Even the name is appalling. On referring to my trusty Google search I discover that the English/American definition of "Wova" means a "brassy woman" or that it could indeed be an acronym for 'Women of Vision and Action'!

The mind boggles as to who may wish to inhabit a building when they know the meanings of the name? Or is it meant to be "Rover" or could it be short for "woeful" which probably reflects the impact of this development?

I note also (Canberra Times, August 7, pp2-3) that Geocon has named the new development of 520 units in Reid, respectively "Metropol" and "Tryst". Why not use names that show some connection with Canberra's history?

C. Parks, Torrens

The residents of north-west Belconnen are being treated as mugs by the ACT government. At the 2012 election the then chief minister Katy Gallagher issued a press release which included an election commitment to restore Spence neighbourhood oval.

That commitment would have been based on some advice about the viability of the oval's restoration.

Today, the oval remains a disused paddock six years after the original commitment.

Now, a letter informs us of the imminent construction of three wetlands along Ginninderra Creek, a project which seems more a self-imposed priority.

With an annual budget of $3 billion and the national weight management crisis, a restored community oval (an unfulfilled or ignored election commitment) would be more valuable to the community than wetlands which costs several million dollars to construct.

Rohan Goyne, Evatt

It would appear from his article on August 5 that The Canberra Times should consider pensioning off its self-proclaimed bard, Ian Warden.

His articles are getting sillier by the week. He might think $939 million for the Gunghalin tram is a mere bagatelle but many Canberrans do not. He rubbishes the current bus fleet, neglecting (I dare say through ignorance) to say that they will all be replaced as soon as possible with electric buses.

He is still under the strange illusion that the people of Tuggeranong are jealous of their friends in Gungahlin over the tram, when they are actually outraged they have to pay for it, as those in Gungahlin will be when it finally dawns on them they won't be getting much for their taxes either.

M. Flint, Erindale

Ian Warden ('The Sheer Poetry of Light Rail', CT, August 5) has a case of tram fever. The tram is the equivalent of fool's gold, glittering but after examination disappointing, providing few benefits at great cost.

I fear Ian has become like Bert Newton – a once witty observer who is now tiresome and out of touch. Or an ageing tennis player whose serve has lost its penetration.

Mike Quirk, Garran

Ian Warden's two recent articles on light rail have been neither logical nor poetic. His own attempt at poetry in his current article suggests he stick to something he does well, retiring and playing tennis, for example.

I met him on a tennis court and he is much better at tennis than writing. In fact, his two articles illustrate rather well why the opposition to light rail has been so vocal and sustained, since the case for the tram, as set out in Warden's article, is lacking any merit.

He harps back to the "vermillion marvel", one of the themes of his previous article, and rants about the opponents of light rail being all in their 70s, when in fact they are not and, in any case, he is not that far off 70 himself.

And he doesn't seem to understand that the mere fact there are many cities in the world where trams work well doesn't mean they will necessarily work here in very different circumstances. How similar is Canberra to the congested city of Edinburgh, the example he quotes? I, both a lifelong train lover and an opponent of the tram, am also looking forward to the commencement of operations.

I want to watch the residents of this city wake up and start to wonder why we spent so much money on this thing that will deliver so little. Warden spoke, in his last article, about the opponents of light rail being a sub-species of homo sapiens, emphasis on the "sub", I thought. I would say he is also a sub species: homo sapiens idioticus.

Stan Marks, Hawker

The climate change debate is not, as claimed in The Sunday Canberra Times, "over", because it never began.

I don't know anyone who doesn't know that the climate has always changed. For most of Earth's history there were no ice caps, yet just over 12,000 years ago the ice cap came down to the Canadian border. Since then, we have enjoyed warmer times. Temperatures 8000 years ago were some 2degrees hotter and sea levels some 2metres higher than now with a general lowering trend (with ups and downs) ever since in both.

Only ignoramuses and climate alarmists deny these facts in their quest to prove our production of extra CO2 will overheat the planet. This is where the debate should be, but isn't. Instead, for decades now dozens of climate models predicting climate disaster have driven action and government policy and spending. Inconvenient facts – like the total lack of correlation between CO2 levels and temperature in the geological record and in recent times and minuscule recent sea level changes – have been ignored. We need to go back to square one and re-examine all the facts, including those that challenge the narratives of climate alarmists and those benefiting from the massive annual outlays propping up everything from unreliable and expensive renewable power to study grants in universities.

Doug Hurst, 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 or fewer words. 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).