These were the very questions that I put to ACT Fire & Rescue in 2013, which provided the following response: "The Bronto Hydraulic Platform has a maximum working height of 44 metres and an ability to go seven metres below ground level (under a bridge for example).

The effective reach of the ACT Fire and Rescue's fire-fighting equipment is 10-11 storeys. Buildings higher than 25 metres must be fully protected by fire sprinklers; contain at least two fire-isolated and pressurised stairwells; each level and sections of the levels must be compartmented to prevent smoke and fire spread; and the buildings must be fitted with triple redundancy fire system booster pumps.

"These measures are intended to provide protection and safe exit paths for occupants and to allow fire-fighting operations to be conducted internally within the building from isolated sections of the building."

This response indicates a presumption that fires can be dealt with from inside the building and that the building's own fire protection systems would prevent fires from spreading. No information was provided about what happens if these systems fail, or the circumstances or feasibility of options such as helicopter-supported rescues for occupants on upper floors.

M. Saunders, Weetangera

I'm with M. Jenson (letters, June 15). Those speed humps are monstrosities and a vote-changing issue.

They have little or no impact on trucks, buses, motorcycles or large four-wheel-drives but really shake up those in the community who drive smaller cars even after slowing down.

Those responsible apparently could not care less about the increased wear and tear on brakes and shock absorbers.

But it goes further than just the impact on cars.

These humps are an impediment to house sales and could impact on the value of nearby properties.

More importantly, absolutely no thought has been given to the impact on the elderly.

Just collateral damage I suppose.

My wife has arthritis and the unavoidable jolt when traversing these humps, even when slowing down below the 20 km per hour suggested, can be painful.

The proliferation of these humps in our area means that it is now impossible to avoid them even on short trips.

We are surrounded.

And what is the justification? If speeding is the problem then the radar vans should fix that as well as raising revenue.

To my knowledge there have been no accidents where these humps are located.

Is it too much to hope the minister responsible is big enough to admit an error and order the removal of this form of torture?

L. G. Stroud, Fadden

Some inexplicable statements were made last week by Malcolm Snow, chairman of the National Capital Authority, to the hearing of the joint standing committee on the national capital and external territories.

Referring to Canberra's light rail Snow was quoted "it's all about trip times". "It's not like a Melbourne tram that wanders all over the place." ("NCA's light rail detour", June 16, p.12).

Perhaps Snow is confused by the number of trams you see in Melbourne, which has the largest tram network in the world, but the links are quite direct connections to the CBD. Tram speed is the issue for Melbourne where I suspect, consequently, the average trip length is only a few kilometres.

If Snow thinks trip time is the issue for the proposed Woden-Civic tram then he should consult the people who currently use the rapid bus services from Woden to Civic.

Most of them will have a mode change and a tram trip that takes twice the time of the current express bus.

It's not about trip time Malcolm, it's about journey time.

As the population density grows along the tram lines so tram speed will slow to that of Melbourne trams and no one will use the inter-town services.

This type of planning is wrong for Canberra.

John L. Smith, Farrer

What's all the complaining about? A new $30,000 per unit property development tax, 20per cent increase in rates on units, a 7 per cent increase in housing rates, increases in electricity and water charges.

Developers were salivating about the prospect of huge profits to be made resulting from the construction/sale of properties along the tram corridor along with home owners anticipating a lift on their own property values.

You voted them in and now it's time to pay the piper along with the rest of us.

And those struggling to get into the property market will now be further down the queue than ever before.

You ain't seen nothing yet. Can't wait for stage two.

Peter Toscan, Amaroo

No one seeks to say that courts cannot be criticised but to denigrate their role so as to lessen their standing in the community is dangerous.

They are the only institutions which stand between us and excesses of government power.

One only has to look overseas to see what can happen to citizens when political power is unchecked. Courts must be fearlessly independent and be seen to be so.

Respect for the rule of law must be maintained.

It is not about personal dignity of judges – it is about criticising judicial decisions responsibly in a way that does not bring courts into disrepute and thereby diminish their role in ensuring our freedoms remain.

Sue Schreiner, Red Hill

We are still arguing the merits of cyclists riding on the roads among vehicles ranging from semi-trailers to midget cars, and, who should pay for their accidents.

As a boy (almost 70 years ago) I rode on the highways etc, but there were nowhere near the amount of cars and the average speed was much lower.

Today I can't understand why a cyclist would want to ride on congested roads among vehicles travelling at high speed. Apparently, motorised vehicles cause the large majority of accidents with cyclists, so we are now asking them to pay for all accidents.

But hang on a bit, haven't we spent millions on cycle paths, and aren't we still doing so.

Errol Good (letters, June 17) says bike riders should pay a rego fee, CPI, Road Rescue Fee and a Road Safety contribution, and then they could join the motorists group and have the right to complain and abuse one another without fear or favour.

I go back to my childhood in WA in the 1950s. To ride a bike on the road one had to have it registered. The fee was two shillings. A number plate had to be fitted to the bike.

That 20¢ equates to about $25 today.

This might be an appropriate rego fee. Then cyclists might be more equal to motorists on the road, or they could use the cycle paths for free.

Dave Jeffrey, Farrer ACT

As well as completely ignoring the sensible points made by Soufiane Boufous ("Two wheels or four, the road belongs to all", June 16, p. 19), Errol Good (letters, June 17) trots out the tired old furphy that cyclists are leech-like parasites on the roads that hard-working motorists have had to pay for.

Spare me please.

The money collected through vehicle registration fees, fines, "Road Rescue Fees" and "Road Safety Contributions" falls well short of the amount spent on building and maintaining our roads — the last time I checked it was in the realm of $15 billion annually Australia-wide — and ignores the hidden costs of all that fuel being burnt and all those people avoiding exercise.

Not to mention the facts that most cyclists also own registered vehicles so have made exactly the same contribution as Mr Good, that by riding their bikes on any particular day they've removed their cars from the traffic he's mired in as they ride past, that bikes make a negligible contribution to the physical deterioration of roads, and that a healthier, more active workforce imparts benefits to the government's bottom line in numerous other ways.

Apart from doing his utmost to avoid running one over, the next time Mr Good sees a cyclist riding past he should wind his window down and thank them for all the ways in which they're making his life better, and perhaps do a little research before revealing his prejudices so publicly.

James Allan, Narrabundah

Re Errol Good ("Pay up cyclists", letters, June 17).

Most cyclists also own a motor vehicle, and pay rego.

Most cyclists pay tax.

Many cyclists own property, and pay rates.

Anyone who chooses to leave the car at home and ride, to work or wherever, is doing a favour, to the earth, to themselves, and to other motorists.

Every cyclist taking a journey that might otherwise be taken by car means one less car in the traffic queue, one less car competing for parking space.

Canberra's cycle path network is something that we all should take pride in, and may well claim to be the best in the world.

I'm not aware of any cycling organisation clamouring for "yet more", as Mr Good suggests.

And let's not forget that our cycle paths are also well used by pedestrians.

Let's hear no more nonsense about cyclists being second-class citizens, nuisances, pests and parasites upon a car-dependent society.

More people riding and less people driving can only make the world a better place.

Trevor Lewis, Fisher

I fully agree with Errol Good, (letters, June 17) when he states there are both bad drivers and bad bike riders using our roads, putting their own and other road users' safety at risk.

But Errol, do you think that all the bike riders out there just ride their bikes when using the roads?

No, they don't.

Like me many are also owners of motor vehicles paying rego, fuel excise, insurance etc therefore well and truly "earning their right", as you put it, to have a say on road use.

It is the attitude you express in your letter, that it is only those that exclusively drive who have paid for the privilege to enter this debate, that contributes to the sense of ownership (of the road) and aggressive driving habits of some, that puts vulnerable road users like cyclists at risk.

Simon Spinetti, Kaleen

Walkers, cyclists, and drivers are individuals — some are more careful than others, some less so.

Overall, I consider myself a law-abiding, courteous, safe walker, cyclist, and driver; yet being human and making mistakes, I've come close to causing accidents in all roles.

Because a car is big and fast, it seems common sense that my mistake-rate would be higher in a car than on foot or two-wheels.

People of various groups who sledge those of other groups — for example drivers/bikers accusing bikers/drivers of rudeness, carelessness, lawlessness, thoughtlessness — come across as foolish and disrespectful.

Instead of leading to solutions, this just propagates problems.

Are these the new Australian values?

Judy Bamberger, O'Connor

A national investigation of cladding material used in Australian buildings is more than justified ("Cladding inquiry call from Shorten after fire at Grenfell Tower", June 19, p5).

At issue is not just the availability of cladding prohibited by Australian standards with flammable core material such as polystyrene.

A slurry of aluminium and polystyrene was the principal ingredient of the Daisy Cutter bomb used in Vietnam and Afghanistan.

The point is that aluminium is itself extremely combustible at high temperatures.

All aluminised cladding should be banned.

Gary J. Wilson, Macgregor

KEEPING MUM

Re Julia Baird's "Repeal of sex appeal", Forum, June 17, p.10). My grandmother always said "A woman's age and her bank balance are her private affair".

Cynthia Moloney, Yarralumla

Julia Baird's "Repeal of sex appeal" (June 17, p10), refers to women lying about their age. No one has to lie about their age. They can simply say, as someone said to me, that they don't know their age because they have mislaid their birth certificate.

John Milne, Chapman

DEADLY OVERSIGHT

James Allen (letters, June 19) better pay attention to world news. The targeted killings, rapes and displacement of the Muslim Rohingya people by Buddhist majority Myanmar is a disgusting oversight in his Islamophobic rant.

Erin Cook, Waramanga

RIGHT OF WAY

Errol Good (letters, June 17) seems unaware that nearly all cyclists also drive cars and also pay rates and taxes and so have just as much right to safety on the roads as he has.

Frances Moore, Melba

LANGUAGE ISSUE

Given that Australia doesn't have an official language; how can the government impose a knowledge of English on new arrivals?

Jeff Bradley, Isaacs

LIGHT TOUCH

Coalition front benchers never cease to amaze. The court contempt debacle is a case in point. Can't wait for the sequel to "Ministers in court", "ex-Ministers behind bars".

Neville Barry, Sutton

NOT MAKING SENSE

Really, Donald, you must stop tweeting all night and get some sleep. You are unravelling.

Barrie Smillie, Duffy

COLLISION COURSE

If a US warship can't avoid colliding with a container ship in peacetime, it wouldn't seem to be much use in a war.

Rod Matthews, Melbourne, Vic

POWERING ON

I'd like to thank the federal government and power companies for generating new business ideas. I'm torn between selling candles and hot water bottles for pensioners and starting up a dating service for people looking for partners so they can halve their heating bill. What a mess.

Craig Martin, Bywong, NSW

TAKING RESPONSIBILITY

Will the Islamophobes who write in accept responsibility for the latest London attack? That is what they expect Muslims to do.

M. Moore, Bonython

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).