Those ideologically opposed to the private sector will always cite the need to redirect funds to public healthcare. However, the PHI rebate encourages people on low to middle incomes to maintain health cover, which reduces pressure on our public hospital waiting lists.

As for the savings the Greens claim they could make from their policy to abolish the rebate, a review of the ATO's taxation statistics for 2013-14 shows that the actual net rebate paid by government that year was around $3.7 billion, not $5.5 billion as reported by some agencies.

The fact is that any plan to abolish the rebate will have an immediate negative impact on public hospitals and set the health budget back decades. Latest government figures show that 13.4 million Australians have some form of private health insurance.

Almost half of all Australians with private health insurance have an annual income of less than $50,000. If the rebate is further reduced, many Australians will be forced to drop or downgrade their health cover. Every Australian who pulls out of private health insurance will have to rely on the public hospital system and those who remain will have to pay higher premiums.

Dr Rachel David, CEO Private Healthcare Australia

Since the introduction of the Medicare levy in 1984, it has been calculated as a percentage of taxable income.

Over time the levy base has been eroded by the growth of allowable deductions associated with, inter alia, eligible superannuation contributions and negative gearing. This effectively means that, in many cases, higher income earners are contributing less to Medicare than would otherwise have been the case. This can be simply remedied by calculating the Medicare levy using "adjusted taxable income".

ATI is taxable income plus total net investment losses, plus foreign income not normally taxed in Australia, plus employer-provided fringe benefits (if worth more than $1000), and plus reportable super contributions.

It is used to determine eligibility for certain social security benefits such as the Commonwealth Seniors Health Card.

Adopting ATI for assessing the Medicare levy would raise many hundreds of millions for the budget and would make the taxation system fairer.

Dan Buchler, Waramanga

Your distressing article "Concern growing on plans for West Basin" ( July 11, page 1) brings to mind the famous Stanley Park in Vancouver, also beside water, centrally located and visible from many locations.

Thousands enjoy its existence every day, both close up and from across the bay. Its stunning contribution to the urban landscape continues, decade by decade.

We have a potential treasure at West Basin that could last for centuries. There should be no argument for development of this public land.

C. Burgess, Barton

First there came reports of the devastation of vast areas of the Great Barrier Reef (Canberra Times, June 30). Now there are reports of the loss of 10,000 hectares of mangroves across northern Australia (ABC, July 10) and 43 per cent of the nation's southern kelp forests (The Atlantic, July 7).

This on top of reports that gum trees are dying over an area of 2000 sq kms between Bredbo and Jindabyne (ANU), and an increase of 40 per cent in bushfire frequency (ABC, February 16).

All five are climate related. Yet our governments (and oppositions) persist in the same policies that are destroying our native landscapes, in encouraging the extraction and export of fossil fuels and in ignoring the concern of the overwhelming majority of Australians about the wrecking of our continent.

When will Australia have a government that cares about Australia?

Julian Cribb, Franklin

H. Ronald (Letters, July 11) predictably laments the ABC's lack of "balance" in reporting the settled direction of the science of climate change rather than the unfounded and discredited views of ill-informed and anti-scientific wishful thinkers with their heads in the sand.

It is similarly reprehensible that the ABC is not giving equal time to creationists alongside evolutionists or to flat earthers alongside astrophysicists.

Mike Hutchinson, Reid

First Andrew Barr and now the Institute for Public Affairs have let their subscription to The Canberra Times lapse.

How else can one explain the most recent article from the IPA's Mikayla Novak ("Protectionists do Australia no favours", July 8.) After all, every one of Novak's unsubstantiated assertions about the potential wonders for Australia's economy of our so-called free trade agreements was comprehensively debunked by Peter Martin in the previous day's edition.

Not only does Martin highlight the extent to which these agreements have actually been disastrous for our balance of payments, he also shows clearly that they are a nightmarish bureaucratic impost on Australian businesses trying to export. Given the evidence Martin brings against these various trade agreements, the IPA's support for them suggests they are locked in a time warp.

The closure of the wormhole of that time warp is fast approaching. However, with the forthcoming loss of up to 200,000 jobs once the IPA's long-standing globalist objective of destroying Australia's car manufacturing industry is realised next year.

Presumably, Novak and the IPA will be breaking out the champagne to celebrate their globalist triumph. They shouldn't imagine Australia's workers will want to share in the celebration.

Greg Ellis, Murrumbateman

I've been awaiting the inevitable outbreak of triumphalist "mandate" flapdoodle by the election winners and, sure enough, Senator Sinodinos obligingly got the ball rolling with his risible claims to the right of government policy carte blanche on Sunday. I'm sorry to prick the good Senator's balloon, but the only mandate any government ever has is what it can achieve by winning votes on the floor of parliament, and particularly so after an election as close as this one.

David Jenkins, Casey

There has never been a better time to be Malcolm Turnbull.

If he is ever to make his historical mark on Australian political history, it is now. The real Malcolm must return and seize the day.

Politics is the art of the possible, but great prime ministers have always extended the boundaries of the possible. The continuation of Abbott-lite timidity will only further erode his position: it has already brought him to the brink of disaster.

Does he have the courage to stride out and embrace the visionary challenges for which Australians have demonstrated they crave leadership: climate change, environment, renewable energy, education, innovation, budget repair, infrastructure, and even a royal commission on the banks, to mention a few. He would instantly repair his standing in the polls.

Ditching the blame-gaming and name calling would be a refreshing change. Honesty, transparency and accountability might come as a shock to the electorate at first, but it could transform Turnbull from a politician into a statesman.

Ray Edmondson, Kambah

ACT citizens aren't just under-represented in House of Representatives. Like the Northern Territory, we have only two senators. All the states, irrespective of population or the number of electors, have 12 each. I see no problem with each state and each territory being guaranteed a minimum number of seats in the House and the Senate. Such guarantees already safeguard some smaller parts of the federation, principally Tasmania.

The current safeguards though are open to abuse. Their coverage is uneven. The constitution extensively protects the representation rights of state citizens but less so territorians. Our representation rights are "retrofitted" legislatively. They are not entrenched, as comparable state rights are, by sections 6 and 24 of the constitution.

In the 1970s, giving each mainland territory two senators was a pretty bold step; 40-plus years on, it's tending towards tokenism. The concept of territory senators has survived constitutional challenge and is now firmly established in practice. But its effectiveness is increasingly diluted. The relative number of ACT Senate spots has not kept pace with increases in enrolments or population growth.

In 1984, each of the states got an extra two senators. The ACT and NT missed out entirely. A third ACT Senate seat would go some way to restoring our rights and that measure of "protection" we first enjoyed from 1974. I don't much mind who wins that third spot. But I'm well over the ACT being treated as an electoral and administrative gulag.

Bob Bennett, Wanniassa

I was reading Tim Dick's piece "Stopping greyhound racing must only be first step in battle for animal rights" (July 11) and agreeing with him until about halfway, where he said, "Greyhound racing falls on the wrong side of the stark moral line between humanely killing animals for human food, and abusing animals for human fun."

If we humans were actually obligated carnivores that statement may have some validity but the reality is that we can, and many of us do, live very well without animal products in our diet. In fact the evidence grows daily that we are healthier when we leave them off our plates.

So we are choosing to eat meat and other animal products purely because we enjoy it — we are abusing and killing billions of farmed animals yearly for our pleasure. There is no "stark moral line" between two forms of animal abuse and killing. It's appalling that thousands of healthy, intelligent greyhounds are killed in this country by the racing industry each year. But around 5 million healthy, intelligent pigs are killed here for the pleasure that humans find in consuming their flesh.

Stopping greyhound racing may be the first step, but there's plenty more steps to go.

Mike O'Shaughnessy, Spence

Thank you, Ross Gittins. Your article ("Sometimes there are forces more powerful than for-profit agencies", Times2, July 11, p9) has dispelled a nagging apprehension about the usefulness, and even credibility, of rating agencies. Last Sunday, July 10, in the ABC's Insiders program, on at least two occasions, the participants referred to Standard & Poor's advice to the government, warning it about Australia's midterm economic outlook. I found myself wondering what was the purpose of all those economic departments the government has if they are going to rely on the tea-leaf reading of a rating agency second-guessing the near-future performance of our economy.

Now I know that their deliberations are not particularly scientific or sophisticated and that their forecasts are probably worthless. But why does the government still persist in paying lip service (and possibly money) to those agencies?

John Rodriguez, Florey

Geoff Cousins, chair of the Australian Conservation Foundation, says the newly re-elected Coalition remains "without a credible plan to cut pollution or support clean energy" despite a clear indication from the electorate that this is what's wanted ("Australians still waiting for climate leadership", Comment, July 11).

Giles Parkinson of ReNew Economy has offered some policy options: "a carbon price, a higher renewable energy target (RET), a longer-dated RET and a RET mechanism that imposes penalties on utilities that fail to meet targets, rather than consumers".

Parkinson goes on: "They could impose emissions standards on coal plants, and vehicles. They could accelerate the exit of coal plants by imposing age limits. Most of all, they could instruct regulators to do all they can to remove the obstacles in the way of new technologies, and new business models that will not just clean up Australia's grid but make it more accessible to competitors and emerging technologies, and also cheaper for consumers."

It is in the clean energy area that is where innovation is needed most, along with courage to stand up to the fossil fuel lobby that is doing all it can to hold us back from meeting our international obligations on climate.

Jenny Goldie, Michelago

It's really good to see the National Film and Sound Archive coming alive again during the day with people visiting its exhibitions, and parents and their children coming to its school holiday screening programs. However, since the NFSA changed the parking arrangements at its Acton head office from a two-hour limit to all-day parking, the NFSA is a hard place to visit during working hours. This appears to conflict with its published service Charter, which states that the public can expect it to "provide easily accessible facilities".

As we all know, in Canberra that means reasonable access to car parking. I notice that the NFSA senior executive cohort have their very own boom-gated parking at the side of the main building. No pushbikes or Action buses for them.

Certainly, there are a few quarter-hour and one-hour spaces on the front driveway. But these are not adequate forthe people hoping to attenda two-hour film in the 248-seat Arc cinema.

The NFSA's service Charter was last updated in April 2011 and I suppose things have moved on since then. In that case may I suggest that they refresh the charter to reflect their current commercial imperatives.

Stephen Frost, Flynn

There's a saying when an auditor says something critical in a report, "Who audits the auditors?" That could well apply to Standard & Poor's threat that the Australian banks should raise more capital (Forum, July9, page 7).

I don't know what qualifies a foreign firm to tell Australian banks what they should do, but I'm certainly not impressed by a spokesman for the firm saying, "There is a significant gap between (the banks' present capital and what they need)" and at the same time saying thebanks "already are well capitalised".

R. S. Gilbert, Braddon

PLEASE EXPLAIN

Could someone please explain the rationale for a payout to election candidates who achieve a 4 per cent acceptance ("Hanson hits the jackpot", July 10, page 1)?

I concede a case could be made for reimbursing personal, not party, legitimate campaign expenses but why give a handout to the successful candidates who will reap the rewards through the parliamentary salary?

Ken McPhan, Spence

TURNBULL ON NOTICE

Malcolm Turnbull has until the new year to demonstrate his leadership abilities to govern this country.

I question his qualifications after the comments concerning Pauline Hanson he made during the run-up to the election.

How dare he say that Hanson was not welcome into the Parliament?

Robert S. Buick, Mountain Creek, Queensland

A DOG'S LIFE

We destroy tens of thousands of functioning unborn human beings each year, millions of animals for food or to reduce numbers, many more thousands of companion animals whoare either not wanted or just inconvenient to have around, but afew thousand more destroyed humanely in the dog racing industry is apparently beyond the pale. What am I missing here?

H. Ronald, Jerrabomberra

REBOOT REFUND

Those 12 "donors" who in 1998 provided then Minister Abbott (with Howard's covert acquiescence) $100,000 towards "Australians for Honest Politics", with the aim of politically assassinating One Nation by funding Sharples' legal action, must feel like demanding their money back ("Hanson reboot", Forum, July 9, page 1).

Albert M. White, Queanbeyan.

KEEP EYES OPEN

Canberrans must remain vigilant to the continual threats to our wonderful green spaces and corridors. If welook away for a moment, some developer (with government connivance) will snatch another piece of our lovely open spaces, and it will be gone forever.

A. V. Peterson, Kambah

WHOSE PARTY?

After reading the article "Nationals set to drive hard bargain, says Joyce" (July 11, p4) and [Barnaby] Joyce's push for a secret agreement with the Liberal Party, isn't it about time the Liberal Party severed its relationship with the Nationals, and formed a Coalition with the Labor Party, with which it would have more in common these days?

John Milne, Chapman

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).