The complexity of this problem, deeply ingrained as it is within our society, has not escaped Professor Phillips within his thoughtful article ("No consolation for those struggling to enter the market but the ACT is not short of dwellings", November 20, p.14).

His ability to cut through the high school economics underpinning "more-supply-alone" reasoning is a welcome entry into the discussion.

Solutions to improving access to appropriate housing are complex and slow – contra to the cheap land and regulation-busting supply arguments peddled by the opportunistic.

There is no single "magic bullet" policy to improving housing affordability.

However, summarising how Australians have gotten to this point and our general direction of escape is more straightforward.

Over time we have squeezed our housing into a very limited range of types, sizes, tenures, financing and locations (i.e. capital cities).

At the same time we've allowed the wealth creation opportunities of housing to expand unduly: speculative asset, equity ATM, tax vehicle etc.

This self-engineered "congestion" of demand for housing, combined with its extreme "commodification", can only but result in the prices we see today.

Breaking up this demand congestion requires a diversity of housing supply and brave political leaders prepared to limit the extent to which housing is used beyond its intrinsic purpose: somewhere to live.

Rohen Conners, Dickson

Thank you, Ben Phillips ("ACT not short of dwellings", November 20, p.14), for confirming Canberra has an over supply of dwelling units.

Professor Phillips has found there is currently an oversupply of 6700 dwelling units and that the ACT and the Northern Territory top the most oversupplied state or territory.

Yes, we have unaffordable (to many) housing prices, but they are not necessarily based on population growth.

Investors from overseas and out of town also create demand.

They are seeking capital gain and some are prepared to have empty dwellings to achieve that.

Other investment factors also drive demand.

A new out-of-scale development with a 24-storey tower and 800 units in Woden Town Centre is just one of the proposed developments in the pipeline.

Who will buy these units? Who will live in them? Will they be lived in?

Instead of rushing like lemmings to release more land and allow our town centres to be swamped with residential towers of 24-plus storeys, there should be annual analysis like Ben Phillips' study to identify the real need, as well as the type of housing demand.

Gina Pinkas, Aranda

Rates in our area for dwellings owned and occupied by pensioner couples have risen 80per cent from July 1, 2013, to July 1, 2017.

What do residents in this area of Greenway receive for their rates? Very little. Mowing does not happen regularly. There are very few footpaths. Road sweeping occurs about once every two to three years. A $10 levy has been imposed on electricity bills for overhead line clearance which do not exist in this area.

In regard to green bins, if you are not some sort of concession card holder you will need to pay $50.

Not satisfied with imposing costs of a tram on all ratepayers to service a very small population of the ACT, we now have a Chief Minister who in jubilation of the same-sex marriage plebiscite is using ratepayers monies to paint rainbow roundabouts.

What other charges will ratepayers face between now and the next election?

R. Wright, Greenway

David Pope's telling cartoon ("A failure of the system", Forum, November 18, p.1) is reminiscent of the movie A Clockwork Orange.

The cartoon transposed the picture of Dylan Voller in the Don Dale Youth Detention Centre, strapped into a restraining chair with a spit hood over his head, onto the toe of a giant boot.

The movie was about the ultimately unsuccessful attempt to rehabilitate a violent criminal by brainwashing him.

After all, one of the objectives of incarcerating these minors or juvenile delinquents or young thugs – they're hardly "children" – is to give them a good boot up the butt to persuade them to change their ways.

Gary J. Wilson, Macgregor

Another week brings another letter to The Canberra Times objecting to the proposed redevelopment of West Basin (Letters, November 18).

A recent weekend visit to the area left me with the impression that West Basin is at present underwhelming, the water's edge being mainly populated by the type of vegetation prevalent on derelict building sites and by signs warning of the danger of swimming.

It looks like what it is: a neglected pocket, adjacent to an increasingly revitalised area of the City. Boat hire is the only positive aspect and one would hope that this will continue to be available.

Your correspondent Juliet Ramsay appears particularly distressed by "ubiquitous" concrete promenade.

On the other side of Commonwealth Avenue Bridge, one does indeed observe such a promenade in the form of the R.G. Menzies walk (which, incidentally, sports a remarkable statue of its namesake). This walk, like the promenade on the opposite bank, was facilitating enjoyment of the lake by walkers, runners, fishermen and on this occasion a young mother tooling around on a scooter.

Constructive criticism of redevelopment proposals obviously has a place, but blanket opposition to development, even by self-appointed and well-intentioned "guardians", makes no sense.

H. Simon, Watson

It's time for religious tax exemptions to cease. Why are we all subsidising the incumbent Sydney Anglican Archbishop's salary and his $1 million donation to the SSM "no" case?

We similarly subsidise every imam, rabbi or priest who preaches homophobia as righteousness.

Bigoted wedding cake bakers are small fry who'll be commercially annihilated; we subsidise every religious institution that pleads sexual dogma to refuse services and deny employment.

The justification for these tax exemptions is a gaggle of contradictory metaphysical beliefs united by evidence exemption.

Enough is enough.

Peter Robinson, Ainslie

I urge the PNG and NZ governments to stand up against the bully Dutton. Human suffering and no work prospects for 600 men. How much longer are they going to be held in indefinite detention?

Sue Cory, Edge Hill, Qld

Debate about SSM and assisted dying is incorrectly confusing individual conscientious objection (ICO) with religious freedom and freedom from religion.

Hawke government reforms concerning military conscription now enable ICO to be secular as well as religious.

Claiming ICO requires longstanding and deeply held moral beliefs capable of being articulated in court, and whose nature, consistency, depth and sincerity can be adjudicated by a court.

Transient opinion, political belief, prejudice or a bigoted "phobia" cannot justify ICO.

Preserving ICO across all contentious moral issues does not cause, "reintroduce" or otherwise risk unethical discrimination. ICO involves consistently declining to participate in a specific act, which the prospective participant believes to be fundamentally abhorrent.

The oft-cited hypothetical baker could not claim ICO in refusing service generally or individually to blacks, whites, Asians, Jews, Muslims, gays, Carlton supporters, etc.

Our notional (and undoubtedly rare) baker could cite ICO to politely decline participation in a particular forced or same-sex wedding celebration, just as medical staff can decline to participate in an assisted suicide or an abortion.

Tolerant liberal-democratic societies acknowledge the ICO principle across all highly contentious moral issues.

They do not try to pick and choose its application.

Neil James, Executive director Australia Defence Association, Canberra

I agree with Richard Dennis in his new book Curing Affluenza that we need to value our stuff more and to stop our mindless buying.

I also agree with Ross Gittins ('Affluenza cure', Canberra Times, November 15, p.16) that we should increase taxes on natural resources.

But shouldn't we also stop our endless gawping at other people's places and things.

A popular news topic between my acquaintances is a commentary on their most recent 'cruise'.

I have watched a cruise ship dwarf Hobart.

I have read about how the citizens of Venice want to restrict the visitation of cruise ships.

And I have sat trying to smile as a friend raved about the luxury of having nine restaurants to choose from on his latest cruise.

I find it all a gross and disgusting display of affluence in front of people who have cared for the places they live in for centuries.

We are carelessly ruining our own beauty spots like the Barrier Reef, native forests, verdant farming landscapes and lands nurtured for millions of years by our own indigenous peoples at the same time as insisting on nudging our vast waterborne hotels into the hitherto quiet harbours of charming, often poorer places which have sustained their beauty with unstinting care.

The urge to travel is natural. But when we begin to compete not only for the goods we own but the places we gawp atwe are taking affluenza to a new level.

Jill Sutton, Watson

Tim Hollo (Letters, November 17) is correct.

Australia's constitution is past its "best-by" date.

It was created in the 19th century. Things have changed a bit since then!

So why hasn't our constitution? Can't we come up with a new set of guidelines that reflect the century and times we live in? People think we live in this great democratic country. We don't have true democracy. Politicians don't take any notice of what the people want, just what their party, or themselves want.

You only have to look at the same-sex marriage plebiscite. Eleven electorates held by Labor voted No, yet their elected representatives are all going to vote Yes, in line with the Labor Party.

This is opposite to what the majority of their constituents want.

Tony Abbott should vote Yes, because that's what his constituents voted for.

Our current political system is broken. No one trusts politicians. One solution would be to ban political parties.

Just elect people from every community who come together and make decisions for the good of the people and nation instead of themselves and/or their political party.

I don't have the answers, but there's got to be a better way.

There's evolution in revolution.

Anthony Reid, Murrumbateman, NSW

A brave anonymous caller has taken exception to my recent letter (Letters, November 16) in which I said claims for religious freedom in the marriage equality debate were a cloak for bigotry and homophobia.

He asserted that "catholic children" are at risk.

To him I say two things: there are no "catholic children" merely children whose parents or educators wish to indoctrinate them into that faith before they are able to make an informed choice; and the greater threat to children (paedophile priests apart) is to withhold from them the now well-established facts about the innate nature of personal sexuality.

To others who still seek legislated "religious freedom" I simply cite the frighteningly sweeping generality of s116 of the constitution. It proscribes any law "...prohibiting the free exercise of any religion..." This surely affords religious freedom far greater constitutional protection than any other human right.

Mike Hutchinson, Reid

Anglicare Sydney's website says 'We believe God calls us to us to care for and love one other, just as He cares for and loves us'.

A quick check of the foyer of most Anglican Churches would show the usual appeals for donations for overseas aid, church building funds, local problems (youth homelessness, etc).

I imagine Sydney parishioners who make a weekly donation and toss in the odd extra would be a little put out to see one million dollars of their money thrown at what everyone knew was a lost cause: the marriage equality 'no' campaign.

Some might feel betrayed to see money squandered by the Sydney Synod while they're asked to dip into their own pockets.

Others, however, may simply see it as gross financial mismanagement.

It'd be interesting to know what God thinks.

Dallas Stow, O'Connor

I'm concerned that the conservative Liberals keep going on about bakers and cakes and marriage equality. Don't they remember that talking about cakes cost John Hewson an election?

Lyn Minerds, Macarthur

The Canberra Times wants to hear from you in short bursts. Email 50 or fewer words to letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au.

THIN EDGE OF WEDGE

While parliamentarians pontificate about if a baker or florist should be exempt on grounds of belief about supplying wedding cakes or flowers for SSM, they should think about the consequences. Would this entitle a Catholic or Muslim person in your supermarket to refuse to sell you condoms or pork products respectively, as it would go against their religious beliefs?

Warwick Priestley, Amaroo

RUNNING SCARED

Parliament really is Coward's Castle. Just ask Turnbull.

Bob Gardiner, Isabella Plains

MANUS A DISGRACE

The treatment of the men on Manus is a disgrace to all Australians. They have no clean water, no food supplies, no toilet system and no medical assistance. If any one of our prisons was running this regime it would be considered debauched and inhuman. We must cease this ugly brutality.

Gerry Gillespie, Rural Australians for Refugees, Queanbeyan

ON THE BRIGHT SIDE

Charles Manson is dead, Robert Mugabe is on the way out and the world is a better place.

Dennis Fitzgerald, Box Hill, Vic

STANCE A BIT RICH

I take issue with Amanda Vanstone's article claiming the moral high ground for the Liberal Party in the SSM debate. If the party was that committed, why didn't it just legislate, as the members are paid to do, rather than putting Australia through the survey?

Graham Hannaford, Ainslie

ONE NATION'S DEVOTEES

One Nation is an anarchic organisation, and it attracts people who simply want to do their thing in an irresponsible way.

Michael McCarthy, Deakin

MUGABE OUT OF TOUCH

Robert Mugabe's refusal to stand down as president of Zimbabwe shows the megalomanic ruler has lost touch with reality. He should be escorted to a senior citizens home to live out the remaining days of his life in peace — something he did not give his own people in his 37-year rule.

Rajend Naidu, Glenfield

ALL A MYSTERY

One of my gripes about the marriage equality plebiscite is that I didn't know what I was voting for. Seems the government doesn't know either.

David Clark, Scullin

DEMOCRACY LOST

My interpretation of Malcolm Turnbull justifying the marriage equality survey. "What could be more democratic?" the PM asked. Ah, I dunno, but maybe Parliament sitting.

John Passant, Kambah

UNDER SCRUTINY

I wonder if 1984 is on the curriculum in ACT public schools? Government-issued laptop-using students be warned, Big Brother is watching you.

M. Moore, Bonython