I mistakenly believed the territory plan protected the character of low-density suburbs and only extra large blocks could be converted to dual occupancy with limits on how much space such a development could occupy. But, then, ACT residents tend to forget we don't actually own the land our houses are built on but are just renting it from the government.

This means it will do whatever it wants to because it can and what it wants to do here is make as much money as possible. Supposedly only to recover buyback costs but should it eventuate that developers are prepared to pay excessively to secure rare vacant blocks in older established suburbs that will of course just be serendipity? If a council behaved in this manner, residents could put their complaints to the relevant state government. Unfortunately, ACT residents don't have that option.

C.Kavanagh, Aranda

It is disappointing to read of the Nicholls' community reaction to a small plot of public housing being allocated to their suburb ("Residents rise up against planned public housing", May 19, p1). Really ... I mean really!

This sort of community "backlash" seems to invariably stem from a small core of agitators who can rally a cause.

If they are so concerned about their suburb, perhaps they should consider a move to the even more prestigious inner south of Canberra. Oops no, that area has the highest concentration of public housing in Canberra. Oh dear!

Perhaps the idea of an "undesirable" from the adjacent Stuart Flats selling the Big Issue to shoppers at the Manuka Shops, or a transient druggie just trying to touch base with normality, might be too much to handle. Or a Somalian refugee giving you a sheepish smile as she passes you on the street in Griffith as she makes her way from her public housing to the shops might be too confronting.

No, best to keep Nicholls a desirable suburb populated only by desirables. We will keep "others" here, thank you very much.

Mark Francis, Griffith

I cannot believe the nerve of the people in the article "Nicholls residents oppose public housing near primary school". To accuse every public housing resident of being a drug addict or paedophile is offensive.

Ghettoising public housing residents is part of what fosters the antisocial behaviour these upper-class warriors are so scared of. The whole point of providing government services like public housing is to assist people to get back on their feet. But that's hard to do if the rest of the community shuns you the minute you can't afford your own home. Surely, most Canberra residents have more sensible and generous hearts than the selfish lot you quoted.

Nick Dixon-Wilmshurst, Canberra City

It is hard not to be a little saddened by the attitude of the Gold Creek residents to the proposal to build public housing in their "family friendly neighbourhood where properties regularly attract premium prices". Their concerns are, as Housing Minister Yvette Berry observes, based on inaccurate and unfair stereotypes. Yet the minister, nor the government for that matter, can't escape a level of ridicule.

The current plans for inner city infill in and around the Griffith-Narrabundah area, at the Stuart Flats and near Jerrabomberra Oval, will see many public-housing tenants evicted for the sake of the development dollar. There will be no public housing included in the subsequent developments, according to a government bureaucrat briefing residents on these developments at the recent Griffith Street Party.

The reason, I suggest, is that the developers would not take kindly to the prospect of "drug addicts, paedophiles and other people with mental disabilities" (to quote one enlightened Gold Creek resident) ruining their chance to make large profits by selling glossy apartments to wealthy investors. I guess that it would also reduce the amount they are willing to pay the government for the land as well.

Both the government and the nimbys of Gold Creek should hang their heads in shame.

Tony Webster, Griffith

It is a shame that, every now and then, we are reminded that there are mean-spirited people who cannot look beyond their own interests. Perhaps they need reminding that, they will get old one day and, by some mischance of fate, they, a friend or a relative, may need to be housed in such communities. At that time they would welcome being part of a neighbourhood group.

Joan Kitchin, Garran

Excessive cost alone won't cut it in the case against light rail for Canberra. Government will apparently make the dollars "stack up" no matter what. However, what the government can't ignore is the bad planning inherent in the proposed Canberra-wide tram scheme. It's a radial arrangement focussing on Civic, as if Canberra were a typical single-CBD-centric city. We've significantly avoided problems inherent in that (like urban-sprawl blight, concentrated employment, traffic congestion, noise, dust, and vibration pollution, etc) by having dispersed town centres, and a fine inter-and intra-town, by-passing as well as linking, road system for cars and buses.

Light rail is about profiteering "land capture" for wrong-way commercial property development – like at Flemington Road and Northbourne Avenue where we are getting alienating strip growth, and for example, at Dickson and Erindale sub centres which will be over stressed. Notably, in the national capital where the landscaped-campus-like Central National Area must dominate physically and symbolically, under the tram regime, nearby Civic (City) will do so, especially with excessive development at nationally significant City Hill and West Basin.

Jack Kershaw, Kambah

That senior executives of Transfield Services and Wilson Security did not answer readily some rather basic questions from the Senate Select Committee on the recent allegations relating to conditions and circumstances at the regional processing centre in Nauru ("Transfield dodges hard questions", May 20, p4) is way beyond "extraordinary".

While highlighting achievement of contractual (and confidential) key performance indicators, Transfield and Wilson deferred answering questions so basic that the Australian government might be accused of being grossly negligent in contracting, as well as in contract oversight. The Transfield contract states: "information regarding performance framework such as KPIs, performance against KPIs and abatements" are "confidential" for the "duration of the contract".

Yet the contract identifies "breaches of hygiene standards" and "incidents of preventative injury" for immediate reporting and abatements. With such significant requirements, how could Transfield execs not come prepared to discuss related issues?

Mouldy tents; rape; trading sex for basic living conditions; access to showers; lack of basic clothing, food, and sanitary products; staffing profiles ... how is it these items are not measured and reported? It suggests a complete abrogation of responsibility to those under Australia's care.

Judy Bamberger, O'Connor

Some months ago, The Canberra Times carried an article by Professor Hugh White describing how the government should procure the next generation of Australian submarines. The article concluded with a suggestion that the government should tell Australians why we need submarines. A recent, and confronting, article by Professor White ("Just whose side are we on?", Times2, May 19, p4) about our relationships with China and the US concluded with a suggestion that the government needs a more effective way of dealing with the US in relation to our engagement with China.

Professor White has well-developed views on Australia's need for submarines and also on how we should engage with China and the US. Can we ask, please, to see future articles which share those views with Canberra Times readers?

Peter Moran, Watson

In her column "The revolutionary benefits of working mums" (Times2, May 19, p5) Jenna Price referred to the gender equality situation in Australia and a range of other countries (mainly in the Americas and Europe).

The countries specified in her article do not include any countries in Africa, the Middle East apart from Israel, the Indian subcontinent, mainland east Asia apart from Russia or south-east Asia apart from the Philippines. I find it curious that the gender equality situation in these latter countries does not even rate a passing mention.

D. McNeill, Rivett

Can someone tell me who put Jenna Price in the vanguard of the working mothers' revolution? According to Price, having mothers go into the workforce has resulted in nothing but glorious liberation for the sisterhood and a boon to humankind all round, including all the children thrust into day-care centres. Imbibing all the latest feminista revolutionary propaganda from those centres of working women's solidarity, Harvard Business School and the New York Times, Price tells us there's even been a more equitable gender distribution in washing-up duties, and more sex as a result.

But how is it that a woman who makes her financial contribution to her household by writing articles from the comfort of her home gets to be the one who speaks for working mothers – most of whom are probably too stuffed by the end of the day to read, let alone write about, what a great boon it is be able to work. It's obvious that for some, mostly highly paid, women in the workforce employment and career can be empowering. But to argue that this has not come at a cost is ridiculous.

In this regard, it was interesting to read the letter from John Coulter (May 20). He pointed out that the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) shows that, since the mid-1970s – ie, since the rise of post-modern feminism – per capita GPI has been flat or going downhill. This letter exposes the fact that getting society to do the work of mothers has been a con-trick.

Chris Williams, Griffith

Jenna Price waxing lyrical about working mothers totally ignores, even sidelines, those new mothers who choose not to go to work. Her comment that "blokes who do house work get more sex" demonstrates how intellectually shallow her diatribe is. Jenna and her ilk have got to stop treating children as commodities. Maybe then, the world might start to take them seriously.

Michael Doyle, Fraser

Egypt's El-Sisi administration, after sentencing Mohamed Morsi and 125 others to death, has extended its involvement in the ongoing Saudi-Gulf Cooperative Council alliance, which has been bombing Yemen since March 26. Thousands of innocent people have been killed and the US government is providing intelligence and refuelling for fighter jets. Libya revisited.

The GCC includes Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, who, like Australia, are all dancing to America's never-ending war drumbeat.

Alan McNeil, Weetangera

According to P. Edwards (Letters, May 18) "Islam … demands the subjugation of infidels". That may be so in a doctrinal sense: I am not a theologian. However, in practice, it is plain to see that the many hundreds of thousands of Australians of Islamic faith have no interest in subjugating anyone.

Edwards speaks of a need for the Islamic community "to make better connections". Making connections is not a one-way street. As host country, ours is the duty to welcome them. The reward is getting to know wonderful people.

Jenny Wright, Karabar

The solution to housing the homeless in Canberra is not rocket science. It could be done quickly and efficiently with converted shipping containers. The containers can be converted in a few hours with insulation, double glazed sliding doors, bunk beds perhaps and ventilation.

One hundred containers and one hundred trailer bathrooms put in groups in areas of most need would go a long way to addressing an appalling situation.

If the site does not work they can easily be moved. If they are no longer needed they can be easily moved.

It is shameful that we accept three nights a week for the lucky ones as appropriate care for the homeless. Nothing for the other 400 especially when the temperature at night is below freezing. Where is our humanity?

This project should be implemented efficiently by the public service as a service for the public and not delegated to some well-meaning organisation. This problem needs to be fixed immediately. All the fear mongering about ghettos and leaners must be ignored in the haste to get these people out of the cold.

R. Edmunds, Farrer

Having spent almost 50 years owning and managing businesses, one of the difficult decisions facing management was when to increase prices for our product.

Of all the reasons for increasing prices, whether it be wage increases and other operating cost increases, one reason that would never be considered is raising prices after the business has made handsome profits.

However, our sewerage and water monopoly supplier Icon Water (formerly known as ACTEW Water) has challenged the common sense test and we naive consumers are going to again cop it in the neck.

Brendan Ryan, Mawson

UBER GOES MAINSTREAM

So the ATO is going to enforce the tax laws on Uber drivers. I wonder when the ATO will also begin enforcing income tax laws on those solar panel householders who receive payments or credits from electricity companies?

John Passant, Kambah

I wonder what part of the phrase "goods and services tax" does Uber fail to understand?

Fredrik Limacher, Kambah

HARD YAKKA AT HOME

The wording of recent articles and letters in The Canberra Times seem to imply that only those women who get dressed up and leave their homes are "working" mothers. I would think that the vast majority of us who have stayed home to look after our children, with no outside income, would agree that we've never worked harder in any other occupation in our lives!

F.J.Hunt, Tuggeranong

MINISTER FOR SECURITY

If Minister Shane Rattenbury is incapable of keeping mobile phones out of the Alexander Maconochie Centre, heaven help us if he is ever put in charge of airport security.

Jim Coats, Fadden

SAFE HAVEN CREATED

Thank you, Prime Minister Tony Abbott, for standing up for Australians. Our borders belong to us, not to those that are trained to kill and maim mercilessly, no matter their religion.

Graham Cartwright, Richmond, NSW

JOIN THE POLICY DOTS

Is the ACT government's plan for public housing in Nicholls really a plot to provide a cohort of users for its tram? I can't imagine the good burghers of Gold Creek leaving their BMWs in the garage.

Dick Parker, Page

Not everyone has the good fortune to be able to own their own home. Given the difficulties that people in public housing might be facing, the least one could do is treat them with respect and welcome them to a neighbourhood.

Joel Dignam, Hackett

DEATH FOR A DEATH

I thought Tony Judge's comment (Letters, May 20) was very good. However, I totally disagree with him about the death penalty. As far as I am concerned, the Boston Marathon bomber, Sukumaran and Chan all fall into the same category: people whose actions shorten the lives of other individuals. Forgiveness is OK.

But me? Their only right is the death penalty.

Ed Harris, 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).