Scott Morrison's election mantra seems to be "we'll give a fair go to those who have a go". And of course Morrison and his mates will decide who is having a go.
Bad luck to those individuals who through disability or for some other reason are deemed not to be having a go. How sad for our nation that care and compassion are now available only on a user-pays basis.
Charles Body, Kaleen
Savings don't add up
Does it pay to travel long distances to fill up at cheaper service stations? ("Canberra fuel prices: The personal cost of paying more," canberratimes.com.au, April 14) The RACV estimates that each extra kilometre travelled in a Mazda 323 costs 15c in fuel, tyres and servicing. For a 50L refill, a 1c per litre saving in fuel costs would save 50c. So it would be worth travelling up to an extra 3.3km (1.7km each way) to save 1c per litre. Any farther, and the cost of the extra travel would exceed the saving. Similarly, it would not be worth travelling more than an extra 6.6km to save 2c per litre, and 17km each way to save 10c per litre.
Leon Arundell, Downer
Devil's advocate on drones
Drones can be noisy, and this offends many people. Planes, cars, helicopters are noisy too, as are many birds, especially Currawongs in the early hours, and the migrating Koels, around Christmas time. They emit loud characteristic noises, any time day or night.
Drones fly, yet are safest form of travel is by air. Ask Superman. The alternative, road or rail travel, is expensive, can be slower, and dangerous.
I believe drones are the answer for many issues; one example is for the ill requiring rapid medication, for example an EpiPen (adrenaline), especially if they are alone. Another is the rapid and safe transport of radioactive chemicals required for medical testing, like F-18 labelled fluorodextrose, which otherwise loses activity quite smartly (half life 110 minutes). Now drones have been usefully employed in Queensland, to rapidly identify swimmers in trouble, locating sharks etc. Much more efficient, and cheaper, than monitoring by regular aircraft.
Banning drones in general would be a serious mistake. But if you want fast coffee and food? Go get it yourself!
What about the birds? Anyone who has ever studied birds closely know that at high speed (ca. 40km/h) they can transverse dense trees without running into or even clipping anything! Quite amazing. Thus I do not think drones are an issue, albeit they travel at comparable speeds.
Greg Jackson, Kambah
Please stop the madness
Just heard my first drone pass over today. How exciting! By chance I also received Project Wing's propaganda in the mail. I can't wait to have hundreds of them flying over everyday (being close to Mitchell and all), it will be like living next to Sydney airport. Will somebody please stop this pointless madness.
Stuart Rankin, Franklin
New-age barista hipster
I am the coffee drone at our house - with a five-star rating. Busy as a bee with a well-caffeinated buzz. I don't fly, but I'm very efficient and don't use non-recyclable cups. A new-age household barista hipster - getting older, greyer, thinner, fitter - with an easy-to-use coffee machine that grinds the coffee beans we buy at the farmers' market.
As a pacifist and realist, drones are not in my sights to bring down or denigrate. But delivering coffee to lazy beings? Surely drones should be used in more helpful and altruistic ways.
Neil Lade, Ainslie
Need to make tough choices
Dr Brendan Nelson claims the AWM is "like no other" cultural institution ("A home for the stories that heal", April 20, p28). Indeed: it is given everything it wants (not "needs") - much more than other institutions.
Dr Nelson seems not to understand that if he wants to display more stuff he should do what other cultural institutions do - decide what can and cannot be displayed within the budgets provided. This may demand hard choices, but I doubt that removing the "Emden gun" from display will upset very many RAN veterans of the Great War.
Dr Nelson needs to learn that leaders of museums have to make choices within reasonable budgets - that is, to manage, and not indulge in emotional special pleading.
Peter Stanley, Dickson
Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attachment. 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).
To send a letter via the online form, click here.
