Let's talk about the Coalition which, having been in power for 23 years, thought it appropriate for Labor to have to face the electorate every 12 months, when conventional wisdom would indicate the fewer elections the better. But Whitlam did plan a half Senate election which may have broken the deadlock. He was arranging this with Kerr as Kerr was conspiring to undermine him.

Far from fulfilling his constitutional duty to take the advice of the elected prime minister, Kerr instead lied to him while constitutional experts Barwick and Mason advised Kerr to take the advice of the opposition leader.

Following a subsequent vote of confidence in Whitlam in the House of Reps, Kerr refused to hear the voice of the people's representatives. How is that not unconstitutional? How is it even democratic to ignore the will of the majority in the House of Reps?

S. W. Davey, Torrens

Michael Lane (Letters, April 18) lambasts Whitlam for "attempting to govern without supply" in 1975.

He neglects to mention the Liberals in the Senate blocked supply, provoking a constitutional crisis from which we have not really recovered.

The Royals are believed by some to have had a hand in the conspiracy. This may be true, but I think the CIA was the real culprit.

In the book and film The Falcon and the Snowman, two characters who worked for the CIA in Virginia threw state secrets over the wall of the Russian Embassy.

When asked why they did it, they said "Look what we did to that man Whitlam in, what was that country?"

Years later, naive governor-general Bill Haydon asked a visiting CIA person if they were involved. You can imagine the shocked reaction!

Richard Keys, Ainslie

With regional meetings in mind, I read with interest David Crowe's article "Britain urged to lift presence in the Pacific" (canberratimes.com.au, April 16) in which he cited the Turnbull government as urging Britain and other Commonwealth states to step up their engagement in the Pacific in the light of China's growing influence.

This has been done before. Australia and India collaborated to support emerging South Pacific Commonwealth regional member states, forming a close connection across Australia's maritime region.

The proposal was endorsed by Commonwealth secretary-general Sonny Ramphal at CHOGM in London in 1977, and led by prime ministers Malcolm Fraser, Morarji Desai and then Indira Gandhi, at meetings held in 1978 in Sydney, in 1980 in Delhi and 1982 in Fiji.

Each meeting was attended by regional leaders. A further meeting was scheduled for Port Moresby in 1984, but cancelled by incoming PM Hawke.

Fraser's and Desai's vision was to give leaders of Pacific island states opportunities to debate issues that affected them at meetings separate from the more formal CHOGM's.

Their success is recorded in papers held at the National Archives.

A new focus on Australia's Pacific sphere of influence should include India whose interests are similar to Australia's, at a point when India under Prime Minister Modi has decided to attend the London CHOGM, held this week.

India has been absent by choice for some years, and its urge to reunite with the Commonwealth offers an opportunity for another high point in the Australia-India bilateral relationship.

Dr Auriol Weigold, Associate Professor, Government and Policy, Faculty of Business Government & Law, University of Canberra

Apropos the startling revelations in the Royal Commission into the Financial Sector, suggesting systemic and despicable conduct of the financial institutions, admitted by many of those appearing to have been cleared at very high level, some key questions need to be considered for the future:

(a) Has the prudential regulator been excessively focused on solvency standards and been able to "stake out its claim" so widely as to squeeze out the consumer protection regulator and/or the corporate regulator?

If so, should there not be a higher-level decision-making body to resolve conflicting policies?

(b) Has the competition regulator made decisions on mergers that have stifled competition and facilitated exploitation of consumers?

(c) Does the ease and blatancy of hoodwinking the corporate regulator suggest that it is incapable of quickly assessing, then investigating and pursuing, likely illegal conduct to secure meaningful punitive remedies which deter such conduct?

(c) Have regulators, ministers and policy departments been captured by the sector they regulate, or for the performance of which they are responsible?

(d) In the short time the royal commission has held hearings, an astonishing amount of despicable conduct has been revealed. Does this make a cogent case for extending the deadline?

(e) Should our parliamentarians now fast-track the National Integrity Commission?

Winston Rodrigues, Nicholls

Ray Armstrong says we need protection from the general power of the Commissioner of Taxation to reconstruct events (Letters, April 15).

But there's no such general power.

The commissioner can reconstruct events only if there's been a scheme for the sole or dominant purpose of creating a tax benefit.

(For GST, this also includes schemes with a principal effect of generating a tax benefit.)

Lacking protection from tax schemes would really be tax madness.

The legislation Armstrong quotes allows reconstruction only "for the purposes of making a declaration" negating the GST benefits of the tax scheme.

I "found" that wording, the first words of the section, which he doesn't mention.

I "found" the whole of Division 165 — Anti-Avoidance.

I "found" the objective test for scheme purpose and effect; the process of declaration to turn off tax scheme benefits; the notification of declaration to the taxpayer; and so on.

I also "found" on the ATO website the commissioner's use of external panel clearance before finding a tax scheme.

Does Armstrong believe that the effect of tax schemes should not be able to be turned off by the commissioner?

Christopher Hood, Queanbeyan, NSW

Prompted by Kirsten Lawson's analysis of the development applications lodged for the Northbourne "SOHO" project ("Art group forced to drop supermarket plan in Dickson", April 4, p2), I've read comments on those applications from agencies obligated to oversee territory planning.

The tension between the commercial ambitions of developers, seemingly egged-on by our political masters, and our planning protectors are evident.

The Conservation Planning, Strategic Planning and TCCS departments detail non-compliance with heritage trees and building height rules, and inadequate stormwater and traffic studies. The scuppering of "Active Travel" plans for Dooring Street by huge volumes of consequential traffic are lamented.

The developers confidently ignore the Territory Plan's requirement that 70 per cent of dwellings must receive at least three hours midwinter "solar access", acknowledging only 43 per cent of their dwellings fulfil this meagre obligation, with most of these receiving sunlight either early morning or late afternoon due to the chosen density and profit maximising orientation.

Of the 52 units on their typical floor plan, farcically, only eight (15 per cent) have a northerly orientation.

We'll see how much the ACT government cares about well-ventilated, solar-passive, sustainable and human-scale housing, unaccompanied by the constant drone of air-conditioners. While the government agency staff understand the conflicts, Labor has been captured by developers.

The Greens seem disinclined to veto energy-intense or battery-hen housing.

Kent Fitch, Nicholls

The Treasury-Home Affairs internal briefing paper on immigration is consistent with the predictable and totally unconvincing arguments trotted out by the government, the Opposition and other supporters of the ongoing, unsustainable immigration intake.

The grounds put forward are unquestionably a badly flawed economic argument.

If the logic provided in the argument was sound then we should double the current intake to 380,000 per annum and we would get a $20 billion boost to the budget.

What a joke! There is no mention made in the report on the briefing paper about all the costs associated with this level of immigration, which are considerable and growing.

Infrastructure shortfalls can only grow worse because the money is just not there. What has the government got to say about the ever worsening traffic congestion in our major cities, housing unaffordability, loss of biodiversity and never ending ugly urban sprawl consuming valuable open space and farmland?

If high immigration is such a good idea, why have the countries of northern Europe, North America and Japan not embraced it as official policy?

They have high living standards in the main. Every new migrant imposes significant costs on the country, just like existing residents. The beneficiaries of such a damaging policy (predominantly the property industry and major consumer goods manufacturers) are few; those who pay the costs are many – most Australians.

It is high time the government took note of public opinion.

Colin Lyons, Weetangera

As a member of the Australian Cricket Family I recently received a weasel-gram from James Sutherland telling me that I have more access to cricket coverage than ever before. This was delivered with all the sincerity of someone coaxing a kitten into a hessian sack. Presumably this is the corporate world's way of turning the anti-siphoning laws into trickle-up economics.

Recent studies have concluded that relocating sports into pay-only viewing have been its death knell, as its popular support drops off precipitately. I am saddened the custodians have chosen mammon against the public interest.

Russell Morgan, O'Connor

In the mid-1980s I went before a Senate select committee investigating the live export trade. I was representing the RSPCA ACT. The then senator George Georges, after much investigation, decided this trade with all its animal welfare problems, should be phased out.

We now hear that MP Jason Wood is declaring for a phase-out – the same words but decades later. He says he wants the public to get behind it to make this push – we the caring and horrified public must make the push.

Another MP, Liberal Susan Lay, is also bravely speaking up for the live export trade to stop.

Even now three live export ships are destined with thousands of Aussie sheep for shipment to the Middle East summer.

For any surviving sheep the misery on arrival continues. They are stuffed into car boots, tied on top of vehicles or dragged along by one leg to an inhumane way of death.

How can we Australians continue to be aware of and witness such horrific treatment?

Please be angry and speak up.

Jill Mail, Holder

The delay in passing the government's "flagship" tax package provides the opportunity to pause and reflect ("Coalition forced to pull flagship tax bill", March 28, p1).

The government can now consider lowering the tax cut to big companies and allocate the increased revenue available to areas of greater need. The boost to the economy will be much the same, as will the trickle-down effect, which is usually less than the government estimates anyway.

Herman van de Brug, Kaleen

There are many arguments on both sides of the light rail issue. But some anti-tram letter writers puzzle me. They absurdly imply "the unions are running the ACT government", a position that is simply ridiculous in 2018. More critically, they appear to be resentful the tram is providing decently paid employment to workers who are able to pay taxes as well as be consumers who boost the local economy.

Attack the idea of light rail — monotonously — if you wish. But why go after the hard working Australians who are building it?

Steve Ellis, Hackett

DRIVEN OFF THE LAWNS

I write re: the NCA's decision to disallow Auto Italia displaying its vehicles near Old Parliament House. It appears the NCA does not like motoring displays of any kind on the lawns there. All displays that used to be held there have had to move elsewhere, to mainly unsuitable sites. They are quite happy to have the Aboriginal Tent Embassy, which I regard as an eyesore, but not a well-organised vehicle event.

Eddie Boyd, Spence

BANKING ON NO CHANGES

The crooked bankers are lucky there's no politically aware and armed proletariat. There'll be a few mea culpas, some lesser heads might roll but the banker CEOs will endure and retire, struggling to spend their mega millions as the rest of us look on in disbelief.

Peter Sesterka, Hawker

CONTROL A BIG ISSUE

Banks: too big to fail; too big to obey the law; too big to be controlled by governments.

David Stephens, Bruce

PRIVATISATION PITFALLS

It's pleasing to see that privatisation of the Commonwealth Bank is working so well.

Peter Brittliff, Kambah

ATTITUDE RESTORES FAITH

It's good to hear from a priest who doesn't believe everything in the Bible (Father Peter Day, Letters, April 20). At least it's a step in the right direction.

Mike Dallwitz, Giralang

TRAVELLING BACK IN TIME

While the ACT government struggles to find the most ineffective way to provide transport for the 21st century, why stop at late 19th-century technology? Horse-drawn trams would be nice.

Maria Greene, Curtin

CLOSING CEREMONY POOR

Brisbane, April 15: I am sitting through the most boring, inappropriate concert, which was advertised as the closing ceremony of the Games. I am still waiting to see the athletes and, most importantly, Kurt Fearnley our flag bearer and such a great inspiration for our young people who are confined to wheelchairs.

Mary Robbie, Aranda

MIGRATION DEBATE

On Wednesday, April 18, the CT editorial "Debate more subtle than critics think" stated that the government's briefing paper on immigration indicated that by 2050 migration will have added 21.9per cent to the wages of low-skilled workers. This is an increase of 0.6per cent a year. Big deal.

John Simsons, Holt

CALL FOR REASONS

Could Abbott, Andrews and Abetz state publicly why they persist in denying the reality of global warming?

A. Paine, Griffith

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).