Your views: on user-pays park lands events
Today, readers comment on city council charges for festival fixtures on park lands.
Commenting on the story: ‘Seismic shift’: Fringe venue considers entry fee after council’s park lands charge
The Fringe is a great event. But its takeover of large stretches of the east park lands for several months (lengthy setting-up and clearing away plus actual Fringe dates) has become excessive. Too much park land fenced off for far too long.
If the City Council’s re-imposition of charges does something to curb this, then (as a city resident) I’m all for it. – Roger Knight
Mr Michael doesn’t quite get it. Fencing off huge areas of the park lands for about three months (setting up /month-long event/closing down) means that these park lands are totally inaccessible for this period to those people who love them and use them regularly.
This does indeed mean, Mr Michael, that the park lands are alienated from them.
Event organisers should understand that using the park lands for business purposes is a privilege, not a right. The purpose of the park lands was not, and is not, to provide a venue for money-making activities. Yes, if you fence off a park, you should pay for it. – Barbara Fergusson
Every year the audiences grow, every year the number of events increases and every year the gate receipts increase, so I fail to see how a modest gate entry fee is going to deter anybody.
Why should the City council not get a proper contribution to their expenses? Every year we hear what a ‘success’ the Fringe has been, so no problem all round. – Peter Manwaring
The ACC is correct in asking for both a fee to reinstate the grass/park lands grounds and in applying a fee for what is commercial use.
Given the attraction of the Fringe and related events, would a one dollar/gold coin entry fee really be that much of an imposition on consumers. How many attended events in 2023 multiplied by a $1 entry fee? – Michael O’Neil
As a regular at Fringe and therefore Gluttony and the Garden, it’s common to hear food and drink vendors refer to huge costs they must pay set up and operate in these venue areas – usually in defence of the often high cost of food and drink.
Stay informed, daily
If those charging claims are true, is Council double-dipping – charging the organisers and the individual occupants? Are Garden and Gluttony organisers recouping at least some of their costs already? – Tony Dawkins
Commenting on the story: University of Adelaide ranked in world’s top 100
If you average Adelaide and UniSA’s QS ranking scores, a new “Adelaide University” would initially rank at around 207 internationally (along with Otago in NZ, Aberdeen in Scotland and Queens in Canada) and in Australia at about 14 (lower than Deakin and equal with Macquarie and Curtin).
That is a significant drop from Adelaide’s latest international ranking at 89, i.e. in the top 100. – Geoff Sauer
Want to see more stories from InDaily SA in your Google search results?
- Click here to set InDaily SA as a preferred source.
- Tick the box next to "InDaily SA". That's it.
