Final resolution of the dreadful health risk of asbestos in ''Mr Fluffy'' homes is far more important. These business moguls obviously have wallets where their hearts should be.

And really these projects aren't much of a loss. We Canberrans don't need them as much as we need a new hospital and attention to public schools. As for the enormous numbers regularly quoted as flowing into Canberra from these projects, I'm sceptical. We are told in the article referred to that a new convention centre will bring ''hundreds of thousands'' of visitors to Canberra.

I've been here long enough to remember similar claims for the existing convention centre. Didn't happen. Then we were told that ''Asian high rollers'' would flock to Canberra if we opened a casino. Didn't happen. Now all we need to do is convince the Greens that their grim determination to spend a fortune on light rail is another white elephant and we can really begin to get our priorities straight.

Gordon Soames, Curtin

The announcement that the ACT government is to proceed with an expression of interest process for construction of a light rail link between Gungahlin and Civic will evoke cries from the usual voices opposed to any form of long-term investment in community infrastructure.

It is interesting that these voices are not raised when it comes to spending money on roads. Although the money required for building a complete ACT light rail network is a major investment for the community; so is the total cost of building a major road network. Add up the cost of ACT major road spending in the last 15 years and it makes light rail appear reasonably priced. The ACT is at a critical stage of development. A well-designed and efficient public transport network can deliver a better lifestyle, both in the short term and for the future. For an ACT light rail network to be sustainable, focus needs to be on integrating the light rail network into other transport modes. This includes linking the light rail network to the bus network; park-and-ride facilities; cycling and walking. It is also critical that planning and development maximise opportunities to assist ACT residents who are attracted to public transport to consider accommodation options knowing the location of a light rail stop and the walking time required to reach it.

There will never be a time when the ACT budget has money to spare for major infrastructure and there will always be people who identify how money can be better spent on police, schools, hospitals and better roads. We could put every cent in the budget into immediate worthwhile spending; but that will not help provide future generations with a better quality of living. Investment in light rail is a long-term project. Over the next 15 years we should expect to see light rail linking all areas of the ACT including Gungahlin, Woden, Belconnen, Tuggeranong, Molonglo and Fyshwick.

Ian Ruecroft, Gungahlin

I am very disappointed to hear that Joy Burch intends to deny public and private schools in ACT the opportunity to access funding for the Schools Chaplaincy Program, which has been operating successfully for a number of years in 20 ACT schools.

I know that the Commonwealth has asked the states and territories to administer the schools chaplaincy program and that it will continue to fund this activity, as the Prime Minister and government believe in the importance of the program and its continued value to schools and individual students. Most states have agreed to co-operate in the administration of this funding, with the exception of ACT and SA.

Given that 20 schools in ACT want the school chaplaincy program to continue, what gives Joy Burch the right, as our elected representative, to deny funding? If she is convinced that secular social workers can do a better job, where is the proof, and why is this a reason for withholding all funding for the service?

I hope that reason prevails, and that a compromise can be reached in which the schools chaplaincy program can continue. It may also be possible to develop a secular social worker service in schools, as a separate issue.

Richard Lord, Ngunnawal

I support Colin Groves (Letters, September 15). Religious belief is not science. It is philosophy. It is a search for truth and understanding of ''what life is all about''. Over many centuries conclusions have been reached. They have become beliefs. But they are not indisputable and are always subject to change. For me, the belief that God is the creator is a defensible belief. I believe it is true.

However, it is certain that God's method of creation was not magic, as claimed by primitive truth seekers. It was by evolution and I believe emanated in God Himself. For any truth seeker, truth is truth regardless of its source. It is senseless to believe anything which is opposed to the demonstrated truths of science. But neither should we restrict our thinking to the limited scope of science.

My own search and experience has led me to believe that we are spiritual beings drawn to God. Response may be negligible or complete. If it is complete the joy is indescribable. To my amazement, it has happened to me. I can't shut up about it. I can assure scientists that philosophy is also ''the process of discovering the nature of things''.

John Miller, Farrer

Colin Groves (Letters, September 15) says that it's sad and unfair that some parents who home-school their children are teaching them creationism. It's more than that; it's tantamount to child abuse.

The power of indoctrination on young minds was never better described than by Ignatius Loyola, the founder of the Jesuit order, who's reported to have said ''give me the child till he's (sic) seven and I'll give you the man''. What consenting adults do in the privacy of their own minds is no-one's business but their own, but Australian children should be protected from religious indoctrination as carefully as they're protected, albeit imperfectly, from other forms of abuse.

Fred Pilcher, Kaleen

Once again the Canberra Times letters pages (September 15) are entirely hostage to sickening moral relativism, and left-wing group-think masquerading as progressive thought. Once again a complete sheaf of editorial hate mail for PM Tony Abbott, for no other reason than he is neither a Green nor Labor.

Dear Canberrans, there is a world out there where children are being beheaded in the street, adults are being beheaded on screen, hundreds are being machinegunned to death in pits. This is all underpinned by an ideology that is underpinned by a religion. There is no moral relativism to be had.

The West has given us in the last one hundred years alone: open heart surgery, cochlear implants, cervical cancer vaccine, jazz, the blues, Picasso, Frank Lloyd Wright, a halving of poverty, the internet, a walk on the moon and I could continue for reams. What is happening in the Middle East is antithetical to all of this and then some.

The Western world is morally right, ethically right, to the deepest core of our souls right, to pursue and destroy these slavering savages.

The only thing that frightens me more than Islamic State is the Greens and their media cohorts who have the spines of jellyfish and the moral rectitude of a souffle. Why should we equate the achievements of the Western world with the savagery of recent events. Why would we sink to their level and call them brother; why attempt to educate the uneducable?

I for one prefer Bach to the Middle Ages, Breugel to mass executions, Philip Larkin to the subjugation of women, Cristina Gallardo-Domas to head lopping, Camus to the Koran.

Z. Kovacs, Kambah

Senator George Brandis has described the beheading of Western journalists by Islamic State as ''barbaric'' and ''evil''.

''Barbaric'' is a term which I take to involve claiming a higher civilisational and moral status for countries like Australia and the US as opposed to IS. Given the involvement by Western nations in the firebombing of Dresden and Hamburg and the dropping of atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to mention just a few random, relatively recent examples, it is likely, to say the least, to be a claim that could be vigorously contested. If, on the other hand, his description of the executions as ''evil'' is intended to state a moral claim about the value of human life and implies opposition to the death penalty whether it be executed by state, or quasi-state authorities, then I think we are in agreement about the essentials. If that really is the case, I look forward to his denouncing of the ''barbarism'' and ''evil'' actions of the Saudi Arabian government in beheading eight people during last month for non-lethal crimes in equally clear and unequivocal terms.

Doug Hynd, Stirling

David Purnell (Letters, September 15) says diplomacy should have priority over military action in the Middle East. In that part of the world it's a simple matter of ''might is right'', and the mightier the better. If the government just sat back and did nothing it would be condoning what is happening - and be disrespectful to the two US journalists and the British aid worker murdered for no other reason than that they were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Mario Stivala, Spence

Hugh White's article ''Where does the trouble lie?'' (Times2, September 15, p1) has once again provided us with some cogent reasons why some Defence projects are troubled. Professor White has acknowledged that ''…. some of them relate to the way projects are managed….'' but concentrates on the conception and choice issues. White cites the Air Warfare Destroyer would not have run off the rails if decisions made prior to award of the contract about off-the-shelf, local or overseas build, etc had been more carefully considered. Equal weight should be given for the perceived failure of this program to the selection of the participants. ASC (and Raytheon) were awarded the contract, despite the fact that neither company had ever built a ship in this country.

Similarly, the Spanish design of the AWD was in existence (the Spanish had the ship in service with their navy), therefore ameliorating the design risk, but the Commonwealth did not have a direct contracting relationship with the Spanish designer.

Furthermore, this program was delayed by six years in the Defence White Paper of 2000, creating a gap in the Australian surface shipbuilding program that was delivering

ANZAC ships on schedule, to cost and required capability.

Perhaps if the AWD project had been assigned to an Australian shipyard that had actually built ships successfully, the designer had been engaged, and the gap in programs eliminated there would not be as many issues.

J.W. Gledhill, Hughes

I read with interest Hugh White's assessment of the causes of Defence's problems with successfully planning and actioning major capability purchases. The lack of a concise and focused document setting out exactly what is expected of Defence in any given strategic environment is a major failure both for the Department and the ADF.

However, I do not believe that a white paper (dare I say, another white paper) is the correct document to provide this guidance. It has long been a concern that Defence lacks an overarching strategic policy document drawing together the various planning and policy documents produced by its various areas of expertise, including procurement and operational planning.

Such a document would provide the planners and policymakers with a solid base on which to develop their planning for future manpower, capability and operational requirements. This kind of document needs to have a permanency which a white paper cannot provide.

By its very nature it has no specific longevity and tends to reflect the Defence views and ambitions of the government of the day, often resulting in a document which bears little or no resemblance to its forebears.

Penny Bowen, Chisholm

I am pleased to read that the Australian Government is contributing $1 million to the World Health Organisation to help control the outbreak of Ebola in West Africa and prevent further spread of the disease. The government should consider increasing its financial support and send teams of health professionals to the West African region.

I understand there is also need for protective gear and viral sanitisers. There is also another measure that the Australian Government can put in place. When natural disasters occur or war breaks out in many countries the Australian Government puts in place a visa related response. The outbreak has resulted in an epidemic of fear among the people of West Africa and also among the few visitors and students from West Africa currently in Australia whose visas expire soon. I am therefore asking the government to urgently consider a visa related response to the outbreak.

Ebenezer Banful, Curtin

Michael McCarthy ( Letters, September 12) asks me what I think of ''Conregal'' as a means of ''adjectivising'' Stephen Conroy. Regretfully, as an old journo I'm only capable of asking questions, not answering them. That's another reason why I nominated his erudite self as the top man for ''Team Pedantry''. Mind you, I might venture to suggest that Michael's idea of ''Conregal'' portending a link between Senator Conroy and royalty, even grammatically, would surely propel the most ardent monarchists into the republican camp.

Eric Hunter, Cook

FIX FOR MR FLUFFY

It seems to me that any trade-off in the territory budget to pay for the government liabilities to fix the recurrent Mr Fluffy issue might better be made by deferring the hugely expensive and extravagant light-rail program - for a few decades or more. Not that I think much of the planned new city stadium - which I note does not seem to have allowed for (any) parking.

R.C. Warn, Weston

HEAVY BURDEN

ACT ratepayers will be shackled with a billion-dollar debt for years to come, and, worse still, it appears ACT Labor doesn't have the guts to wait until after the next ACT election to sign off on contracts. By the way, just what percentage of ACT votes did Rattenbury win in the last election?

Peter Toscan, Amaroo

Gungahlin doesn't need light rail. It needs employment opportunities for the people who live in the district. Whether through poor design or neglect, it has no major public service departments within the town centre to provide employment.

Vernon Topp, Kaleen

PROTECTION AT HOME

If the threat of terrorism within Australia has escalated to high, why are our crack troops being deployed overseas? Shouldn't they be here, protecting us?

Susan M. Marshall, Chifley

COSTLY ADVENTURE

How can Australia afford this new military adventure, on far-away soil, at someone else's beckoning? From which already-strapped, Australian-community pockets will the millions or billions come? And how will this give us a stable environment?

Judy Bamberger, O'Connor

NO REPRESENTATION

Regarding our Prime Minister's non-attendance at the World Leaders' Forum on climate change next week, the fossil-fuel industry captains tell him, ''Jump!'', and he responds, ''How high?'' On this issue he is a disgrace, and by his representation of Australia, so are we.

Julian Reid, Dickson

WEIGHING THE COST

Adam Smith and Napoleon Bonaparte both dubbed the United Kingdom a nation of shopkeepers. But, as Neal Ascherson and others make clear, there's much more than pounds and pence at stake in the Scottish independence referendum.

David Teather, Reid

If the saltires come off the Union Jack on our flag, then I guess there'll be mixed emotions down at the Burns Club.

Jack Kershaw, Kambah

Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attached file. Fax: 6280 2282. Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.

Keep your letter to 250 words or less. References to Canberra Times reports should include date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).