last Beagle Weekender (Vol 210) containing a statement by the "Moruya Bypass Action Group". I am concerned that the Action Group are presenting in my opinion a very one sided case and to provide balance I would like to share my views. I must say that to a great extent I disagree with the views put forward in their statement namely: 1. The Action Group state that prior consultation on the choice of a preferred corridor was not adequate. On the contrary, I felt that the prior consultation was adequate. It obviously had to be held on line due to the then existing Covid Restrictions. As a person in their mid seventies I had no trouble with being kept informed and registering my views via the online process. It is fair to say that the black summer fires were personally hard going, particularly as that for the most of the emergency I was on my own on our rural property, as my wife had evacuated the Grandchildren back to their parents just prior to New Years Eve and was subsequently unable to return due to the road closures. However, I certainly was not that traumatised two to three months later as to not be aware of what else was going on in the shire. As for Covid, lets face our lock down in Moruya was pretty painless with the biggest drama being that my glasses kept steaming up when I wore a mask in Woolies. To me, this sounds like a case of "after the horse has bolted". 2. The Action Group indicate that there was only one weeks notice regarding the current consultation process. Here again I received adequate notice of the Community Meetings via the Internet, I think it was about three weeks in advance and I made a booking on line. No problems here. It was a shame though that our half hour meeting was monopolised by three or four highly vocal individuals who consistently aired similar views to those stated in the Action Group's statement. The end result being that the spokesperson from the department could hardly finish his presentation and that there was no time for rest of us to ask questions. 3. The Action Group suggest that the presentation of the choice of route by the department was interpreted by many in the community as "a done deal". I would like to point out that the current document is titled "PREFERRED Strategic Bypass Corridor and welcomes public consultation and comment. It also states that the next step is "Investigation and Refinement To Identify a Preferred Option". This to me is hardly "a done deal". 4. The Action Group states that the department is asking the community to accept their choice of route without analysis and justification of the reasons. My reading of the report (Section 5.6.1) is that a Value Management Workshop was held involving "Community Business Representatives and Technical Specialists". The workshop evaluated the alternatives and rated them giving reasons in section 5.6.2. The Action Group state that the reasons for the preferred Orange Route are not stated. It is suffice to say that the relevant paragraph of the report on page 78 begins "Option Orange was the best performing corridor in the goals of safety" and then goes onto list other reasons for it's being the preferred corridor. 5. The Action Groups states that Transparency is lacking in the reasons for the preferred choice of corridor. Here again my reading of the report does give justification for the choice of the preferred option. 6. The Action Group questions the benefit to the community of the preferred corridor. This is an early part of the process and the documentation from the department states that intersections, access ramps etc are yet to be decided. As for lane numbers, as it is I believe the current government's strategy for "four lanes on the Princes Highway from Bombaderry to the Victorian border, I think we can safely assume that it will be four lanes. Sure it will most likely feed back into a two lane highway when originally built. The members of the Action Group are of course welcome to their views as am I. I just feel we as the Moruya community should not move forward in this process with the mindset of "we were robbed". Paul Carter