The concerns expressed,including safety of children, are legitimate and serious and the local community would have to live with the consequences of poor decisions by the government and its bureaucrats.

The community is also very angry about the bumbling way the proposal has been dumped on us and the obvious disdain shown by the bureaucrats, both at the public meeting and in subsequent media comments, to the concerns.

The government needs to restore goodwill and should withdraw the current proposal. If public housing is still proposed, then the community needs to be constructively and meaningfully engaged in a discussion of the issues and options (including other uses of the site) without the intrusion of sanctimonious drivel.

Warwick Williams, Nicholls

Honour the founder

If some of the residents of Nicholls were more aware of the man after whom their suburb was named they would honour him with different behaviour and attitudes ("Residents rise up against planned public housing", May 19, p1). Sir Douglas Nicholls was generous, socially inclusive, a practising Christian and a fine sportsman. I am proud to live in his suburb. But now I feel some shame.

Sir Douglas knew hardship and rejection. On arrival in Melbourne in the 1930s he slept in empty fruit boxes at Victoria Market.

Though recruited by Carlton he never played for them because of the racist attitudes of some players.

His curator's house at Northcote football ground became a half-way house for paroled prisoners, a care facility and a drop-in centre for Indigenous people, all funded from his curator work. He picked up litter and cleaned up after games, though not in his job description.

He formed an Aboriginal Girls' Hostel in 1956, for which he and his wife acted as house parents. "Supportive housing" is one of his legacies.

The public meeting held on May 4, 2015, was for Nicholls residents "to express their concerns" over the proposal. Naturally, those attending (about 140) were opposed to it, and very strongly. Those supporting probably felt no need to attend and stayed home. I attended, and was a lone voice in support. I was howled down when suggesting that an innovative school principal would find ways to build relationships between students and residents in the "supportive housing" complex!

I am sure many Nicholls residents support the views expressed in your editorial "Sharing burden in all our interests" (Times2, May 19, p2). A fine piece of work. Nicholls was a "burden sharer".

Come on, silent majority in Nicholls. Let us be a welcoming community. Support the weak, help the afflicted, honour everyone.

Let us honour the man who selflessly supported others and moved from empty fruit boxes to the Governor's bed in SA.

Ron Reeson, Nicholls

Fluffy woes ignored

It is with great sadness that I read about the Fluffy owner who, last week, was pushed to breaking point over the ACT Government's asbestos buyback scheme ("Fluffy owner arrested over threat", May 16, p1). The ACT government has focused on financial aspect and completely ignored the human impact. They have repeatedly threatened "sign up to our scheme or we'll compulsorily acquire your land".

I have not heard one compassionate or supportive word from Chief Minister Barr. Minister Barr has not attended one single information session with homeowners and refuses to engage with us. The Asbestos Taskforce often does not respond to emails. It is no wonder that people have turned to desperate measures to get some attention.

The problem is that the ACT government has not provided Fluffy owners with any real options. Valuers have suggested to me that the market value of my cleared land would be around $150,000-$200,000 higher than what the government has offered me for my house and land. This is before the additional value of the dual occupancy is factored in.

This will put repurchasing my land out of reach and I will be forced to leave my community. I and many others feel helpless, disempowered, frustrated and angry.

Name and address withheld by request

Whites not alone

Rod Matthews (Letters, May 14) complained that only whites were "blamed and shamed" in the SBS documentary Struggle Street and suggested it should turn its gaze towards other ethnic groups. Perhaps he was watching a different program, because I saw at least one person of Aboriginal descent. And not so long ago, the SBS First Contact program gave six city people some insight into the lives of Indigenous people in the bush. This program did not criticise Aboriginals, but some of the participants certainly did. Perhaps Matthews missed that one as well.

David Roth, Kambah

Stopping mobiles easy

Shane Rattenbury (Letters, May 18) has outlined the technical and legal issues that must be faced in preventing mobile phone use in Canberra's prison.

Given that failing to do this allows prisoners to easily maintain an outside social life as well as run businesses and organise illegal activities from jail, it would seem the costs of taking action would be outweighed by the potential community benefit.

As a communications engineer I can understand the technical challenges but they seem far from insurmountable – an order of magnitude less than, for example, those posed by light rail in Canberra.

The fact that other countries, including the US and New Zealand, already block prison mobiles, and given there are many companies easily found that sell nothing but mobile blocking systems for jails, it would appear the difficulties are being overstated.

Without knowing the outcome of the Lithgow trial it is not possible for the public to argue the case any further.

Can Mr. Rattenbury tell us what sticking point was identified by the trial? Without this information we are left to wonder whether there is a lack of will here that might be related to the motivations and good intentions that were responsible for calling our jail a "centre" with an unspellable name.

Julian Robinson, Narrrabundah

The unveiling of the Dhurga Rock in Braidwood's Ryrie Park on Saturday, recognising and celebrating the Indigenous history of the region, was a moving and well-attended event.

Dhurga and closely related Yuin-speaking people joined non-Indigenous Australians to acknowledge past dispossession of their lands and impacts on their culture, but also to embrace a more equitable and inclusive future.

Is mainstream Australian society ready to make such memorials as plentiful and meaningful today as our iconic Anzac memorials have been for the past 100 years?

My hope is that the people of Braidwood have started a tradition that will see in the next century a similar monument in every country town across Australia – symbolic of our move to a fairer and more informed and compassionate community.

Michael Hermes, Ainslie

Defence expert

Some months ago, The Canberra Times carried an informative article by Hugh White describing how the federal government should procure the next generation of Australian submarines. The article concluded with a suggestion the Coalition 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 United States concluded with a suggestion that the Abbott 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 that share those views with Canberra Times readers?

Peter Moran, Watson

The recent executions of Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran caused many Australians, including leaders on both sides of politics, to state our abhorrence of the death penalty. We abhor state-sanctioned killing because it is wrong. It is not justice, it is crude retribution. It denies the possibility of repentance and rehabilitation. It says that the planned, considered act of killing a human being is a justified response to a crime against us. The death penalty demeans the executioner and legitimises violence.

For the same reasons, we should condemn the US Federal Court decision to execute the Boston Marathon bomber, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. His crime was horrendous and the consequences were terrible, but the death penalty is never a just or reasonable response.

Executing Tsarnaev would be a message that the world's most powerful, predominantly Christian, country believes there is no hope of redemption for a man who was 19 years old at the time of his crime. It would say to groups like Al Qaeda and Islamic State that the West also believes killing is a just solution. It would make a martyr of a murderer and it would deny the US the opportunity to say "we are better than that".

Australia, at some cost to our relationship with Indonesia, chose to take a neighbour and ally to task over the executions of Chan and Sukumaran. We did it because it was the right thing to do. We should take the same approach to the US on the decision to execute Tsarnaev.

Tony Judge, Belconnen

Bigger not better

Thank you and Crispin Hull for again setting an important matter (this time the budget) in a wider context ("Grown-up UK and NZ make Abbott look undergraduate", Forum, May 16, p2). But on this occasion even Crispin has not set the budget within the broad context that it misses completely.

It is now widely recognised in scientific circles that humanity is not living sustainably on planet Earth, and that continuous exponential growth is driving us ever further from a sustainable future. This truth is unrecognised by Joe Hockey and Bill Shorten. The latter used the word environment once in passing in his budget reply; Hockey did not utter the word once.

A second major flaw in both the budget and the opposition's response is taking gross domestic product growth as the principal goal.

By now all should know how misleading and defective GDP is as a measure of improved human welfare. The costs of growth are added to the benefits in this crazy index and because the costs of growth are now exceeding the benefits, we have a situation in which GDP is increasing while people are actually becoming worse off. Crispin's mention of the costs of adding more infrastructure to cope with government-encouraged population growth could have pointed out that these are real costs, yet they add to GDP.

Comparison between GDP and the genuine progress indicator (GPI, a more comprehensive index) shows that in the UK, US and Australia while per capita GDP has been increasing, since the mid-1970s per capita GPI has been flat or going downhill.

Just one of the flaws in GDP is well illustrated in the latest intergenerational report, another document authored by our federal Treasurer. If a parent stays at home and cares for children, the value of this work does not show up in GDP, for GDP only counts dollar-based transactions. If the parent goes out to work and spends the income on someone else caring for the children, both incomes are added to GDP. But is the quality of childcare any better? This is not to argue that women (it's especially women) should not go out to paid work, but the principal reason Mr Hockey gives for the second arrangement is that it will add to GDP.

John Coulter, Bradbury, SA

Indefensible demand

Why on earth does the Australia Defence Association's Neil James keep harping on about "defence investment" being below 2per cent of Australia's gross domestic product (Letters, May 15)? What possible connection is there between Australia's defence needs and the GDP? If we're richer, do we need more defending? If we're poorer, do we need less?

Defence's analysts look at Australia's security position in the world, work out what sorts of military personnel and equipment would be needed to meet the perceived threats and then bid for the required funding from the government. If the funding allocation falls short, Defence can and does point out the consequent risks. The government then increases the funding or decides that the risks are tolerable. That is both rational and reasonable.

Simply agitating for a bigger "slice of the national pie" is neither.

Furthermore, even if pie slicing was a valid approach to defending Australia, why 2per cent of GDP? Why not 1per cent? Or 10per cent? It is 2per cent simply because that happens to be somewhere around what the defence budget usually ends up being. It can't be 1per cent because that would mean less pie. And it can't be 10 per cent because no sane government would countenance it. Nor is calling defence expenditure "defence investment" persuasive. Defence expenditure provides no "return". Money spent on defence is money spent on a necessary evil – an insurance policy – not an investment.

If the Australia Defence Association wants to be taken seriously, it needs to lift its game.

Bronis Dudek, Calwell

Cuts to foreign aid

There have been expressions of dismay from the aid community about further cuts to foreign aid by the Abbott government. While these cuts are deplorable, they are not surprising. If the government considers it necessary to reduce spending or find savings, foreign aid is the obvious target because it does not have many votes. The present government is not the first to cut foreign aid in such circumstances, nor will it be the last.

To provide greater protection for the aid program, there is a need to develop a stronger community support base. This is easier said than done, but in the absence of greater public support, foreign aid will often be on the chopping block when the government decides to cut spending or redirect funds to higher-priority programs.

Erik Ingevics, Hackett

NIMBIES OUT IN FORCE

I must agree with Nicholls residents ("Residents rise up against planned public housing", May 19, p1) that it is inappropriate for public housing to be built in the Nicholls suburban centre. Tenants in public housing should not have to endure such selfish, ignorant, nimbies as their neighbours.

Chris Aulich, Giralang

The complaints of Nicholls and Gold Creek residents are the worst form of anti-social behaviour. Arrogant, snobbish nimbyism.

Dermot Balaam, Garran

SPENDING PRIORITIES

Hear hear, Peter Stanley (Letters, May 16). And no doubt Monash and all those who served and died would be outraged at the continued spending of dollars on the dead instead of on the vulnerable living, such as victims of domestic violence and the mentally ill in the criminal justice system.

M.A. Ellis, Bruce

TERMS OF ABUSE

Could we please have a moratorium on the term "rent seeking". Its literal meaning is requesting payment for use of premises or property, an entirely honest and legitimate transaction. It is currently used, with a quite different meaning, as a term of abuse for the seeking of undeserved government handouts. A recent offender is Jack Waterford ("Abbott loses courage in latest budget", Forum, May 16, p1). He should know better.

Max Brown, Mawson

MONEY-MAKING PLAN

More revenue cameras ("More speed cameras on the way", May 15, p1)? No longer constrained to "accident black spots"? Ah, well, I guess someone has to pay for the northside tram.

Michael Warrington, Garran

THE WORLD'S GONE MAD

Watching the news on Friday night, I couldn't help feeling sick at the obscene pictures on our TV: hundreds of human beings floating desperately and precariously on our oceans in a wreck of a boat – starving, thirsty, sick and unwanted by anyone. This story was followed by images of two dogs flying back to the luxury from whence they came – in a private jet. We've gone mad.

Sue Gerrard, Dunlop

STAMP OUT USURY

When the law of the ACT was brought over from NSW law, there was an anti-usury law that stayed on the books till the 1980s. The ACT sued the finance companies when they charged more then 18per cent and won. If the ACT reintroduced this law, other states would follow and the problem ("Payday loans hurting Canberrans", May 17, p5) would be solved.

Ben Gershon, Curtin

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).