The largest potential market is for the Australia wide short term hire of baseball and cricket bats for single use on May 18.

A smaller, but still very profitable market, exists in Canberra for the hire of high capacity paper shredders to current government ministers and their staff post May 18. Provided the shredders are not burnt out from overuse, they could then be on-sold.

A third attractive opportunity exists for the establishment of a "boutique" training and employment agency for defeated government ministers, other Coalition MPs, and for their many thousands of advisers, gophers, spin merchants, consultants and associated personnel likely to be unemployed post 18 May.

That said, a significant effort would have to be put into initial retraining of all affected personnel to bring them from the 1950s to basic 2019 skill sets and ways of thinking.

Australia is truly the land of opportunity. If you have a go, you will get a go.

R. King, Melba

On Anzac Day media reports revealed the Australian War Memorial's director, Dr Brendan Nelson, receives payments from a large weapons making company, Thales, for his work as a Thales board member.

In his defence, the AWM states Dr Nelson donates his payment to the memorial. This does not absolve the director or the memorial of any conflict of interests however.

In December 2015 Dr Nelson extolled the virtues of the Bushmaster protected vehicle, specifically mentioning its maker Thales, when the vehicle was installed on the AWM grounds.

The fact Dr Nelson claims to have the relevant approvals for his role with Thales from the AWM Council, the secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Minister for Veterans Affairs and the Australian Public Service Commissioner compounds this problem.

Did not a single one of those people consider that payments to our pre-eminent place of war commemoration from a company that profits hugely from warfare represents a conflict of interest?

Dr Sue Wareham, Medical Association for Prevention of War president

Whatever happened to the 2011 plan, by the National Commission on the Commemoration of the Anzac Centenary, for an Anzac Centre for the Study of Peace, Conflict and War?

The intention was to focus on building an understanding of the conditions needed for Australia to live in peace and avoid repeating the tragedies of the past century.

It is time for a bipartisan commitment to such a venture.

David Purnell, Florey

Dr Nelson has made his case ("The stories that heal", April 20, p28) for the half-a-billion dollar expansion of the Australian War Memorial.

Superficially it appears to be sound but when it is considered in detail, it is far from convincing.

While nobody could deny the need to tell stories that heal and the need to help and assist veterans, there is no hard evidence to argue why a vast sum of money is required to tell these stories.

Dr Nelson seems to believe that more and more space is vital to display large objects. There is not one major cultural institution anywhere in the world that can display anything more than a very tiny percentage of objects in their collection.

No institution can keep expanding. Hard decisions have to be made and priorities determined to tell the most significant stories and the objects that support them. You can't do everything.

It is true that the Memorial is like no other cultural institution.

The same could be said for every national cultural institution in Australia, some of whom really need urgent financial assistance to undertake core functions such as the National Archives.

One could consider such basic services more important than a glorified wish list for half a billion dollars.

Phil Creaser, Civic

Thanks Michael Shoebridge ("All aboard your non-existent bus", April 24, p19) for a considered and thoughtful look at forthcoming bus changes in respect of school services.

As an "older" Canberran, I've had a look at the changes from an "aged" perspective and I suspect, those with a disability have viewed through that prism.

None of us fare very well under the new scheme so I assume it has been designed by those who either don't catch buses or to whom speed is of the essence.

Having to change buses (or from bus to light rail) once or twice to complete a journey is certainly not ideal.

I am already driving my car to a local bus stop due to my decreasing ability to walk any great distance (the nearest bus stop to me is half-a-kilometre away), so having to change to light rail at Dickson (more walking!) and then, on arrival in Civic, walk twice as far to my destination as I used to on the "one catch bus" is really not my idea of an "improved service".

H Merritt, Downer

It is imperative water resources are managed better in our drought-prone nation.

Parties making constructive, holistic proposals for improving water management will surely attract support from voters tired of political point-scoring.

A key is funding for systematic, field-based hydrogeological studies to delineate groundwaters and their links with surface waters.

It is vital relevant findings from such scientific studies are promoted in ways that facilitate their incorporation into decision making.

Let me briefly illustrate this concept for the Darling River in the region where the recent fish kills have generated community outrage.

Geoscience Australia conducted a hydrogeological study here around a decade ago, looking for a potential water supply for Broken Hill. This documented abundant fresh groundwaters.

There does not appear to have been any serious consideration of drawing on these subsurface waters to improve the current state of the Darling.

It is important integrated, evidence-based use of aquifer and surface waters underpins water management decisions, and revision of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.

Dr Ian Lambert, Garran

It is great national media are taking an interest in water issues which have been impacting on family farmers for over a decade.

Water is a terribly complex issue and buybacks go much deeper than farmers selling unwanted water entitlements back to the government.

The Murray-Darling Basin is divided into the northern basin and the southern basin with the Darling River from the northern basin meeting up with the Murray River from the southern basin at Wentworth about 100 km east of the South Australian border.

The problem with assuming buybacks came from willing sellers is that roughly 83 per cent of the water recovered under the basin plan came from the southern system, and those who took part in buybacks were farmers under extreme financial duress having come out of the Millennium drought with banks at their doors.

Selling water to the government was the only way to keep their farms; this was not spare water which farmers and the communities who rely on them had lying around.

There is a significant difference between a water entitlement in the southern basin, compared to an 'over flow' entitlement in the northern basin. It's all very complex, which is probably why governments have made such a mess, overall, of water policy.

Hayley Doohan, Finley

Why is it claimed by both major parties that tax cuts for the well off and corporations would be a stimulus for the economy?

Surely the better and more certain stimulus would be to increase the spending budgets of those considerably less well off in our country by tax cuts for low income earners and an increase in unemployment benefits to a level that is based on the actual cost of basic food and accommodation.

As for corporate tax cuts, "trickle down" economics was discredited years ago.

M A Ellis, Bruce

One wonders what Michael Lee (Letters, April 16) intended by identifying himself as principal of a Catholic school.

It's hard to believe someone in such a position could not be aware of Catholic teachings on homosexuality that coincides with the teaching of every mainstream religion for the last few millennia.

Even so he can surely understand the distinction between chastisement and hate ("love the sinner, hate the sin") that his Church also teaches.

G. A. Joseph, Hackett