There were plenty of parks still available. However the queue was around 20 minutes long to purchase a parking voucher, and getting longer by the minute.

That was the easy part. Having had our fill of Floriade, we then headed back to our car around noon.
By then the entire car park was just that, one big car park.

No one [was] going anywhere in any direction.

Whilst we managed to join the queue to exit the park, it then took over an hour to eventually exit onto Allara Street.

It probably would have taken longer had my wife not taken it upon herself to play parking/traffic co-ordinator.

When we earlier called both Access Canberra and Civic Police, we basically got the ‘‘finger’’ as their response.

The police [apparently] had better things to do than dealing with traffic issues.

Whilst we appreciate that our police are under the pump, the ACT government should have been on top of this eventuality and had staff available to co-ordinate both arrivals and departures.

No doubt this year’s visitors won’t bother coming again next year.

Perhaps we should all go to Tulip Tops instead.

Peter Toscan, Amaroo

I agree with Mike Buckley (Letters, September 22).

Ms Peart nailed a key reason why the methodology change for the rates of unit-titled properties is unfair. However, the earlier testimony of the Treasurer and his officials confirmed that not only is the change unfair it is not warranted in the first place.

It is a pity that the Public Accounts Committee inquiry members didn’t ask the pointed questions that would have explicitly brought this out.

Treasury started by telling the committee that progressive outcomes weren’t the intention of introducing more progressive tax scales for residential rates.

The committee asked for no detail, or why the corresponding mound of money from the mansions of Mugga Way wasn’t also unintended.

We can gauge from the testimony and previous data from Mr Barr that adding $140 to the average rates of unit-titled properties would remove this progressivity ‘‘problem’’.

Officials said that they considered a variety of methodologies for addressing this, curiously the obvious one of less progressive tax scales wasn’t considered. Again, no follow-up from the committee, or on why the chosen method raised $265, on average, almost double the amount required.

Readers won’t be surprised that the Treasurer wasn’t asked any difficult questions like, the rates of the average unit-titled property rose by 46per cent in the first five years of tax reform, slightly more than the average block-titled property, how does raising them a further 24 per cent help?

It is a sad indictment of our Assembly that a tax surcharge that wouldn’t get past a high school economics student can become law in the ACT.

Peter Bradbury, Holt

This week the Prime Minister claimed that Australians should be able ‘‘to age with dignity and choice’’.

Many like retired medical practitioner Bob Douglas (Letters, ‘‘Dying with dignity’’ October 2 ) agree, especially on the need for new alternative support options.

Governments must accept that choice is not just about enabling older Australians to pay for more and more complex and costly layers of care at home or in a residential setting, with some charitable volunteer visits added in to mitigate concerns about social isolation.

Many who want to avoid or stop aged care arrangements should have their choice recognised and supported, and be given a legitimate alternative to enduring any care set-up until the inevitable happens.

The terms of reference for the royal commission into aged care should therefore include examination and recommendations about how to give those who want to end their lives the means to do so, peacefully and humanely, at a time of their own choosing.

Sue Dyer, Downer

In his article ‘‘We need a royal commission into the media’’ (October 3, p17) – with which I agree – Kevin Rudd points out the insidious influence of Rupert Murdoch on Australian politics.

He writes that Murdoch has been ‘‘up to his neck in the elevation and removal of Australian prime ministers for the better part of a decade’’. Mr Murdoch has also been heavily involved in the election and removal of government, and, according to my recollection, his interference in politics and support of conservative causes have been going on for a lot longer than a decade.

One of the News Corp newspapers, which I read daily to see what ‘‘the other side’’ is thinking, is consistently biased against ‘‘progressive’’ (used as if it is a dirty word) values and opinion and against Labor.

A royal commission into the media is probably a good idea, but I wonder what real effect it would have on Mr Murdoch’s media empire.

Douglas Mackenzie, Deakin

Re: ‘‘We need a royal commission into the media’’, Kevin Rudd, October 3, p17)

Now that would create headlines. But would the media be keen to report on the hearings?

Allan Gibson, Cherrybrook, NSW

Mike Quirk (Letters, October 2) says ‘‘Abandon light rail stage 2 and use the funds to increase ... bus network’’. I may have missed a government announcement on the matter, but I do wonder, apropos the funding of light rail stage 2, what increases in government prices, costs and rates we are facing in the next ACT budget.

Peter Moran, Watson

What disgraceful treatment the Roosters fans handed out to Billy Slater before, during and after the NRL grand final, booing him at every opportunity.

He was charged and fronted the NRL tribunal who found him not guilty of the charge.

He had every right in pleading innocent to the charge so he could play.

Being found not guilty, that is where it should have ended.

Yet the mindless fans in the crowd booed him in the belief that he did something wrong.

Billy has been an icon to the game and deserved better. It was bad enough his team lost; to have to put up with an unforgiving crowd would have made it harder.

Bad sportsmanship to the extreme by Roosters supporters, hopefully only a small section, with the rest respecting him for what he has brought to the game over an illustrious career.

Alan Leitch, Austins Ferry, Tas

I’m dismayed at the lack of historically relevant knowledge shown by so much of the coverage of the royal commission into banking.

Paul McLean, an Australian Democrat senator, raised much of the type and extent of the evidence that has come before the royal commission between 1988 and 1992.

He placed documents and argument over and over again before the Senate which is all recorded in Hansard.

He was unsuccessful in interesting either Labor or the Coalition in mounting a proper inquiry, and so in 1992 he published a book, Bankers and Bastards.

More than a quarter century has passed while the major parties have sat on their hands and thousands of Australians have been defrauded.

Related to this and detailed in his book is the creation of the Commonwealth Bank in 1911 and the history of the gradual unwinding by successive governments of both persuasions of the original purpose and function of this bank, which would have prevented the corruption that McLean and now the royal commission have uncovered.

The coup de grâce was delivered by the Hawke/Keating government.

Both parties bear a heavy responsibility for the harm that has been done.

Dr John R. Coulter, Australian Democrats leader 1991 to 1993, Bradbury, SA

The Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry has published its interim report.

Commissioner Hayne has been dogged in his pursuit of the banks’ rorts and finance industry rip offs.

The systemic failure of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority should be of real concern to federal public servants.

That they wilfully ignored that the industry was charging fees to dead customers, lying to regulators and providing dodgy advice should have been exposed.

Over 140,000 Australians work in the banking sector and they also knew some of the heartbreaking customer stories.

More than 9000 submissions have been made so far with thousands more robbed of their life savings.

That the banks have failed to obey the law should result in the government and regulators throwing the book at them and sending some of them to face justice and serve a custodial sentence.

We do not require new or tougher laws – just the enforcement of those we have.

Customers and consumers deserve better from the poor behaviour of our public servants who failed so many of their fellow Australians by not taking these reprehensible companies and people to court.

Julian Fitzgerald, Farrer

Given that the banking royal commissioner is perfectly able to request an extension of time – and given that the PM has made it clear that an extension would be granted if requested – Labor’s populist holding of its own hearings with those who made submissions, but were not called to appear, seems to be yet more political grandstanding.

All the more so after hearing the shadow minister for financial services, Clare O’Neill, repeating ad nauseum Labor’s rationale that the Commission had insufficient time – while dodging responding to ABC AM host Sabra Lane’s repeated reminders of the Commissioner’s powers.

While only 27 of the more than 9000 people who made submissions have appeared, the Commission, makes it clear that all have been carefully considered.

One can but wonder if Labor may be ‘‘meddling’’ in the work of the Commission – and if it may give rise to any corresponding legal implications.

One also wonders if those ‘‘appearing’’ [for Labor] may have adequate privacy or legal protection?

Len Goodman, Belconnen

Apparently $9 billion in market capitalisation has been wiped from the big banks since the royal commission started. The banking culture was at the heart of the problem, according to Commissioner Hayne.

The culture of the banks was nurtured and championed by its CEOs on their multimillion-dollar annual salaries.

And, as the bad news continues to bite, where are these CEOs?

I haven’t seen or heard from any of them since they were found out.

Philip White, Crace

The financial services royal commission has much more work to do before it achieves anything significant.

So far it has sated public outrage, feeding it a steady disclosure of criminal predation. It has precipitated impressive dollar penalties but nothing that hasn’t been covered by a few strokes of the business manager’s pen to change fees and cover the costs of doing business.

Essentially it’s back to normal. I have yet to read of any significant restitution. There is little or no proactive outcome. Television abounds with advertisements of the most incredible insurance offers. There have been threats of criminal charges but no charges.

The commission’s outcome to date has been a whitewash enabling the government to declare it did something.

G. Wilson, Macgregor

It was very stirring watching the AFL grand final at the MCG last weekend when the singer singing ‘‘Up there Cazaly’’, a tribute to a high leaping star decades ago, asked the crowd of 100,000 to join him in the last verse just before the bounce of the ball. Which they all did with gusto. Why can’t the NRL find a star legend from decades ago too and get a song written about him to be sung by a singer plus the whole crowd at the SCG just before the grand final kick-off?

Murray Hunter, Auckland, NZ

I’m bemused by reports the ‘‘singing budgie’’ was to be offered $750,000 to sing about the ABC. Given the question is ‘‘who would have been promoting whom?’’, shouldn’t she have paid them?

N. Ellis, Belconnen

DAY FOR ALL AUSSIES

Okay Marilyn Quirk of Tasmania, (Letters, October 2) good Aussies have one day to celebrate their amazingness, while the Indigenous tribes have all these events to remember — to sorrow over — to regret the loss of their history — to try to restore their dignity — to allow those of us who truly care to engage with them: to really all be Australians ... NOT Austraalyy uns!

John Royes, Canberra

DIVISIVE ISSUE

Marilyn Quirk (Letters, October 2) is right about people promoting fragmentation and division about Australia Day. She should stop it!

Bruce Minerds,Macarthur

HERE’S AN APT DATE

If we are in need of a new date to celebrate Australian Day, then I suggest we look no further than May 9, the date of the opening of Federal Parliament in 1901. It’s also the date that the Provisional Parliament House and the Australian Parliament House were opened in 1927 and 1988 respectively.

Graeme Rankin, Holder

ABC’S BUSY BOARD

Having read the credentials of the present ABC board I would be surprised if any of the board members would have time to watch any TV stations or listen to the radio.

Where is the board member from the Australian public who has no connection to any political party, mining company or is not already a board member of another organisation?

Robyn Lewis, Raglan, NSW

LET’S SAVE THE FEES

Given that the ABC is still functioning well without a managing director and a dysfunctional board, why not just sack the lot, save lots of money in CEO fees, and let ABC staff keep on doing what they do best?

Susan MacDougall, Scullin

GENDER BALANCE

[I’m] interested in ABC board membership (‘‘Claims Coalition stacked board’’, October 2, P6) at five women and two men. It was previously six to three. There has been no call, to date, for [gender] balance or quotas.

Greg Cornwell, Yarralumla

JOURNALISTS WORK ON

The PM has told the ABC to get back to work. I suspect that is exactly what ABC journalists have been doing and will continue to do to the very best of their ability.

Be careful of what you wish for Mr Morrison.

John Sandilands, St Marys, Tas

WHY ONLY SMOKING AGE?

Minister Fitzharris is considering raising the smoking age to 21 and banning it outside private homes. Apparently all the issues with the health system are irrelevant or are in the too-hard basket. Why not raise the age to 21 to consume alcohol and obtain a driver licence as well?

Phillip Nicolls, Monash

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 the date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).