<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><div><span>I completely disagree that population alone should be used to classify a location (unless the populations are seriously reduced). Going by the suggested population<font size="2"><font face="Arial">s, places like Tenterfield<font size="2">, Glen Innes, Charlevill<font size="2">e will become villages a<font size="2">nd Norseman, Laverton and Lockhart hamlets.</font></font></font></font></font></span></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><br><span></span></div><div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial; background-color: transparent; font-style: normal;"><span><font size="2"><font face="Arial"><font size="2"><font size="2"><font size="2"><font size="2">The population metho<font size="2">d may wel<font size="2">l
work in most of Europe <font size="2">as a '<font size="2">village' of <font size="2">2,000 people will <font size="2"><font size="2">rarely</font> be further than 50km from a town and there<font size="2">fore won't need facilities beyond a basic fuel station and general store.<font size="2"> <font size="2">Rural Australia is a different game.</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font><br></font></font></font></span></div></div></body></html>