Last stand for taxis

In May last year, Uber CEO Travis Kalanick said that the company has no choice but to "throw mud" at taxi companies and the associations that represent the taxi industry. Previously, Uber was forced to deny that one of their executives, Emil Michael, had meant what he said when he suggested hiring opposition researchers to focus on [non-compliant] reporters [to discredit them](BuzzFeed News Nov 21, 2014).

Buzzfeed also reported that David Plouffe, former Obama campaign manager, was appointed by Uber to lead a campaign-like effort that included both Uber's communications shop and the newly created opposition research role.

Regarding this effort, Kalanick said, "Uber is the candidate and [the opponent] is an asshole called taxi."

In response to Wednesday's taxi drivers' strike in Canberra, claiming it was organised by [evil] investors, not drivers, Uber has emailed its Australian contacts and asked them to plead via email to the ACT

government to allow them the choice of how they travel around our city. The fact is that the taxi drivers' strike was organised by taxi drivers and some operators. I saw only two taxi owners among the protesters.

Uber's arguments have often focused on "evil taxi", painting taxi owners as monopolists and exploiters. Individuals own around 200 of Canberra's 217 perpetual taxi licences. Many of them are widows and former owner/drivers who rely on them for their retirement income.

A perusal of the net will throw up the real story of Uber, the complaints from its drivers about broken promises and shocked customers after a "surge pricing" ride. It will throw up Uber's methods of

dealing with complaints from drivers, customers and governments: "ignore and push on". Meanwhile, watch out for the "bullrush".

John McKeough, chairman, Canberra Taxi Industry Association

It is difficult to take ActewAGL seriously when it responds through its highly paid CEO (Letters, September 17 )

advising that the first postponement of power interruption across hundreds of homes and businesses in Hawker, for a seven hour period, was due to "short notice" from a subcontractor.

One would expect from an organisation as large and influential as ActewAGL that such an important and disruptive event would require a serious back-up plan, not just a fall-back position to simply postpone and unilaterally ignore the original formal notice. Customers make plans and prepare for such a long period of outage; ActewAGL should reciprocate.

ActewAGL and contractors must understand the political and business fallout this causes. Large penalties should apply. Customers can understand safety concerns when we have inclement weather, but to be held to ransom by contractors on such an important issue is not on. ActewAGL needs to strengthen its planning and not offer lame excuses.

John Whitty, Hawker

Jack Kershaw's criticism (Letters, September 17) of the awful units that are spreading like mushrooms all over Canberra hits the nail right on the head. The majority are energy inefficient, while still carrying an EER rating of anything between 5-7. Tony Trobe has battled for a long time to point out that the EER system is basically rubbish.

The basic design of an energy efficient house, unit, etc, is simple: it faces north with large windows to capture the winter sun at 700 watts per square metre and has adequate shading of the north windows to keep the summer sun out.

None of the houses, units being built in Gungahlin meet these basic criteria and yet claim to be energy efficient – virtually none face between 20º NE and 15º NW as the preferred orientation and none have any shading of the windows.

Many have west windows, which will make the houses very hot. In addition there is no co-ordinated green space between individual tower blocks of units – they simply open onto concrete – where do children play?

Basically our lovely garden city of 20 years ago is being ruined by the ACT government for money with no ideas for the future. Other cities, such as Brisbane, are doing a better job of integrating tower blocks with green space and cycle paths.

Dave Roberts, Dickson

Thanks Jack Kershaw (Letters, September 17) for your views that I agree with wholeheartedly.

The problem is that Chief Minister Barr can't see the forest for the trams. Speaking of forests, the destruction of our beautiful urban forest on Northbourne Avenue leaves me speechless.

No one will be able to convince me that the installation of swaying overhead electric cables, a swathe of concrete furrowed with steel tracks and flanked by brittle gums will form a better entrance (or even a better public transport option than some of the new emerging technologies) to our magnificent city.

Michael Axelsen, Turner

James Allan (Letters, September 16) tries to refute my point that the motoring public pays more in taxes, excise and other imposts than is spent on roads but has to resort to the obfuscation so common when cyclists try to justify their position.

To bolster his arguments he states "without including externalities" and then includes a range of externalities! The cost of road trauma, damage and tax concessions are irrelevant to the point I made. Damage and trauma are covered by other inputs, such as insurance and self-funded repairs paid for by motorists. Tax concessions are not a cost of road building; they are a policy tool to assist business.

Being well-practised in the art of assessing research projects and statistics I'm not misled by the selective use of statistics and ideological interpretation. Nor am I impressed by statements that cyclists also have registered vehicles.

If a person has several motor vehicles each one has to be registered, have third-party personal insurance and be taxed. There is no reason why bicycles should not be treated the same way, although taxation would have to be assessed in a different manner.

He wonders what cyclists would think of me; I don't care as it is of no importance to me – I simply avoid them.

Michael Lane, St Ives, NSW

Apropos the article "The cat's out of the bag: no more cat, puppy peddling or it'll cost up to $75,000" (Gang-gang, September 17, p8) the argument seems to be that un-licensed, unregulated and intensive breeding of cats and dogs of varying hybridisation, for sale to would-be pet owners represents hypocritical exploitation of animals for the pet market, whereas licensed, regulated breeding of certified, pure-bred cats and dogs to would-be pet owners does not.

I detect a clear double standard there.

My sceptical hackles are raised by the prospect of the lure of the licence fee to the legislators. There is the problem of inbreeding in pure-breds, together with their greater sale price, to consider. David Ellery's observation that "breed-specific, companion animal breeders who are generally very committed to the welfare of the creatures in their care" is less than reassuring on that important matter.

The concept that the ethics of the case is decided by regulation of the numbers of litters within prescribed age ranges evokes echoes of China's one-child policy. I doubt the legislation just adopted will end the hypocritical exploitation of animals for the pet market. It may profitably shift it from one group of breeders to another.

Hugh Gibbon, Pearce

Julie Macklin (Letters, September 18) offered hints to thwart the dreaded magpie swoop. While I cannot see it being permitted in the ACT, nothing I have seen offered here recently comes close to an (unwritten) rule of the golf club in a small town close to the Victorian border where I lived many years ago. No questions were asked when a single barrel 410 gauge shotgun was carried in the golf bag to deal with swooping magpies and crows stealing golf balls.

Paul O'Connor, Hawker

Tony Abbott's final speech was both poignant and pertinent, especially in his affirmation that the nature of political commentary has been "mostly sour, bitter, character assassination". Indeed, despite his success in fulfilling signature election promises, his measured manner, his active community service and his ardent social conservatism in regard to the family, he continually earned the ire of the hashtag activists, who simply could not accept that he represented overall, the aspirations and attitudes of middle Australia.

It was particularly nauseating on late Monday evening to see ABC personalities duly acknowledging that our politicians are first and foremost human beings, after lavishly laying on years of unbridled criticism upon the former Prime Minister.

In his book Sideshow, former federal Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner rightly affirmed that it is now more important for our elected candidates to be interesting than right, and genuine debate thrives on simplicity and synopsis that is glib and emotive.

We do our nation a disservice, if our elected leaders are turfed out every couple of years, simply because they don't instantaneously tick all the superficial boxes of persona, camera presence and likability.

Peter Waterhouse, Craigieburn, Vic

The spiteful and infantile comments against Tony Abbott in these pages and by the left in general say more about the authors than any shortcomings in Tony Abbott. Indeed, I am sure history will be kind to Abbott, recording him as a far better person than his detractors.

None other than Bill Shorten recognised the uncommon decency of Tony Abbott in his personal and generous valedictory address to Parliament. For all his faults, Tony Abbott started the conversation on the economy that we had to have and must now address. He dealt with seemingly intractable problems such as stopping the boats and most importantly, unlike Rudd and Gillard, he did no harm.

Thanks to Abbott, the country is now on a much better footing and this is a gift that Malcolm Turnbull must build upon.

Some time ago I warned that Bill Shorten was squandering his time in opposition by remaining stuck in Labor's past and he is about to learn the lessons of his myopic tactics.

H. Ronald, Jerrabomberra, NSW

Because people actively like Malcolm Turnbull and are indifferent to Bill Shorten, we know Shorten will lose to Turnbull at the next election. We know, therefore, that it is in the ALP's self-interest to knife Shorten and install someone else. But: please don't.

Put the nation above your self-interest; do the honourable thing and let Shorten lose gracefully, restoring some stability and dignity to Australian politics.

Post-election though Shorten will have had his chance. Please replace him with someone (anyone!) else.

Christopher, Budd, Belconnen

The blood is hardly dry on Malcolm Turnbull's hands, yet it is already clear that they have been trussed up in the same short-sighted and dangerous policy agenda as his predecessor and victim.

Barely two days into his premiership he blurted, in classic Abbottese, that the opposition's perfectly affordable and, frankly, only barely adequate target of 50 per cent renewables by 2030 was "one of the most reckless proposals the Labor Party has made".

That is one of the most recklessly irresponsible and destructive claims I've heard for some time.

Felix MacNeill, Dickson

In the wake of our very latest change of prime minister, it is worth noting that leaking to the media to damaging effect is hardly a new thing in federal politics. In the National Library of Australia on Friday, I came across a manuscript which contains a resolution passed unanimously by the Mortdale Branch of the Australian Labor Party in the winter of 1956. This 59-year-old resolution reads in part: "That this Branch is perturbed at the persistent leakages of activities and decisions of the Federal Labor Caucus, to the Press, and considers that urgent action should be taken to eliminate such leakages." This practice seems to be endemic.

Stephen Holt, Macquarie

It would be so nice to think Tony Kevin ("Joint effort needed to solve the Syrian tragedy", Times2, September 16, p5) could be right that Barack Obama and NATO could work with Vladimir Putin to solve the Syrian tragedy. But unfortunately to do so would be hopelessly naive.

Kevin very fairly corrects the baseless anti-Assad propaganda of the Western media, including that perpetuated by Fairfax Media's David Wroe, but he is simply misguided in imagining that the US or NATO will ever genuinely embrace peace.

Kevin correctly notes that the US and NATO are sponsoring extremist jihadist groups to destabilise the region. Yet one need only contemplate this fact to realise that such monsters are not in the business of seeking peace. The purpose of NATO is to act as the instrument of US imperial power in Eurasia. Syria, Iran and Russia stand directly in the way of the resources of central Asia and the greed of the US imperialist machine to have that wealth is such that it will not stop until it is defeated — and that means overthrowing the cabal currently wielding power in Washington by another genuinely popular revolution.

Chris Williams Griffith

Re Bert Castellari's query (Letters, September 18) about the full version of the parody of The Red Flag. A popular version in English rugby clubs goes: "The commissar from Potters Bar/ Has bought himself a brand new car/ The Workers Flag has changed its hue/ Its colours are now red white and blue/ The proletariat can kiss/ My fundamental orifice/ And if I'm out of work I'll draw the dole/ So shove your red flag up your hole."

A more vulgar version of lines five and six went: "The working class can kiss my arse/ I've got the foreman's job at last".

Bill Deane, Chapman

BACKSTABBERS BEWARE

The Canberra Backstabbers Club has applied for an extension to accommodate 54 new members, including the glamour couple Mal and Jules. It is suggested that they take note of the club motto that graces the entrance: "Confucius say: 'Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves'."

F. Coble, Isaacs

TELL SHORTEN TO GO

I congratulate the parliamentary Liberal Party for getting rid of the worst prime minister (not the government) we have had since I began voting in the late 1950s.

Perhaps Tanya Plibersek could now do a Julie Bishop and advise Bill Shorten that he no longer has the support of the Australian people, and rid us of one of the most ineffectual opposition leaders we have had.

R. Wright, Greenway

LITTLE HAS CHANGED

With the change of prime minister, has anything really changed? I don't think so! If I had been asked whether Turnbull or Shorten would make a better PM, I would have joined the 70per cent and said Turnbull, but I,too, will not be voting for him.

We still have austerity economics, unaffordable university degrees, perverse free trade agreements, a witch-hunt into trade unions and multinationals not paying any tax.

Jane Timbrell, Reid

REFUGEE CONUNDRUM

Why are fit, healthy-looking young men among the refugees fleeing Middle East countries, rather than fighting for these lands, and why are local Arab states not taking most of the refugees running from the disturbances?

Greg Cornwell, Yarralumla

GOOGLE SUCH A HELP

It is a pleasure to reread Patrick O'Brian with Google to hand, to look up Ciudadela and Cap Salou instantly in Google Maps and renew acquaintance with "vaticinate" in Google Search.

Kenneth Griffiths, O'Connor

FREE TO PROTEST

Methinks G. Pinder (Letters, September 17) doth protest too much. Laws preventing the harassment of women outside abortion clinics are not an issue of free speech. The right to protest against abortion has in no way been diminished; nor are those espousing that view persecuted in any way for so doing.

If the clique of imaginary friendists want to protest against the law, they can do so in their churches, they can write to their MLAs, they can protest outside the assembly, or they can take out full-page advertisements in The Canberra Times.

Paul McElligott, Aranda

mail: 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).