But he failed to mention Justin Trudeau. With inclusive beliefs and policies, progressive views on the environment, climate change, gender issues and a humane approach to refugees, his campaign displayed inspiring positive leadership, and unexpectedly, from a very low base, the Canadian voters swept him into power.

So perhaps the reasons we, the Australian public, are voting against our current leaders is because they simply aren't leadership material, are too controlled by media managers and spin doctors, outdated ideology and vested interests.

I don't think Julia Gillard was ready for leadership when she seized the role from the flawed Rudd. The savage media made it nigh impossible for her to grow into the position.

Then Tony Abbott became PM and his lack of any leadership qualities and far-right ideology, resulted in disastrous polling forcing the Liberals to remove him and replace him with Malcolm Turnbull.

We thought Mr Turnbull had similar qualities to Mr Trudeau but now we realise he is just a better-packaged Abbott, with the same policies and ideology. The same budget strategies destined to increase inequality; the continuation of attacks of Medicare, state schools and university education, policies that have made Australia a fair country, and the same inadequate response to climate change and the environment.

His silence on the sacking of CSIRO scientists is deafening, whilst the rest of the scientific world protests at this disgraceful policy. The further slashing of funding to the ABC and the arts community is a bitter blow when we thought he was a man of culture, and the fear-mongering on refugees in a desperate attempt to secure votes. No wonder we are disenchanted with our so-called leaders and want to vote them out.

Lucille Rogers, Kingston

Thank you for taking up the disgraceful issue of the federal Environment Department insisting on removing every reference to Australia in the UN report on how UNESCO World Heritage sites are threatened by climate change ("Another own goal on Great Barrier Reef", Editorial, Times2, May 31, p2).

It was particularly heinous in light of the latest study that showed 35 per cent of 84 reefs suffered bleaching through the summer. You talk of the Coalition's "silence and complacency about global warming".

It's worse than that, if Trade Minister Steven Ciobo's performance on Monday's Q&A on the ABC is anything to go by. He started with support for the massive Adani Carmichael mine in central Queensland and went on to justify coal mining and exports, saying if we don't others will, utterly ignoring Australia's commitment to the Paris Agreement to keep global warming to 1.5 to 2 degrees celsius. The problem with the Reef, however, is that if we are to save it we have to do far more than block the Adani mine from going ahead.

Even keeping warming to within the Paris targets of 1.5 to 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels is not good enough. We have just passed 400ppm of atmospheric CO2, yet scientists like Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg say 320ppm is the upper limit for avoiding coral reef bleaching. How do we get back to 320ppm?

Philip Sutton of Climate Code Red says we must shut down all current uses of coal, oil and gas and any other technologies that result in net greenhouse gas emissions. We must also draw down all the excess CO2in the air, for instance, with extensive reforestation programs.

This is a massive task and will mean fundamentally changing the way the economy works. But if we don't: it's goodbye Great Barrier Reef.

Jenny Goldie, Michelago, NSW

What Phillip Pellatt (Letters, May 31) hasn't mentioned is that his defined benefit superannuation scheme is also unfunded. His lifelong, guaranteed, indexed pension is paid for from the public purse. The unfunded cost of his pension used to be around 20 per cent of his salary, a tad higher than the superannuation guarantee provided to most non-public servants.

On top of that, all his own contributions came back to him at retirement, as a lump sum, unless he used them to purchase additional pension.

Most Australians would give their eye teeth for such a pension.

Fred Barnes, Bruce

I imagine that some readers of Colin Rubenstein's article "There is more to do in Iran" (Times2, May 30, p4) would accept it as a knowledgeable and well-written summary of how and why we should distrust Iran, and regard the historic uranium centrifuge dismantling deal as something essentially chimerical.

It must, however, be noted that working to publicly and politically undermine Iran's return to normal international rights and obligations has been on the agenda of the Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council for years.

There are reasons both valid – and, regrettably, some of them venal – for the stance of this professional lobbying outfit; but an exposition of them is well beyond the scope of a short letter.

Suffice to say that it is rich indeed to hold Iran to account for potentially instigating nuclear proliferation in the Middle East when Iran has no nuclear weapons whatsoever (and is under relentless international scrutiny in that regard), while Israel is already armed to the teeth with them!

The audacity of these ear-benders would be funny if it weren't so unhelpful in the matter of bring a troubled region into some kind of balance.

Ross Kelly, Monash

Thank you P. Johnston (Letters, May 31). Je reste mon valise.

John Rodriguez, Florey

Can someone please explain to me why federal politicians should be compensated for their travel from their accommodation in Canberra to Parliament House ("Federal MPs get expenses to turn up", May 31, p1)? Ordinary workers are not even allowed to claim their travel as a tax deduction. The excuse given that these entitlements are determined by an independent tribunal is no reason to accept or claim them. Congratulations to the two ACT Labor Party members who do not claim their entitlement and brick-bats to the two ACT members, one Liberal and one Labor, who do.

One advantage with the new Senate voting system is that, assuming there are more than 12 candidates in the ballot, I don't have to put a number beside a candidate I don't like. This entitlement issue has made it a little easier for me to decide who will not get my Senate vote.

Norm Johnston, Monash

Your editorial "Bulk-billing rate deters doctor visits" (Times2, May 30, p2) notes that in western Sydney, where 96 per cent of patients are bulk-billed, patients visit their GP 7.6 times a year. By contrast, in Canberra, where 57.1per cent of patients are bulk-billed, patients see their GP only 4.5 times per year.

You conclude that patients visit their GP less in Canberra because of the lower level of bulk-billing. That is the wrong conclusion. The number of visits in western Sydney is higher because bulk-billing does not provide GPs with an adequate income unless they see a high number of patients each hour (in some case up to eight or nine) and keep consultations short.

The consequence is that patients are, for example, only allowed to raise one matter in a consultation and must make a return visit for any additional problem. Bulk-billing clinics also usually require patients to make an appointment to get the results of pathology and radiology tests. And so on.

Your editorial also sings the praises of the National Health Co-op because it bulk-bills all its patients at the cost of a $100 annual membership fee. Given that, in the area where National Health Co-op operates, patients on average visit GPs 4.7 times per year this means that they pay a surcharge of $20 per visit – which is only slightly less than a privately billed fee.

Paul Hartigan, Ainslie

On May 11, 2015 I made a claim on Medicare via the My Gov system. The claim was for a GP visit and after I ticked the box to indicate that the account had been paid the system told me that the benefit was $37.05 and that the claim would be paid into my bank account. This showed up on my bank statement two days later on May 13. It was a very efficient and quick process.

On May 12, 2016 I made a similar claim but this time I was asked for proof that the account had been paid. I scanned the tax invoice which clearly stated "payment received" and with some difficulty I worked out how to incorporate that into the claim. This was rejected because I did not include the credit card receipt. I did it all again and this time it seemed to accept the claim but it did not tell me how much the benefit would be.

On May 23, I received a letter of two pages from Medicare, dated May 17, telling me that the amount of $37.05 would be paid into my bank account within five working days. On checking I found that the payment was actually made on May 16.

This brilliant change to the system took two days longer for payment to the bank account and 11 days longer for advice of the amount of the benefit to reach me. The new process also involved Medicare staff in processing two sheets of paper, an envelope and postage.

This looks like an excellent example of innovation and job creation about which Malcolm Turnbull is boring us to death.

Gordon Shannon, O'Malley

Kirk Coningham from the Master Builders' Association is suggesting suing UnionsACT over some statistical reporting in their radio campaign ("MBA threat of legal action over UnionsACT radio ad campaign", May 30, p3). Somehow, Mr Coningham seems to think that it is OK that 19 rather than 43 serious workers compensation claims are made each month by construction industry workers!

Whether the figure be 43 or 19 claims, both figures are far too high; and I have seen no efforts by the MBA to work with the construction unions to help to lower this appalling statistic. Mr Coningham, if you are not part of the solution, everything tells me you are a big part of the problem!

Jane Timbrell, Reid

Robert Willson (Letters, May 30) misunderstands the contemporary relationship between the state and religion. Religions and their traditions actually are matters of "purely private opinions". Such opinions may, of course, be held freely – if irrationally.

Thomas Becket was misguided (if harshly dealt with), as is Mr Willson, to hold that religion should not be subject to proper secular authority. Twelfth-century superstition makes Becket's view understandable. But all religion must be subordinated to properly enacted contemporary law. Christians seeking wider community exemption for the private peculiarities, practices and prejudices of their own faith are no more entitled to it than are, for example, proponents of Islamic law, forced marriage or genital mutilation, for their views.

Mike Hutchinson, Reid

Simon Corbell's claim (Letters, June 1) that 'The Capital Metro project has been one of the most transparent projects in the ACT's history' suggests that he has a sense of humour. Announced without any reasons being given, in the middle of the last election campaign, undertaken without any formal process of public consultation and forced through by the use of the call in powers to avoid public examination would suggest anything but. Jim Hacker, friend of Sir Humphrey Appleby, would be the only other minister I have known who would make such a statement and think people would believe him.

Stan Marks, Hawker

Simon Corbell's defence of "Capital Metro" misses the point entirely, ie, that it is an inordinately expensive project which many believe delivers too little to too few for too much. In regard to his $939 million claim, I (presumptuously) invoke the words uttered by the late great political journalist Peter Bowers to PM Malcolm Fraser: "You wouldn't want to bet on it would you?"

As a moderately rational leftie voter I'd simply add, 'bring on the poll".

Jon Stirzaker, Latham

Jane Timbrell (Letters, May 30) bemoans the loss of the Australian car manufacturing industry blaming the Coalition and in particular former treasurer Joe Hockey. Not so. The decision to close the local industry was inevitable; its viability was never better than marginal at its heyday. It survived on high tariffs and quotas giving it some 80 per cent protection at one time. Instead of improving the product it demanded more protection; the last hurrah of protectionism was the luxury car tax which started just over the price level for the Holden Statesman and Ford LTD.

Protection was first reduced when senator John Button was the industry minister in the Hawke ALP government. The industry did not respond to the market and continued with its dinosaur products even though the warning signs were clear in 1967 when a former colleague bought a Datsun 1600 with carpet, heater, radio, disc brakes and good steering which were all extras or not available on the local product. Sales of "Australia's own" have been falling for decades as others were a far better product. No subsidy can beat that criteria.

The smarter component suppliers have been searching for and finding new markets.

Do not blame the government for the demise of the car industry; it brought it on itself.

Michael Lane, St Ives, NSW

Jane Timbrell needs to get her facts right before blaming Malcolm Turnbull for the plight of the car industry . It is a long time ago that GM management decided to close its Australian factories. Actually it was about the time that Bill Shorten was sharpening the knife for Julia to stab Kevin in the back, which I might add was quite a while before he gave the knife back to Kevin for a repeat process.

L. Scott, Monash

Surely we haven't sunk that low that we expect every politician to have an intimate knowledge of their ministerial colleague's portfolios? Or have we?

D.J. Fraser, Currumbin, Qld

TO THE POINT

The Canberra Times wants to hear from you in short bursts. Email views in 50 words or fewer to

letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au

TAX CUTS TO THE MAX

If the fifty-million-dollar tax cuts to business will stimulate "jobs and growth" and through greater productivity pay for themselves, why not make it a hundred or two hundred-million-dollar cut and give the economy a real boost?

Perhaps deep down those proposing the tax cuts know they really don't work.

Jeff Bradley, Isaacs

BRIBE AND PREJUDICE

I've just worked out the semantics – a donation to a trade union is called a "bribe". A bribe to a political party is called a "donation".

C. Whittaker, Torrens

ONE-WAY BUS TICKET

I just read that Labor asks public help to ship Bill Shorten's bus across Bass Strait to Tasmania. Oh yes! I'll donate, so long as Bill and his bus promise to stay there. Any way, Tasmanians need some comic relief after years of economic depression caused by successive Labor-Greens state coalitions.

Gerry Murphy, Braddon

FAIL FOR SAFE SCHOOLS

It's almost unbelievable that Bill Shorten has given his support and no doubt that of the ALP to the obnoxious Safe Schools program initiated by Marxist academic Roz Ward. The pretext this program combats bullying is hard to believe. Gender and sexuality education should not be part of a school curriculum. Such education lies firmly within the purview of parental responsibility.

N. Bailey, Nicholls

DRAWING THE LINE

Robert Willson (Letters, May 30) believes that, in the interest of freedom, religious organisations should be exempt from anti-discrimination laws. Does he think that they should be allowed to break other laws as well, for example, laws against terrorism? If not, where should the line be drawn?

Mike Dallwitz, Giralang

BRAKES ON RAIL DEBATE

Any chance of an interstate edition of The Canberra Times where the incessant whingeing about the pros and cons of the light rail will be banned.

David J. Richards, Moruya, NSW

UPDATE THE ESTIMATE

Simon Corbell (Letters, June 1) indicated, carefully, that the $939 million project NPV includes "the contribution the Territory will make to the project once services commence". Will he update his estimate for all of the contributions that the Territory and all its public enterprises (for example, Icon water) will make before the project commences?

Bruce Paine, Red Hill

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).