Will it not just mean that only the larger and more profitable clubs and bars that are able to pay those licence fees will continue serving alcohol at those times, thus creating "hubs" of late-night activity.

Seems to me this will only concentrate intoxicated people into those establishments.

A. Chan, Lyneham

Youngsters are fortunate I'm not the ACT Attorney-General. I'd revert to 10pm closure of pubs as existed 20 or so years ago.

Since the new 21 is 30, eg, still living at home with mum and dad, I'd raise the drinking age to 21 (exceptions would include those on active service in the military).

Young boofheads would probably still get their grog but would learn to be more sociable at private parties rather than pestering all and sundry in public. Stuff the nightclub lobby.

Gerry Murphy, Braddon

It is disappointing to see that yet again the real issues behind late-night violence are being ignored.

Since they were small children, boys' ferocity and inability to convey their feelings has been written off with a shrug that "boys will be boys". Rather than teaching boys how to play nicely and use words (a treatment usually reserved for rearing "nice" girls), we tell them it is not appropriate to cry. And that in some situations, violence is a means of communication in and of itself.

Before you know it, all of these boys are in our streets, 20 beers deep and feeling a little second-rate. Some of them by now, have learnt how to cope with their inner monologue. Others though have not. And while they are far from the majority, here we are, trying to shut down cities in the name of just a few boys.

While regulating venues into earlier closure certainly masks these problems, someone has got to have a better idea.

Sarah Fitt, Griffith

In light of the release of the Panama Papers, and the resignation of Iceland's Prime Minister over his involvement in tax havens, will Malcolm Turnbull now release the full details of his Cayman Islands investment (and any other tax haven investments he and his family may have) and the tax he has paid so we, the Australian public, can make a judgment on its (or their) appropriateness?

John Passant, Kambah

Preventing evasion of Australian tax in a world of international transactions and many tax-free host countries is not going to be easy. One way to help is to require more withholding tax. The method of recovering rates and land tax owing for real estate is all but unavoidable – the amount owing is a charge on the land and any unpaid runs with the land to the next owner.

So the vendor in a land transaction is required to provide to the purchaser rates and land tax clearance certificates. If by chance any arrears are owing, they are paid on completion.

Why not extend that to all transactions over a certain size? As an example, if the private equity vendors of the Myer shares in the float in 2009 had been required to provide a tax clearance as part of the float before title could be transferred to the investors, then the taxman could have required a payment. The money then would not have been lost overseas in the micro-second that the bank transfer took.

Ian Morison, Forrest

If Malcolm Turnbull continues to be a carbon copy of Tony Abbott, I say bring on a double dissolution. At least Billy Boy Shorten won't be a puppet for the far right.

Shame on you Malcolm: many of us thought you were going to make a difference and would present our country to the rest of the world in a sane and capable way.

Carolyn Doyle, Banks

Shelley Penn ("Manuka Oval can set a design benchmark", Times2, April 7, p5) writes that she has provided advice to Greater Western Sydney on running a design competition. Significantly, Penn omits information from the GWS/Grocon Manuka Green website that "the judging panel to be chaired by leading architect Shelley Penn with a majority of independent judges, including the ACT government architect".

Why so coy? The developer states it has already signed her up. Note not all of the judges will be independent of the developer.

Penn adds: "I hope the proposal is supported by the ACT community and by government." Acceptance by the ACT community of more fundamental planning issues, such as the appropriateness of development, must come before an architectural competition based on the developer's brief.

Jeremy McGrane, Kingston

I lived in Kingston for about 10 years, and I have played and attended sporting events at Manuka Oval for the past 25 years. On behalf of the silent majority who don't write letters to the editor but usually read them, I would like to throw my support behind the Manuka Oval upgrade.

I have attended and listened to the consultation to date and am impressed with the amount of information present at this stage of any proposal.

I would like to see Manuka Oval upgraded as large AFL and cricket matches can be problematic with public transport, parking, toilet facilities, temporary bar and food concessions and small entry gates. The public amenity in the proposal looks outstanding, and I want to continue my sporting love of Manuka well into the future.

Brendan Read, O'Connor

I have never been good at sums and have always needed help in working out and understanding big numbers. So perhaps someone can help me with a little maths problem.

I believe that the ACT government has stumped up about $23 million for a group to play three matches a year, for I think, each of 10 years at Manuka Oval. I think this would mean about $770,000 for each game. Recently I thought I saw an advertisement for a game which indicated a ticket price of $19 for fans coming from Sydney by bus. I think there were about 13,600 spectators at the last game and this seems to me to work out as an ACT taxpayer subsidy of about $57 a ticket. The game before appeared to have about 5600 spectators. My calculation of this ticket subsidy looks pretty high. I wonder if someone else could help me with this figure in case I make an error.

Peter Moore, Kingston

Like many others I sympathise with Alison Lee (Letters, April 6) who says she parked in an area not marked as no parking near Manuka Oval last Sunday and copped a fine.

There should be sensible parking options at weekend AFL Manuka fixtures. One, I suggest, is running shuttle buses from the Russell offices or other nearby government car parks.

Another must be requiring ACT parking inspectors to clearly mark no-parking areas instead of lurking until after kick off then pouncing to rake in the moolah!

Should these parking officers ever be so clever and vigilant in policing mobility impaired parking violations or even rubbish skips covering such places in Civic thus denying them to needy drivers.

Pete Ryan, Lyneham

Thank you to The Canberra Times for continuing to provide information about local planning and development issues.

Thank you also for providing insight into the apparent disrespect by some politicians, lobbyists and developers for some of our community representatives and the local community in general.

This disrespect ignores the fact that many long-term Canberrans, such as the Forrest family, have constructively contributed to the establishment of our city, and deserve to be acknowledged for their largely unpaid valuable input.

Further, the specific comments made about Ms Anne Forrest ("Government stop work notice lifted on landmark Manuka property", March 31, p3) represent the worst kind of gendered personal attack, perhaps saying more about the perpetrators of this violent verbal behaviour, and demand public apologies that reflect true understanding of the individual and community damage inflicted by such violence.

N.L. Scherger, Red Hill

Your article "Jail to trial new visiting hours" (April 7, p5) misses the point and fails to take into consideration the needs of families of the inmates and the needs of the inmates themselves. Cost-cutting is all very admirable but what of the negative impact on family lives that a lack of contact with a loved family member can bring? I understand there is considerable outrage and consternation among inmates and families, some of whom are advanced in age, and will now have to travel long distances for one hour of visitation at 8am on a Monday morning once a week.

Those living locally can now visit up to five days per week for longer than one hour. That is a good thing that should not be stopped. Deprivation of liberty for inmates for crimes committed is one thing (and that is punishment enough) but what about the children and spouses of inmates who no sooner than they say hello, they have to get ready to say goodbye. What is the point of having a local prison for ACT offenders if visiting hours are chopped by at least 70 per cent.

How would you feel if it was your son, daughter, father, mother locked up and you got to see them once a week for what will work out to be less than an hour?

As a matter of interest, how much is the ACT government saving by this "trial" of shorter visiting hours? The reporter forgot to ask. Nobody asked the inmates or their families for their views, either.

Leonie Kennedy, Forrest

BANKS' CONTRITION

Australian Bankers' Association chief executive Steven Munchenberg says "banks have shown in the past they will act when they are made aware of behaviour contrary to their values and codes of conduct". Call me cynical but does this mean, "when we get caught with our hands in the cookie jar we do our best to look contrite"?

Peter Edsor, Bungendore, NSW

CAN'T BE TRUSTED

David Murray, former CEO of the Commonwealth Bank, says "the community needs to trust banks". The point is we do not and can not.

Peter Sutherland, Ainslie

PERSON NOT PARTY

Frank Marris (Letters, April 7) misses the point of the Malcolm Mackerras and Bob Day High Court challenge. The constitution says we vote for people not parties. A person, not a party, should decide how to distribute votes if a voter fails to give preferences.

Kevin Cox, Ngunnawal

NO PLEASURE IN DEATH

I frequently disagreed with Bob Ellis but I rejoice that we can have free discussion in Australia. How sad that T. Leslie (Letters, canberratimes.com.au, April 5) is glad a person is dead.

Catherine Stein, Rivett

NEED FOR HONESTY

Manny Notaras, when discussing the use to be made of public space ("Angry locals extract a promise to listen", April 7, p1), considers only his own interests. We need others to be equally open and honest.

Sue Schreiner, Red Hill

NO SHAME IN IT

No matter what developers and governments think, being a NIMBY is not derogatory. Any resident will protect their suburb and lifestyle as is increasingly apparent in Canberra.

Greg Cornwell, Yarralumla

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).