As I see it, the Coalition's strategy is proceeding exactly as planned. With three years between elections the plan for the first year is complete. That is, go in hard with a series of ideologically-driven, unpopular policies that favour big business and the well-off and disadvantage the poor (and we know what they are).

In the second year, when you have become so unpopular you are threatened with defeat at the next election, you go very quiet, consultative and empathetic and the electorate begins to think "Well, they aren't so bad after all and maybe it was just us".

In the third year, with the election looming, you go on a big spending spree, granting tax cuts and handing out money to all and sundry. Then you win by a narrow margin – and that's when you really fire up, claiming a "mandate" for your ugly, inequitable agenda. Hang on to your hats, folks, it's going to be a bumpy ride! They haven't even started.

Michael Slocum, Ascot Vale, Victoria

"Facts" trumpeted the Prime Minister in Question Time on Thursday, on the latest Intergenerational Report: "These are facts!" Well, no, Prime Minister, they aren't.

All four reports work the same way. They're projections, as each report carefully explains. They aim to suggest what might happen, if nothing much changes in the mean time, over the next 40 years. Assumptions range from common sense through near heroic to little more than best guess. Fine for the slow-moving tide of population change – we'll certainly have a larger, older population and all four reports have pretty much agreed by how much.

But on the economy and the budget, well, the guess-work can only result in far less certain outcomes and most certainly not "facts". As our Prime Minister must surely know, having read any of them.

At best, these reports are an early warning: to plan, in a non-partisan way, for inevitable population and climate change; by fairly addressing both revenue and spending with an eye to the truly long term and the national good. I won't hold my breath.

D. Clark, Latham

Andrew Leigh's article "Progressives should love economic growth, too" ( The Public Sector Informant March 8, p16) is erudite and wide-ranging. However, the article does not address the inescapable fact that all growth has its limits.

The mathematics of growth towards its limit was first formulated by the Belgian mathematician, Verhulst, in 1838. He predicted that a growing population will follow a stretched-out "S" shaped curve, first accelerating, then progressing in an approximately linear fashion, then decelerating and finally settling down at the carrying capacity.

Since Verhulst's time it has been found that his equation also describes growth of many human systems. In manufacturing, production follows the sigmoid curve towards market saturation, in agriculture the limit to growth is maximum yield per hectare and so on.

The point of diminishing returns is reached when growth decelerates but humankind has ever proved unable to stabilise its systems at this point. Living close to the carrying capacity is no fun: indeed, before the Industrial Revolution it was, as Leigh quotes Hobbes, "nasty, brutish and short". Then the life expectancy for at least half of humankind was less than 30. Even allowing for child mortality the words of Psalm 90 that "the days of our years are three-score years and ten" indicates that things were better 2800 years earlier.

Leigh's article reads as a panegyric today, in 50 years time it will serve as a eulogy.

Nick Ware, O'Connor

In its recent report on the Liberal Party internal dispute, the Canberra Times cited Liberal fund-raiser Phil Higginson as having "laid out my plans to the PM" to travel to the United States to raise "tens of millions" from donors ("Trouble in Abbott's camp", February 24, p1). The silence both from media and politics since this revelation has been extraordinary.

Nobody donates to a political party unless they expect something in return. The investment of tens of millions of foreign dollars in an Australian political party – currently the government – by undisclosed foreign interests, for ulterior purposes, represents the gravest threat to Australian democracy.

It is reasonable to suppose these donors may represent the ultra-right of US politics and the powerful corporations which sponsor it. This would explain much about the current LNP government's behaviour: its determination to degrade Australia's health, education and welfare systems to abysmal US levels; its debasement of traditional Australian values of fairness, equality and equity; its move to turn our universities into profit-driven degree shops; its ardour for unwinnable military adventures that increase the terrorist threat to Australians; its enthusiasm for NSA-style plans to spy on the entire population; its reluctance to tax big US corporates while raising the burden on low- and medium-income Australians; its willingness to sacrifice future Australians to a fictional belief in a "stable" climate; its war on science; its prejudices against women, multiculturalism and the Muslim community; its brutal attitude to those seeking sanctuary.

None of these are Australian ideas or values. They are all artefacts of the American hard right in all its savage, bigoted, ignorance and selfishness. The issue for Australians to consider is that our political parties may now, apparently, be funded by these non-Australian, un-Australian elements.

Julian Cribb, Franklin

Thank you for the side-by-side publication of two excellent articles on planning and urban development by Ross Gittens ("Growth comes in the centre, so boost access", Times2, March 4, p5)) and Jane Goffman ("McMansions damaging the garden city's uniqueness", Times2, March 4, p5).

Though they came from very different perspectives, it is in the tension between them that an enormously important lesson for Canberra can be learned.

Ross Gittens is absolutely right: we must achieve compact cities with high mobility, primarily through excellent public transport. Plans to begin rolling out a territory-wide light rail system, combined with the transit-oriented development it will encourage, are vital if we are to avoid the growing social and economic problems of Sydney and Melbourne that Kelly and Donegan's City Limits exposes.

But Jane Goffman is equally right: that "quiet, leafy, spacious feel" is indeed one of the great virtues and attractions of Canberra. The common enemy of both is the gross McMansion, now too readily permitted by planning-in-practice, despite public assurances to the contrary. The common solution to both is better public transport and corresponding transit-oriented development – ideally with rather higher environmental standards than has been the norm in Canberra of late, and shading quickly down to open, green suburbs. This allows Ross's economic density where it's needed and Jane's healthy space where it's wanted.

It's easier said than done, but this is the only real way to get the best of both worlds and make Canberra the best city it can be for all of us: one that truly earns the title of world's most liveable city.

Felix MacNeill, Dickson

Downer is on track to be the first Canberra suburb where all presence of ACT government institutions is slowly vanishing. Downer will soon have no community-use land – the last three hectares of the former public primary school site is to be sold off to developers for apartment blocks. The preschool is on its last legs despite plenty of eligible kids, due to bureaucratic bungling, or if you are a conspiracy theorist, they want it to close so it can be sold to private enterprise. We may lose our shops as the government has put every obstacle in the way of the current owner, who wants to restore the 1930s heritage listed building and reopen them. The public toilets are to close in May after 40 years of service with no correspondence to be entered into with TAMS. This stripping of services from the community is happening at a time when the local population is growing and the number of kids is expanding rapidly, according to the census data.

The government is also planning to shoehorn another 300 units into central Downer, which will represent a 20per cent increase of total dwelling numbers in the suburb in one development. This is even before the development corridor associated with the light rail project hits.

You can't help but think the current planning is the antithesis of the original Canberra vision of walkable, liveable, self-contained communities centred around schools, shops and neighbourhood facilities.

Miles Boak, Downer

If you really want to compare apples to apples, Terry Werner (Letters, March 5), the true rail comparison for the proposed Canberra light rail is not with Sydney's former Monorail, which was a tourist gimmick for Darling Harbour, but rather with the highly successful and recently extended light rail service from Central Station to Dulwich Hill. This is being articulated with Sydney's broader public transport network – a good model for Canberra, where the land is more readily available.

Bruce Ryan, Kambah

Graham Downie ("Action on public transport needed urgently", Times 2, March 2, p5) is right. Fourteen years is a long time to wait for some action. Moreover, another report is not "action". A public transport service which pays for itself and meets the needs of Canberra's people ought to be a matter of common sense. But common sense seems in short supply with ACTION senior management, and their political masters as well. A "light rail system" which will serve a fraction of Canberra at an enormous cost to be borne by the whole of Canberra is nonsense. The time to build a light rail infrastructure was decades ago. We already have a perfectly good roads infrastructure which can easily carry a "light bus" service. This service would be able to penetrate further into the suburbs and find clients waiting.

ACTION would have to drop usage of the semi-trailer buses and other "super' buses." It might mean they don't have "big toys" to play with ... It might also mean more fuel efficient buses and more drivers with "light bus" licences who are not frustrated and who are not "hated by the public". Let's not sell off the "bush capital" image which Northbourne Avenue represents.

Len Kelly, Wanniassa

Tom McIlroy ("Pay parking in triangle boosts Canberra's bus patronage", March 4, p3) is guilty of editorialising whilst reporting. "Maligned bus network"? Maligned by who? I have caught ACTION buses to and from work every day for three years, and it's an experience I enjoy. Helpful and cheerful bus drivers, a chance to read a novel on the way to work and avoiding the stress of traffic make it a great service.

It's not a perfect network (and could use more buses on weekends!), but our bus networks need to be supported, not trashed. The 27,000 people who go by ACTION every week no doubt agree.

Alex Cassie, Turner

Bob Furbank (Letters, March 3) refers to tailgating and regular road fatalities "like the one outside our front gate". I live in the inner north, yet witnessed a road fatality in my suburban street. Driving trucks along highways, or family cars along suburban streets, are responsible tasks. Yet road rules and vehicle safety regulations are commonly ignored.

I'd rather pay more to governments to have road rules and safety regulations effectively enforced, than pay more to insurance companies to obtain (partial) recompense for loss and trauma suffered in preventable "accidents". Costly road re-engineering solutions are not the answer. Unless persuaded otherwise, some drivers will persist in disregarding the safety of other road users and some vehicle owners will continue to flout safety regulations.

David Teather, Reid

The next time a young person asks me for advice about a career in science, I'll probably suggest they explore business studies, beauty therapy, politics or almost anything else. Australian governments and employers say more of us need STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) skills, yet Christopher Pyne thought it was a good idea to tell the crossbench senators to pass the government's higher education reforms or 1700 scientists will get the boot.

It takes a long time to grow a scientist or engineer, and if you sack them, it is hard to get them back. Nobody goes into a career in science to get rich, but without some continuity of employment it is hard to see how we will persuade any of the next generation to take the risk.

Alison Rowell, Ainslie

Which are out of place in this list of gargoyles at the Australian War Memorial: Aboriginal man, Aboriginal woman, black swan, bearded dragon, bush turkey, carpet snake, cassowary, cockatoo, cuscus, dingo, frilled-neck lizard, frog, frogmouth, goanna, gurnet, kangaroo, koala, kookaburra, mopoke, mountain devil, platypus, possum, Tasmanian devil, wedge-tailed eagle, wombat?

Have we lived too long in cities to recognise the pattern. The frog and the gurnet are out of place! These aquatic creatures can be found around the world. The remainder are, for the most part, uniquely Australian. Each is a recognisable symbol of Australia. Among these, the Aboriginal man and woman take pride of place.

Given time, we hotchpotch race of recent settlers may earn the right to be symbols of Australia. Not yet.

The Australia our servicemen fought for is well served by the symbols chosen to represent it. The gargoyles should remain, especially the pair who represent the custodians of the past.

Peter Snowdon, Aranda

ISSUE OFF THE TABLE

It's wonderful to read climate change is no longer an issue ("Climate change no longer a budget problem for future generations", canberratimes.com.au, March 5). Just bring in harsh ideologically driven budget cuts, light up a cigar and problem solved.

Thos Puckett, Ashgrove

Dear Joe, I am 70 and I am working. I just don't get paid for it. It's called "volunteering", and my work benefits many Australians.

M. Pietersen, Kambah

A SIMPLE TREAT

Having read the elaborate, OTT and at times hilarious description of the food on offer at Terry Durack's selection of the top 12 restaurants in Australia (Food & Wine, March 4, p3-4) I felt the need for something simple, tasty and nutritious like baked beans on toast!

Rosalind Bruhn, Curtin

LEST WE FORGET

The advertisement for Canberra's Anzac Centenary Tribute (Food & Wine, March 4, p6) invites us to "pack a picnic and relax by Lake Burley Griffin". Are we actually commemorating the 60,000 Australians killed in the industrial-scale slaughter of 1914-18 and the countless more shattered lives, or celebrating ?

Sue Wareham, Cook

CLEAN-UP NEEDED

It is pleasing to see that the Barr government can afford to give $800,000 to assist the Westside container village ("Westside's container village finally getting an autumn opening", March 4, p4). However, when will the same government find funds and action to clean up the suburbs of Canberra where long grass and unsightly graffiti proliferates.

Trevor Willis, Hughes

ELIMINATE SITES

It was announced recently that the ACT government is going to create more "official" graffiti sites and eliminate others. Andrew Barr, how about eliminating the thousands of "unofficial" graffiti sites that are a blight on our cityscape? Or don't you care?

Mr B. J. Millar, Isabella Plains

DRUG PREDATORS

Yes, Tim James (Letters, March 4), I and many Australian doctors question the integrity of the pharmaceutical industry. And I suggest that anyone who trusts them to put their profits second to consumer safety or product effectiveness is naive. And we cannot rely on our Therapeutic Goods Administration to protect us from predatory marketing, going on past performance and the list of products banned in the US but still approved for sale here.

J.J. Heywood, Spence

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).