Amsterdam makes great provision for cyclists, although we are still very much in cooee of pedestrians, scooters, cars, buses and trams. But the city was not always like this; it is shaped by 1970s community activism protesting the deaths of hundreds of children in road traffic accidents. This produced both cycle paths and legal reforms.

Cyclists in Amsterdam feel safe because drivers are legally responsible for any accidents involving a bike, regardless of actual fault. Mothers feel safe riding bikes with toddlers on the back, babies on the front, none of them wearing helmets, because they always get a wide berth from the cars.

Replicating the reality of cycling in Amsterdam means addressing driver behaviour before providing better infrastructure and deciding on the role of helmets.

David Campbell, Amsterdam

Your editorial (February 26, p14) argues there is no need to debate a proposal by Shane Rattenbury, Minister for Road Safety, to float the possibility of relaxing the laws that make bicycle helmets compulsory for all riders.

The proposal actually encourages people to decide on the other benefits that outweigh the risk of immediate trip trauma from an accident.

A question worth asking is whether removing the helmet laws would encourage more people to cycle and gain overall health benefits.

You assert that the minister's argument is timeworn and largely discredited, but I maintain there is evidence that bicycle helmets are likely to increase the risk of serious brain injury, an inconvenient fact that proponents of helmets ignore.

In the internationally published 2008 book Transportation Accident Analysis and Prevention, (held by the National Library and available online), my chapter 6, "Bicycle helmets: a scientific evaluation", argues that no Australian authority responsible for helmet law applied the relevant science to assess efficacy to protect the brain from serious injury.

Worse, I believe there is evidence that helmets might increase the risk. By contrast with Australia, ever since 2007, when research commissioned by the UK government warned of this danger, authorities there have resisted pressure to introduce compulsory helmets.

Bill Curnow, Ainslie

Recent letters highlight widespread concern about the extension of light rail to Woden.

Part of the concern stems from the Barr government not having a clear mandate for the Civic to Gungahlin light rail let alone its extension to Woden.

The return of the government is likely to have been a result of the social and economic conservatism of the Liberal party.

The current Tasmanian election is instructive. While poker machines have been the dominant issue, polls indicate it is a vote changing issue for only 14 per cent.

Further concerns derive from the failure of the proposal to consider alternatives, including busways, and trends influencing future travel demand including changing lifestyles, working hours, employment and residential location, electric buses and automated vehicles.

Changes in electric battery technology make light rail a high risk strategy.

Electric vehicle technology has advanced sufficiently for a large electric bus, with up to 300 passengers and capable of travelling at 70km/h, to begin operations this year in Zhuzhou in Hunan Province.

This "trackless tram" potentially meets the objectives of light rail at a fraction of the cost. As battery technology improves its viability will increase.

No decision on the extension of light rail should occur until a detailed assessment of land use/transport futures is undertaken.

Light rail is a technology unlikely to meet Canberra's transport needs.

Funds saved from its non-construction could be used to improve bus services throughout the city.

Mike Quirk, Garran

Congratulations to Bill Meani for his brilliant expose of the proposed removal of the excellent Watson-Civic bus service and it's substitution for a Watson-Dickson service requiring Civic bound passengers to transfer to the southbound tram (Letters, February 26).

I had heard rumours of this change and rang Mr Barr's office to check. I got a recorded message saying my call would be returned. It wasn't.

I therefore emailed Mr Barr asking for verification of the service change and was at first delighted to get an immediate email response. Unfortunately that is all it was — a computer generated email that did not refer to my simple question at all. It featured a portrait of a beaming Mr Barr advising me that I may eventually get a reply or that my query may be referred to another minister and that I would have to be patient as he got a lot of emails.

I phoned Mr Barr's office again and was told it was not possible to reply to all emails because they received so many. I would have thought that answering legitimate simple questions from constituents would be a first priority of any elected representative.

It could be of course Mr Barr and his government feel they no longer have to listen to constituents who do not share their enthusiasm for 19th century public transport.

The only issue Mr Meani did not raise was cost. At present pensioners travel free on the Watson-Civic bus. Will such travellers now be slugged with a tram fare on top of all the other inconveniences that he so well illustrated.

Phil O'Brien, Watson

The announcement of the planned high-rise developments ("ACT hits new heights", March 2, p1) raises at least two important questions.

First, what has happened to the Assembly inquiry into "Better planning processes, consultation and outcomes" that Labor and the Greens promised?

This inquiry was, among other things, "to recommend changes to the Territory Plan".

This inquiry would have been able to investigate the costs and benefits of the high-rise plan and could have engaged in proper community consultation. However it appears the promise, has become "non-core", or given the announcement.

Secondly, it notes Northbourne will be reduced to two lanes each way.

Why didn't we save money by converting an existing lane to a peak hour bus only lane, rather than building light rail?

Bruce Paine, Red Hill

The proverbial drover's dog, as a former toppled Labor leader might have said, could have led Qantas to record profits.

After all, all it takes, as Qantas CEO Alan Joyce has told us, is to reduce capacity on domestic routes (ie cut flights) and bingo, thanks to the government's guaranteed duopoly that exists in the domestic aviation market, profits go up.

And by quite a lot – 20 per cent up just in the last six months.

No wonder foreign investors are keen on Qantas and – along with its CEO – are pressing the government to remove the current 49 per cent limit on foreign ownership of the Flying Kangaroo.

I was looking forward to a weekend away in Melbourne in early March – the cheapest Qantas return Canberra-Melbourne fare that I could find at suitable times earlier today was $856.

So I gave it a miss. Instead I may go to Paris, since there are plenty of return flights from Canberra to the French capital to be had for around $1100.

If the real purpose of the domestic aviation duopoly is to protect local jobs, I can abide that.

But, to borrow another toppled Labor leader's phrase, fair shake of the sauce bottle.

If the government is happy to continue to grant Qantas (and Virgin) a domestic duopoly, then it must demand in return an end to price gouging.

The cost to other sectors of the Australian economy of a grossly overpriced domestic aviation market that discourages domestic air travel is another story.

Perhaps a less pernicious way for Qantas to lift its profits in future may be to replace its overpaid CEO and give the drover's dog a go instead.

Giancarlo Savaris, Macquarie

Last Wednesday my husband and I were in the Belconnen mall when my husband had a major medical incident.

I would like to say how grateful I was for the kindness, care and compassion that was shown to us during that traumatic time. Strangers came out of nowhere to assist.

Somehow the ambulance was called and information given to them by a lovely kind lady who was standing next to me. (I was in shock and unable to talk to them myself.) The security officers arrived with screens for privacy, and shortly after the ambulance officers came to take over.

Suddenly everything was in overdrive and working smoothly and eventually, my husband was delivered safely to hospital. Thank you for your efficiency and compassion as well as a safe passage.

I was overcome by heartfelt gratitude to absolute strangers who rushed, not only to assist my husband, but also for the words of encouragement (as well as the bottle of water) for me.

They meant so much and I am very grateful to all of these kind people. Names were not exchanged, but I would just like to thank everyone who was involved, so very much.

My husband is now recovering, and so am I. I am so grateful, thank you.

Canberrans can be so compassionate.

Beverley Lawrence, Belconnen

Michael Bungey (Letters, March1) is partly right.

There is no actual sale of land in Canberra but there are enforceable "leases".

Under the ACT Self Government (Planning and Land Management Act 1988) the ACT government does not "own" any land in the ACT as the term "ownership" is understood.

It has a statutory right under this legislation to manage certain lands in the ACT described as "Territory land".

The Commonwealth looks after land described as "National land".

The ACT government, as I understand it, may issue "leases" on behalf of the Commonwealth government for periods up to 99 years.

The ACT government issues these leases on behalf of the Commonwealth under the self-government legislation and also undertakes a number of other land management activities on an "agency" basis for the Commonwealth.

For example, the ACT Namadgi National Park is one which started its environmental protective life as a Commonwealth Reserve.

These arrangements , the ACT government wrote in 1997, "were put in place to ensure that the Commonwealth always had an overriding interest in the development of the national capital".

Throw into this mix of who owns what in having to address any existing Aboriginal native title property rights and interests that seem to exist in every other state or territory, and all go running for the doors.

You would have to ask, why? I have great faith in our legal systems of not falling over if the Crown has to prove its title like anyone else; even if surprises occur.

But the question must be addressed rather than scamper.

George Villaflor, Ainslie

ANU Professor Ken Taylor's article on the floodways of Canberra ("Poor infill design contributing to flood risk as Canberra's distinctive look is gradually trashed", February 28, pp18-19) was both timely and informative.

It articulated yet another dimension of this government's trashing of the capital. As a frequent dog walker with my husband around Turner, O'Connor, Lyneham, North Lyneham and Dickson, including the wet areas, we have continually observed just how much trash and plant matter has been allowed to clog up watercourses and entry points into the subterranean water channels.

In such an event as last Sunday's major downpour, these entry points very quickly become dams.

We inspected two such "dams" on Monday including the one near Southwell Park. What we discovered was that someone had done a very quick and nasty job of clearing the entry grill.

They had then dumped the rubbish on the bank of the watercourse. Such clearing should be done on a regular basis, not just in a crisis. The government's failure offers more evidence of its willingness to allow Canberra to become the "weed and rubbish capital" of Australia.

I hope those whose apartments and property were ruined by the floods think seriously about claiming damages from the Barr government.

A. Mulgan, Lyneham

THANK YOU

A big thank you to all the blood donors out there, especially A+, for the wonderful contribution you are making.

Blood transfusions eased my husband's illness immensely. Please continue and encourage anyone you can to also donate.

Margo Geering, Deakin

NO HOLDS BARR

Once the Chief Minister Andrew Barr finishes dragging central Canberra into the 21st century, could he please cast his modern vision to sexing up Canberra's suburban wastelands and local shops?

Danny Corvini, Deakin

BACK TO THE FUTURE

It's ironic how Chief Minister Andrew Barr labels those who oppose his grandiose plans for concrete canyons along the Northbourne Avenue as having a mid-20th century mentality, when he is proposing to build an early 20th century cityscape, serviced by a 19th century transport system.

Lee Welling, Nicholls

DEPLOY THE DEATH STARE

Headmaster Malcolm Turnbull should send Head Prefect Julie Bishop to administer the death stare to Michaelia Cash, and restore some order to the schoolroom.

K. L. Calvert, Downer

WHO HAS SUPPORT?

Andrew Bolt, Peta Credlin and Tony Abbott have been vocal in condemning Michaelia Cash's appalling slur on Bill Shorten's staff. Is Senator Cash a Turnbull supporter or something?

H. Simon, Watson

FALLING CASH RATES

It has often been said that gender equality will only be achieved when there are as many incompetent women in positions of power as there are incompetent men. Michaelia Cash demonstrates that progress is being made.

Rob Ey, Weston

RE. JOYCE, TIS THUS

May I correct Stewart Sweeney's James Joyce quotation? (Letters, March 1). James Joyce closed Molly Bloom's soliloquy in Ulysses thus: "and yes I said yes I will Yes." Not "yes, yes, yes".

The punctilious Irish novelist must have been turning in his Zurich grave.

Dr John Doherty, Dhún na nGall, Ireland

NOTHING TO DO WITH US

To simplify drawing up contracts like the one for Mr Fluffy blocks, the ACT government should legislate that they are not responsible for anything.

Mike Dallwitz, Giralang

CINEMA IS CULTURE

Given the presence of the word "and" in the "New Acton Cultural and Cinema Precinct" sign noted by Alex Mattea (Letters, March 1), the ACT government thinks cinema has nothing to do with culture.

Heino Lepp, Macquarie

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).