“Barrington Coast” has been put on the back-burner thanks to a rescission motion filed on Thursday morning, July 26 after extensive debate and discussion at the July 25 council meeting initially returned a positive outcome for the suggested branding.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Speaker against the recommendation, Nawal Kant Maharaj said the report the recommendation was based on had little substance.
“Were any Aboriginal groups or Taree businesses contacted? The report doesn’t say,” he said.
Also speaking against the recommendation, Jim Morwitch said developing a tourism brand was a challenging conundrum and the solution was “not quite right yet”.
Speaking for the recommendation, Gloucester resident, Suzanne Hedditch said she was in the tourism industry and had been in this destination planning process from the beginning.
“Barrington Coast is the most uniting option,” she said.
Resident, Ivor Thomas also spoke in support of the recommendation.
Councillor Troy Fowler moved the recommendation and Cr Claire Pontin seconded the motion. Cr Brad Christensen moved an amendment, suggesting the matter be deferred until the next ordinary meeting so that further community consultation could be undertaken.
Cr Christensen said while he was not necessarily in support of the name, he was in support of the direction of creating a brand. “This is about new visitors to the region; the ones who already come here will continue to do so,” he said.
The motion to amend the recommendation was seconded by Cr Peter Epov, who suggested the community should be “taken by the hand”. Speaking against the proposed amendment, Cr Len Roberts said council needed to make an executive decision and show leadership. “There is no advantage to deferring this matter,” he said.
Cr Jan McWilliams spoke in favour of the amendment, citing concern about the loss of identity of individual areas through the branding. The amendment was rejected, with Crs Roberts, Pontin, Fowler, David Keegan, Karen Hutchinson and mayor, David West voted against the amendment.
Speaking to the original motion to adopt the recommendation, Cr Fowler said the name fitted the area perfectly. “I didn’t like it originally, but it sums up our large region.”
Cr Pontin spoke in agreement, saying it was important to adopt a name that was a geographical anchor. “I wouldn’t agree with this if I wasn’t completely convinced.”
Cr Kathryn Bell moved an amendment, requesting further work-shopping of the name with extensive community consultation, and motion was seconded by Cr Epov. “To pretend this doesn’t matter to residents is folly,” Cr Bell said.
Speaking against the amendment, Cr Roberts said it was an issue for which targeted consultation was required. Cr Katheryn Smith spoke for the amendment, saying an additional workshop would be beneficial. “It’s just not quite there yet and a bit of extra time won’t hurt,” she said.
The amendment was lost, with Crs Roberts, Keegan, Pontin, Fowler, Hutchinson and mayor, David West voting against.