Canberra Times Letters to the Editor: Brekkie initiative

And most sincere gratitude to the donor behind this heart and belly-warming initiative. We'll stop in for a coffee of our own some time.

Where and how can we donate to ensure this program continues?

Judy Bamberger, O'Connor

I had to read your article ("ACT Government to review Canberra sex worker laws", CT, July 9) twice. Everyone is entitled to their own view of the sex industry and those who for many reasons work in it. But this article says far more about our current governance than the sex industry.

According to the article, the government is considering changes to the Prostitution Act, following a 2011 inquiry. Six years from inquiry to "considering"! But it gets better.

The original inquiry was prompted by the death of a 17-year-old working in a Canberra brothel nine years ago. Nine years from a child's miserable death in a brothel to "We're thinking about making changes".

I don't know if this is indicative of their callous attitude to sex workers, teenagers who go off the rails, or both.

Mike Crowther, Lyneham

Gary J.Wilson (July 9) is a bit severe in his rejection of Tony Trobe's concept of densification for Canberra ("Design Matters", June 3).

After all, the government's urban development proposals for concrete canyons of apartments and shops formed along tram lines do not exactly fill one with expectations for future planning awards.

There is a hybrid suburban densification scheme that I find attractive. Aim to develop a population of 1000 within 300 metres of every suburban centre, while broadly retaining existing planning for other parts of suburbs. These focal areas would also host information-based industries and other harmonious activities such as health services thus forming distributed employment centres.

All suburban residents would benefit by having viable businesses that provide good food and social amenities a short distance from their home.

While rezoning existing suburbs would meet with strong resistance, new and emerging technologies underline the case for this type of development in new suburbs and in redevelopments.

John L Smith, Farrer

So Mark Parton, at age 21, borrows $1000, chances it all, and ends up $100 down for the day ("Liberal reveals battle with gambling", July 9).

Does this sanctimonious wanna-be "problem gambler" seriously believe this qualifies him to pontificate on gambling addiction? Sorry, Mark – come back and talk to us when your bank account is constantly in negative numbers and when you have lied to your partner for years, destroyed relationships, and been left surrounded only by self-deception and denial.

Until then, don't tell us that you understand problem gambling.

Karina Morris, Weetangera

Mark Parton has no idea about problem gambling (poker machines) with regard to the difference between access to money from ATMs and eftpos machines in clubs. An ATM in a club has a daily limit of $250 whereas an eftpos machine has a transaction limit of $1000. You can therefore do more than one $1000 transaction.

Clubs clearly circumvented the limit on ATM withdrawals by introducing eftpos machines that allow patrons to withdraw as much money as their financial institution will allow, including overdrafts. ATMs within walking distance in shopping centres is irrelevant, and eftpos machines in clubs is unnecessary.

Steven Hurren, Macquarie

We commend Mark Parton for sharing his story of gambling addiction. This is never easy to do and each lived experience of a social issue provides an unique perspective regarding gambling harm. Every person's story is different and what helps one person may not help someone else. There is no silver bullet to reducing gambling harm but what we do know is that a range of measures will contribute to protecting consumers and, given the power of the gaming industry, provide a more level playing field for those people accessing products that are known to be harmful. Mechanisms such as restricting access to cash in gambling venues have been shown to be an effective measure in that it can reduce the level of unplanned losses by people affected by gambling harm. It's a simple approach aimed at breaking a run of play to give consumers the space to consider if they can sustain ongoing losses.

The proposed restrictions to withdrawing cash via eftpos may marginally inconvenience some patrons and won't stop everyone from feeding a gambling addiction. However, just because it is not the perfect measure doesn't mean we shouldn't adopt this reasonable and modest reform.

As individuals involved in services that pick up the pieces when people's lives have been devastated by gambling addiction, we think it's time for new approaches. It's time to introduce a range of modest reforms where we have evidence that they will contribute to reducing harm to the community.

While industry voices will loudly protest any proposed changes, we question the need for patrons to require large amounts of cash or multiple mechanisms to access this cash inside gambling venues given what we know about the risks of gambling harm. We think it's time to put people first instead.

Rebecca Vassarotti and Jeremy Halcrow, co-chairs, Canberra Gambling Reform Alliance

Over half of Jack Kershaw's latest solution to town planning and housing availability was a long preamble of dog-whistles (letters, Sunday CT, July 9).

Eventually, he disclosed his plan. He recommended developments with pre-subdivided blocks and small houses on one of the subdivisions spec-built by, and with purchaser finance supplied by, the town council. That sounds like densification by stealth to me.

His further suggestion that purchasers initially buy only half of the pre-subdivided blocks, and later buy the rest and extend the house, would encourage, if not guarantee, shoebox developments with a common driveway shared by a battle-axe block at the rear.

Townhouse precincts offer better facilities than this suggestion. It's so ridiculous that Mr Kershaw might just be mocking developers pushing to subdivide everything larger than a pocket handkerchief.

Gary J. Wilson, Macgregor

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).