Re: "ABS statistics reveal Canberra growth spurt" (March 28, p2).
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Demographer Liz Allen contends that those caring about population numbers, growth rates, and targets are obsessive and implies their views don't count.
Numbers do count, and critically, when considering congestion and other negatives of over-population and its rapid growth.
She seems to believe the only target for planners should be to accept whatever growth is imposed by state and federal leaders, and to ignore the inevitability of there being limits to growth, and the need to plan for that.
The undeclared common intention of those leaders is to simply keep growing forever. Impossible as this may be, it is supportive of the business view of putting short-term profits ahead of future social and environmental considerations.
Leaders attempt to make their contentions plausible by saying infrastructure shortfalls are not structural outcomes of too rapid growth, but the result of easily reversed political indecision.
That is untrue, as can be seen every day as never-ending roadworks attempt to keep pace with traffic growth, and new hospitals can't be built (and staffed) quickly enough to meet demand growth.
Before accepting the current high growth projections, Canberrans should ask what sort of place they want future Canberrans to live in – overpopulated congestion as in Sydney, or spacious as we currently enjoy.
If the latter, tell Zed Seselja, Andrew Barr, and all ACT politicians and political aspirants.
If you don't, then it is "Sydney here we come".
Vince Patulny, Kambah
Self-destructive policy
Re: "Canberra population sprints past 420,000, new figures show" (canberatimes.com.au, March 28).
It is interesting how modest and small a 2.2 per cent growth rate seems.
Few would realise the actual impact: if maintained that is a doubling of the ACT population in just 32 years. To keep municipal services exactly as they are now that means doubling expenditures on schools, hospitals, policing, transport, water supply, sewerage treatments and so on.
If population doubles, we need to double every single government service just to stay exactly as we are now.
We need to recognise that numeric fact of doubling times so we can plan for it and take action.
To my knowledge, there are no effective ways for a single location to constrain its migration population growth under our current economic system other than by slowing economic growth.
This would make the ACT a less attractive place to live and existing residents would be affected negatively.
Rethinking dwelling density and rapidly changing the current rules, which effectively mandate individual car ownership, will be critical.
The world has dramatically dropped its population growth in the past 40 years, from an under 35 year doubling time at a rate of more than 2 per cent a year, to a current rate of just over under 70 years.
That still means we face huge global stresses from population growth and must work to reduce the rates in those areas, mainly in Africa and the Middle East, where population growth is still well above 2 per cent a year.
The proven path is to educate women, which reduces poverty and lowers birth rates dramatically. The primary issue is that we have an economic system which assumes perpetual growth is possible on a finite planet. That's also called the path to self-destruction.
Steve Blume, Chapman
Taking the wrong road
Transport Minister Meegan Fitzharris hopes Canberra will soon be recognised as a global leader in transport-focused urban development ("Putting the trams before the Gateway", March 27, p1).
It is more likely to be recognised as an example of what not to do.
The provision of the Civic to Gungahlin light rail took place despite:
(a) The Productivity Commission observing the business case indicated bus rapid transport would provide similar benefits at a quarter of the cost.
(b) A benefit to cost ratio of 1.2 i.e. it would return $1.20 for every dollar spent. The ACT Auditor-General indicated the real ratio was about 0.5.
(c) Failing to respond to widespread concern about the merits of the project.
(d) Limiting consultation to not much more than choosing the colour of the carriages.
(e) Failing to develop significant employment along the route.
Having spent hundreds of millions of dollars above what was necessary on rapid public transport from Civic to Gungahlin, the government now intends to spend about $1.6 billion on the Civic to Woden light rail without a business case.
It is committed to the project no matter what the cost. Hardly an example of best practice.
Ms Fitzharris, be responsible, prepare a business case comparing light rail and its alternatives, including busways, and undertake genuine consultation, so we can get the most appropriate land use transport solution in the Civic to Woden rapid transport corridor.
Mike Quirk, Garran
System needs rethink
I note The Canberra Times report of the summing up of Justice Burns regarding the terrible incident at ANU in August, 2017, involving mental impairment ("Student found not guilty over ANU bat attack", March 27, p3).
Our thoughts are for the continued recovery of those injured and affected by the attack.
However, on behalf of the Canberra Mental Health Forum, we also are extremely concerned about the ACT justice system's response to dealing with those who have a mental disability and a confirmed psychiatric disability, such as schizophrenia.
As noted in The Canberra Times, Justice Burns launched into a "scathing assessment" of the Crown (ACT Prosecution) case.
We wonder about the ACT government's commitment to dealing justly with people with a mental illness.
Other evidence in the trial also raised questions about the police processes of dealing with people with a mental illness, and the capacity of ACT Corrections to sufficiently support a significant number of people in its care with mental illness.
All ministers – the Chief Minister, the Attorney-General, the Minister for Mental Health and Justice, and the Minister for Police and Emergency Services – should be asking questions of their respective directorates regarding their integrity and diligence in this matter.
We hope that the forthcoming report and recommendations into disability and the justice system addresses some of these issues.
Ros Williams, convener, Canberra Mental Health Forum
Hail to the chief for intervention
Well done Chief of the Defence Force, General Angus Campbell, for intervening in the press announcement by Defence Industry Minister, Christopher Pyne, on March 28 when he announced changes in the top military leadership.
After the announcements, the questions moved on to politics, including One Nation and preference deals.
The Australian Defence Force's second in command, Vice-Admiral David Johnston; the newly announced Air Force Chief, Air Marshal Mel Hupfeld; and the next Chief of Joint Operations, Major General Greg Bilton were standing in the background.
General Campbell advised the minister it was inappropriate for them to be standing in the background when he was answering political questions.
The officers were then excused from any further involvement in the interview.
General Campbell showed great leadership.
He also demonstrated he has the strength of character to stand up against inappropriate political interview standards.
Jack Wiles, Gilmore
One Nation disgraced
It does not matter that conversations by One Nation leader Pauline Hanson and two of her party's cohorts were secretly recorded. It does not matter that what has been reported in the media are only edited snippets of those conversations.
What does matter is that those supposedly edited comments show a political leader and her followers who have no idea of what is expected of those in a position of political responsibility and obviously would pay any cost to get elected to Federal Parliament?
No sensible person would vote One Nation after those callous comments and the attempt to gain overseas funds to push an overseas agenda.
Alan Leitch, Austin's Ferry, Tasmania
Extreme Greens
The PM should have made his decision to preference One Nation below Labor contingent upon Labor preferencing the Greens below the Libs.
The Greens are a party of dangerous extremists and fanatics, so his failure to do so was merely acceptance of the fact that he is leading the Coalition to electoral oblivion.
Bob Hawke famously pledged on June 23, 1987, that "by 1990 no Australian child will live in poverty", such was his faith in the power of government.
The Greens' leader, Richard Di Natale, might as well pledge that by 2030, every Australian child will live in poverty, because that is precisely what would happen under the Greens' insane 100 per cent renewable energy target.
Di Natale thinks this policy would not result in job losses because the government would manage the transition.
Where the government would get the massive tax revenue needed to fund the transition is unclear, given that Australian industry would be destroyed and coal exports would stop.
The only "clean" technologies capable of providing the baseload power needed to keep the country in the 21st century are hydro and nuclear. The Greens, of course, are vehemently opposed to both.
Di Natale said only there would be no job losses, not that our standard of living would be maintained. I suppose he would think it a great outcome if Australia in 2030 resembled North Korea today. After all, our carbon dioxide emissions would be reduced by almost 100 per cent.
D. Zivkovic, Aranda
Heroes deserve respect
What a disgusting and ungrateful letter from Kenneth Griffiths (Letters, March 27), saying none of the Australian soldiers who fought and served our country made their sacrifice for Australia.
Did he think that when Japan invaded Australia in World War II the servicemen and women were not defending their country?
Hundreds of people lost their lives in Australia to this attack from an invading enemy. So much so, that the government had ruled a line across the country and was prepared to sacrifice it to the Japanese, such was the threat of total invasion.
Does he really think that the Australian personnel who served did not make their sacrifice for Australia (as he puts it, in his words)?
In fact more bombs were dropped on Darwin than Pearl Harbour.
On February 19, 1942, Darwin was bombed two-and-a-half more times than Pearl Harbour, resulting in the killing of 243 people and many more wounded.
It was attacked 64 more times by the Japanese, the last attack in late 1943. Much of northern Australia was also attacked.
Next time he writes such dribble he should check his facts and show a little more gratitude to the servicemen and women of this country who put their lives on the line for people like him.
Maybe he should make a trip to Darwin to see some of the monuments and history dedicated to the people that saved this country.
Ian Pilsner, Weston
Always on right path
Owen Reid (Letters, March 27) asks who would have guessed that a group of "prominent" Australians against the War Memorial expansion "just happen to be of the left"? And who would have guessed, judging from Mr Reid's oft-stated opinions, that just about everyone is to his left?
Eric Hunter, Cook
Give cash to veterans
May I add my small voice to the prominent Australians opposed to the expansion of the Australian War Memorial.
Having had four years celebrating World War I, the AWM now wants half-a-billion dollars to glorify war. Enough is enough.
To make matters worse, the AWM spokesman claims the public has been consulted and that the overwhelming majority of Australians support the proposed development.
What arrogant nonsense. Nobody I know supports this development and one hopes that if the ALP forms government at the general election, it will seriously review this proposal given the public is not in favour of it.
When one looks at other developed countries in North America and Europe, they favour national institutions that promote their culture, heritage and natural history.
We promote our involvement in other people's wars as our priority.
If the ALP does form government in the near future, may I suggest it spends the half-a-billion dollars on proper care for our veterans, proper funding for our existing national cultural institutions and a national natural history centre or museum, as advocated by the Australian Academy of Science.
Phil Creaser, Canberra City
Another US stumble
In a brief proclamation, witnessed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Donald Trump declared that "the United States recognises that the Golan Heights are part of the State of Israel."
He argued that Israel's illegal seizure of the Golan Heights in 1967, its unilateral annexation of the territory 14 years later and its continued assertion of control along with the aggressive buildup of illegal Jewish settlements and Israeli capitalist exploitation in the territory were all justified by "Israel's need to protect itself from Syria and other regional threats" including Iran.
Another win for Israel.
Another downhill slide for the US empire.
Rex Williams, Springwood, NSW
Anti-semitism still alive
Rex Williams once again descends into crude reductionism when he accuses Israel of "controlling both houses of US government" (Letters, March 26).
Not only is this statement out of touch with political reality in the US, it is also redolent of the paranoid fantasies about a 'Jewish conspiracy' that are a feature of classical anti-semitism.
It is sad that such discredited discourse can still see the light of day.
Robert Cussel, Yarralumla
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 the date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).