It is just plain wrong for so many reasons. Rest assured John Emery, the parishioner who bequeathed 1000 pounds from his will in 1906 so that the statue could be constructed and then erected in its current position, would be turning in his grave at the disrespect with which it is currently being treated.  

As would, no doubt, the parishioners of St Paul’s who turned out "en masse" in 1906 to witness the unveiling of the statue.    

To now adorn it in various cheap costumes, each of an increasingly ridiculous nature, is to insult the wishes of its deceased patron. I would have expected better of the current church hierarchy. 

But it also insults the memory of the man himself. Statues have always been erected throughout history to honour the memory of the subject (or subjects) whose likeness has been cast in bronze or carved in stone.  

Normally, if an iconic statue such as this one (or any of its ilk in the Rosiland Park precinct) were mindlessly vandalised, there would be an understandable uproar.    

Perhaps the Very Reverend John Roundhill believes that in these times of "Invasion Day" and the demonising of Cook, that this is a "hip" way of communicating with the younger, less religious and politically correct demographic; if so, he is very mistaken.   

The mistreatment of this historic statue by the very church in whose care it has been entrusted, is simply appalling.    

I urge the Reverend to consider the wishes of those good people long gone, and desist in this pointless, childish behaviour.   

And whilst the "refugee cause" may be a noble one, perhaps the church should concentrate on more home-grown issues, such as the continuing downwards spiral of our Australian society in its journey towards complete moral decay.

Campaspe Shire outlines a preferred plan of delivering aquatic services through four main pools at the expense of four smaller ones (Colbinabbin, Lockington, Tongala and Stanhope). The impact on these communities would be huge should they be left with no pool.

It is suggested the yearly running cost of these pools is not an issue. The prompt for such a decision is concern that the average age of pools is 50 years and in time will need renovating.

Under this proposed plan, $305,800 would be spent to demolish four pools. What a waste. These four pools are not yet at the end of their lifespan. Some, like Colbinabbin, are only 38 years old and in good condition.

If these pools were at the end of their lifespan or needed major works, one could understand council having this conversation.  

Why are these communities being asked to consider such a scenario when their assets are still functional? Some pools were last inspected six years ago. Why base a decision to demolish pools on old data when upgrades may have occurred in that time?

The provision of safe swimming places and opportunities for children learning to swim are seem a paramount for this council.  

Campaspe Shire is concerned about their asset renewal gap and closing pools is seen as the answer to this problem. Some services like pools should not be about cost recovery and income generation.

Pools should be viewed as essential assets in a community. They provide safe swimming places for children and cater for the mental, physical and social wellbeing of residents.

They are integral in drawing and retaining people to rural communities. Pools are the fabric of many rural communities and must be retained at all costs.