There is no doubt that as with cars and cyclists not mixing, neither do cyclists and pedestrians. On my quiet Sunday walk, as I started to extend my arm to indicate that I was turning right off the footpath, a cyclist rocketed past me, brushing my arm and narrowly missing me.
Had I turned a second earlier he would have hit me fair and square in my back, and pushed me face down onto the bitumen.
Cyclists just don't seem to understand (or care) that a pedestrian will often step sideways to avoid rough ground or a puddle; please slow down as you pass a walker.
Norman Lee, Weston
Immigration bridge
Vic Rebikoff (Letters, April 13) suggests that 6000 paid subscriptions for the Immigration Bridge is more meaningful than ''only'' 70 submissions. I would suggest that the 70 submissions represent the views of at least 6000 people because many were lodged by organisations on behalf of their members.
I also understand that 70 submissions is an unusually high number for any Joint House inquiry.
What information have the 6000 subscribers been given that would allow them to make an objective judgement about the desirability of a bridge in the proposed location?
Have they been told about the negative impacts that such a bridge will have? Have they been made aware of possible alternatives?
Unfortunately, the emotive cause for a monument to immigrants, a concept with which I have no problem, is being perverted by the suggestion by the Canberra bureaucrats that a bridge across the lake would be a good idea.
Rebikoff also seems to suggest that the fact that a few high profile people are honorary ambassadors for the bridge means that it is ''a good thing''.
I'm sure that like the rest of the community, those people would support the concept of a monument to immigrants but have they been given information about the negative impact the proposed bridge will have on the national capital?
My straw poll from people I talk to supports my views, and that of those of the vast majority of those represented by the submissions to the inquiry, that a bridge in the proposed location is unnecessary. It will be unsightly and intrusive, as well as being costly.
Would a Commonwealth funded bridge at this location receive the necessary approvals and funding?
Peter Forster, Curtin
Online information
The Australian Government has announced that, from later this year, parents will be able to get online access to nationally consistent information about any school in the country and will then be able to compare schools in relation to how students perform.
Parents may or may not consider this useful, especially considering important variables such as differences in student populations and resources.
What we are still waiting for, however, is a similar announcement from Health Minister Nicola Roxon, concerning the availability of food hygiene information for restaurants and cafes information which is readily available online in countries including Britain and North America, and which would be of clear and unambiguous use.
Karina Morris, Weetangera
Managing drugs
Recent letter writers addressed various drug strategy issues and I'm not sure why we can't walk the same path as alcohol management.
I enjoy a glass or two of wine occasionally, I acknowledge the health risks that may be associated with that, and I pay the tax from which the Government benefits.
The percentage of alcohol in most wines is about 12 per cent.
There are alcoholics but the sale of alcohol is not banned.
Cigarettes are legal although there is an acknowledged health risk and Governments make money from their sale. Why not legally sell a cigarette that contains a fixed percentage of a suitable narcotic which will provide comparable relaxation benefits as moderate alcohol consumption? It would make money for the Government, would probably reduce health risks associated with unregulated drug use, and might reduce crimes related to illegal drugs.
Roger Dace, Googong
Email a friend