Idiotic case a waste

In addition to the personal stress and distress suffered by the individual, the taxpayer once again foots the bill for an idiotic case that should never have been initiated in the first place. And the author of that decision that actually wasted public money pays no penalty whatsoever. Brilliant.

He or she has a bright future in politics.

Ramesh Thakur, O'Connor

Union drives costs up

C. Williams (Letters, May 13) has written about the excessive costings to lay track from Sydney (via Canberra) to Melbourne when comparing this to China's or Europe's prices.

The explanation is pretty simple, if you read Cameron Spence's article ("CFMEU taking us for a ride", Times2, May 13, p1).

It's the CFMEU driving up prices by only using affiliated builders/contractors.

This cartel like practice drives up the cost 20 to 30 per cent. Once we rid our country of this Mafia we will start to see more infrastructure being undertaken. At the moment it is just too expensive. Who'd have thought that construction workers would be earning the same as lawyers and accountants?

Michell Fegan, Kingston

Cameron Spence writes that we know that the CFMEU, via Unions ACT, have been involved in the tender process for light rail.

Stephen Sasse, a former executive of CIMIC (part of the winning consortium) adds "there's kind of a cartel, kind of a notion between the union and [builders]."

This then is the same cosy cabal which gifted $65 millions to CIMIC's Spanish workers, to build and ship from Europe 14 trams to Gungahlin, ignoring the Australian-built rival tender.

Can the Minister for Capital Metro confirm to the hundreds of steelworker families in Whyalla (as they submit their applications for unemployment benefits) that these trams will at least travel on rails manufactured in Australia, and not imported?

David Dickson, Kaleen

What do roos do?

Here we go again, another 2000 kangaroos needlessly slaughtered in the bush capital over the coming months ("Activists vow to fight annual kangaroo cull", May 14, p1). It will be argued they have an impact on endangered eco systems. What a tired, predictable and worn out message. Unchecked livestock and weeds cause far more damage to the grasslands that support the Golden sun moth, Perunga grasshopper and grassland earless dragons than these soft footed native animals do.

Chris Doyle, Gordon

I was shocked and saddened to read of the ACT government's plans to kill 2000 kangaroos to "protect biodiversity", but even more upset to read further that their meat will be used as bait so that even more wild animals, including wild dogs and foxes, can be killed.

This is as shortsighted as the United States government's "Wildlife Services" which indiscriminately kills wild predators to satisfy ranching interests in the West. Don't these officials, yours as well as ours, realise that predators will help keep these so-called "pest" prey animals in check? Please let nature take its course and stop the killing!

Laurel Gress, Wadsworth, Ohio, USA

Membership no benefit

I choked on my Weet-Bix as I read in this morning's Canberra Times ("Dunne used parliament stationary by mistake", May 14, p6) that Vicki Dunne is in London attending another meeting of that useless junket-generator, the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.

I believe the Commonwealth government relinquished its membership of this irrelevant and self-serving collection of despots and hangers-on some time ago, presumably on the basis that it cost time and money, for no identifiable return. Just how do the taxpayers of the ACT get any benefit from this farce? The ACT government should end its pretentious membership of this useless and entirely inappropriate organisation immediately — not even Bronwyn Bishop would have the effrontery to waste taxpayers' money on such blatant jolly.

Steve Anderson, Forrest

Staged proposal

Grocon and GWS seem to be employing a tried and tested two-stage approach to progressing their development proposal for Manuka Oval. Stage one involves the release of an ambit claim to promote a public outcry. Stage two involves making minor changes to demonstrate how consultative and inclusive they are being.

The beauty of stage two is that it directs attention from fundamental questions such as "is this development required at all" or "could another developer deliver a better outcome at a lower price". If Manuka Oval, and it's a very big if, requires such major redevelopment it should only occur after a rigorous planning process to determine exactly what is required to meet community aspirations.

This would be followed by an open tender process to see which developer can deliver the best outcome for the community. The current process with its apparent behind-the-scenes involvement of former politicians and staffers does not inspire confidence especially after the recent revelation that the Chief Minister is also happy to spruik on behalf of certain developers.

Jim Derrick, Florey

High hopes for Oval

Your editorial ('Oval bid has the feel of a done deal', Times2, May 13, p2) repeats the "hope" expressed by the chief operating officer of the GWS-Grocon consortium, Richard Griffiths, that the consortium would spend $80 million to $100 million on stadium improvements. This important information, however, is not the same as the advice provided by Grocon and AFL representatives on the last day of their consultations. These officers confirmed that no more than $40 million would be spent on improvements.

And they said these figures could be reduced depending on the government's own refurbishments now in train and on the eventual scope of the development. Canberrans need to know that they and the Barr Government are being taken for mugs.

Paula Harris, Narrabundah

Tom Swann's article "Territory leads nation in race towards clean energy" (Times2, May 11,p5) highlights how the ACT is making the Federal Government look backward on this issue. Strangely, however, he does not mention the leader who has made this happen: ACT Minister for Environment and Climate Change, Simon Corbell, who has developed and implemented this policy with such spectacular success.

It should also be noted that the ACT, through its 20 per cent weighting of assessment of bids on community engagement processes for proposed developments, is also leading State jurisdictions toward better consultation processes.

Minister Corbell's community engagement policy is based on CSIRO research and successful European models whereas those of the State Governments are derived from top down models to service the mining industry at the expense of communities.

Tragically Minister Corbell is resigning – apparently due to local factional ALP issues. Hopefully a safe seat in Federal Parliament will later be provided so that he can help lead us nationally out of the coal-fired darkness.

In any respect, political descendants in future will undoubtedly be following his path and hopefully will also recognise his achievement with a memorial or statue in a prominent public space.

Frank Ross, Hackett

Darker days ahead

Am I the only person to think that the fluorescent lights that we have replaced the old incandescent lights with offer far less brightness of light?

I feel that the lesser intensity of the light from them will probably lead to people's eyesight deteriorating much more quickly than it used to and hence doctors finding that they have to prescribe glasses to more people at a younger age than they used to.

Peter Tobler, Macgregor

It would appear that that accomplished spinner, Malcolm Turnbull sold the promise of a Siberian Gold Mine to investors and walked away with a handsome return ("Ill-fated Star struck gold for Turnbull", BusinessDay, May 13, p10).

However the gold mine did not materialise and the investors lost. Now Mr Turnbull is selling another illusory 'gold mine' to Australian voters – the promise of "jobs and growth". He is likely to take away the gold trophy, namely the prime ministership, but "jobs and growth" is unlikely to materialise in a substantial way.

Lorraine Perera, Oxley

Contradiction

I wonder if Scott Rashleigh (Letters, May 14) recognised the fundamental contradiction in his letter, in which he says Turnbull is the better choice to manage the economy, but that he will vote Labor in the Senate so Shorten can vote down the Coalition's proposed super changes.

It appears that Mr Rashleigh's approach is to want Turnbull to make the hard economic decisions while putting Labor in a position to block them? That does seem strange, or perhaps it's just that Mr Rashleigh only wants tough economic decisions that don't affect him?

Kym MacMillan, O'Malley

Scott Rashleigh is typical of those voting who are not interested in good government. Of course it's anyone's right to vote however they want to, but if everyone followed his suggestion of voting one way in the House of Representatives and another way in the Senate, they would be denying the 'winner' any chance of governing.

Whether you vote Labor or Liberal, at least vote consistently in both the Lower and the Upper House and give the winner a chance to show what they are capable of. You can always vote them out next time. All Scott Rashleigh is going to do is create even more dysfunction where everything gets passed in the Lower House and gets blocked in the Upper. That's not good government – it's just pig-headedness and achieves nothing.

Janet Fletcher, O'Connor

Dribble-down effect

I find it hard to believe that in this election the Liberal/National conservatives are still "spruiking" supply-side economics. I am also surprised that the conservatives sought the advice of Arthur Laffer, a former adviser to President Regan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. (I am tempted to comment that the Assistant Treasurer Kelly O'Dwyer and the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry might have been better off inviting Rowan Atkinson's character Mr Bean to present his economic modelling rather than Mr Laffer). Mr Laffer's Curve of 40 years ago, underpins what the Political Right want to hear — that if Government reduces taxes (which presumably mean reduced Government services), then the economy will benefit. This action will in turn produce a "trickle down" economic effect, giving tax relief to the wealthy, and this will result in greater investment and private consumption, thereby stimulating demand. In other words, "Jobs and Growth." Surely the conservatives have progressed beyond such simplistic economics.

"Dribble down" economics, sorry, I mean "Trickle down" economics, no, on second thoughts I do mean "Dribble down "economics, is a redundant, out of date economic philosophy and not an effective economic model for the issues of the 21st century. Dribble down economics has not produced greater economic benefit to communities, in fact just the opposite is probably true, in that it has produced greater economic inequality within the western economies. Unfortunately, the trouble with any form of "dribble" is that it produces a mess that somebody always has to clean up afterwards.

In short we need far better economic models than Mr Laffer's "napkins" model.

In terms of building rigorous research based economic models, could somebody please point out to politicians that "correlation does not imply causation". Causation can never be proved statistically, although at best it may be very strongly suggested. However politicians seem to be quite cavalier and happy to "spruike" that as a consequence of their Government policy such and such will result; e.g. jobs and growth. Really, then show me. We really must demand, through our media and through competent journalists, greater analysis, research and synthesis.

A sound research base on which to build our economic policy for the 21st century Australian economy is definitely not to be found by following the "noise" of some economic popularist.

Mike Flanagan, Farrer

Too positive

Excellent article by Sean Burges on the political coup against ousted Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff ('Early signs from Brazil's new President not promising', Forum, May 15, p7) highlighting the essentially elitist, undemocratic composition of the anti-Rousseff plotters.

The plotters have of course been long supported by the ruling elites of the West who see Rousseff's real crime has been her enthusiastic and crucial embrace of the anti-New World Order partnership of BRICS countries, Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa which has proved to be an increasingly effective bulwark against the US-NATO-Israel agenda for global hegemony. Rousseff has also been a strong long time critic of Israel's treatment of the Palestinian people.

Of course such things can never be admitted, and so instead she is impeached on the hilarious charge of presenting overly positive statistics about the state of Brazil's economy as a ploy for getting re-elected!

Australia's politicians better hope we never get that kind of criminal law put in place!

Greg Ellis, Murrumbateman, NSW

Black day for arts

Is there no end to the Turnbull government's penny-pinching. Last Friday was a black day for 62 arts companies which had their funding cut through the Australia Council. As a "man of culture", I thought Mr Turnbull would have been extremely interested in fostering all aspects of the arts to ensure a well rounded society.

Obviously not. Perhaps we could cancel a few fighter jets to fund the arts. This government seems to specialise in "death by a thousand cuts".

Barbara Godfrey, Lyneham

MIDDLING MALCOLM

Some people thought that Malcolm Turnbull had a vision of wanting to lead Australia into the future.

In reality, however, it seems that he has focused solely on leading the Liberal Party – a party which was briefly accorded the label: "The Abbott-Turnbull Government."

The hopes of many have been shattered.

Howard Spicer, Bondi Beach, NSW

LIGHT ON THE SHRILL

Thank you, Vince Patulnay (Letters, May 13) for your criticism of "econobabble such as growth and jobs". It cast a blinding ray of light on my previous understanding that Jobson Groath was an economist advising both major parties.

Bill Deane, Chapman

WHY CROW GROW?

Jobs and growth. Repeated ad nauseam. Jobs, yes; we all know what jobs are; we want and need them. But growth?

What do we all want and need more of, personally? Surely not just a budgeted bottom line. And surely there must be a limit to growth. When?

Malcolm Whyte, Weston

PLEASE EXPLAIN

How is it that the rich get incentivised by receiving benefits from the government, but the poor get incentivised by having benefits taken away? How does that work?

Anna Molan, Holder

IT WASN'T BEN

John Enders (Letters, May 13) was nearly right about the late-night visitor to the Niagara Café. It was actually John Curtin; the story is written on the wall.

Bob Gardiner, Isabella Plains

I think, John Enders (Letters, May 13), we should go a little easy on Ian Warden for a while. He may be somewhat depressed.

Norwich City were relegated from the Premier League.

Robin Poke, Hughes

MANUKA MISGIVINGS

While the sham, "unsolicited", GWS-Grocon project at Manuka appears to be a done deal (Editorial, "Oval bid has the feel of a done deal", Times2, May13, p2), it should be stopped in its tracks until it can be compared with the "design competitors" that David Waldren wishes us to compare it with.

Murray Upton, Belconnen

EXPLAIN THE RULES

Will there be an MOU with the ACT government and the CFMEU for the Cotter Road duplication and the new pool planned at Molonglo, and if so, what are the details for we taxpayers?

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).