Currently this is marred by the fact it is held on the day when my ancestors, and those of other Britons living in this country, took advantage of the fact the original inhabitants of this land had not developed the same high-powered weapons as they had.

The latter valued land among themselves so much (e.g. welcome to country ceremonies) and they were so isolated, they didn't envisage invasion from overseas, or that any invaders would be so ruthless.

I suggest all proud Australians, particularly those with British heritage, read books such as Pascoe's Dark Emu to find out what really happened.

I would hope that by this time next year we have found a more appropriate Australia Day and set a date by which Aborigines will have reached the same health and education standards as other Australians.

I also hope we will have given Aborigines an acceptable voice.

Let's make Australia a proud and intelligent country.

Murray Upton (January 28) opined "in view of the growing numbers of letters and articles appearing in the media in favour of changing the date of Australia Day this suggestion should be ... adopted as soon as practicable".

This reasoning is illogical. Media editors choose what to publish. Their preferences should not automatically become law. If they did, should the preferences of the editors of The Daily Telegraph be given preference over those of the editors of The Canberra Times which has a smaller circulation?

Perhaps to solve Mr Upton's perceived "current controversy" the government could ask the ABS to undertake some sampling of preferences for the date of Australia Day.

If this shows that more than 30 per cent prefer a specific date over the current date then a full plebiscite should be conducted. This should put all the present arguments behind us.

The announcement of the creation of the National Emergency Medal in recognition of the service of Australian firefighters, police, paramedic and others during the latest bushfire season should be welcomed both by those well deserving and the many who have publicly called for such.

While the criteria is yet to be determined it will required careful and measured assessment to ensure the contributions of people from all walks of life can be recognised.

How can the federal government announce extra funding only for private schools when state schools are struggling?

This is yet another example of how out of touch they are with the majority and focused on buying the votes of voters.

They are supposed to be governing for all Australians.

Paul Wayper (Letters, January 28) omits another option to reduce population growth, that is education.

Talking about it in the context of limited earth resources resonates strongly with most people. When the Club of Rome released the report The Limits to Growth in 1972, many people accepted the need to limit the number of children they had to the replacement level of two.

Unfortunately a large section of the population was unaware of this report. The need for continual growth was then pushed effectively by vested interests and talk of limiting population growth has become tainted with the accusation of racism.

Education about Australia's severely limited natural resources is also needed to explain why this country cannot take in large numbers of excess population from other countries without end.

We might have lots of land but our population, historically, has concentrated on the south-eastern fringe because the rest of the country is so resource-poor.

This most habitable land is continually being degraded by population growth as forests are cut down and farming land alienated to accommodate this growth.

Many thanks to Ian Webster for his letter on our world's carbon budget (Letters, January 27).

This is vital information for the world to combat global warming.

In 2014 the Climate Change Authority, the Australian government's scientific advisors, told us Australia's share of the world's carbon budget is a total of 10.1 billion tonnes of emissions from 2013 to 2050.

The latest data shows Australia continues to emit well over 500 million tonnes per year and emissions are not dropping.

Simple maths tells us 10 billion tonnes will only last for 20 years.

This means in 2032 we will run out of our share of the world's carbon budget. My questions is how do we drop to net zero emissions in 2032 and remain there at net zero until 2050?

What will that do to our economy? How do we deal with the likely trade sanctions that will follow?

Would it not be wiser to progressively reduce our emissions and eke out the carbon budget over the full period to 2050 so as new technologies emerge we can take advantage of their benefits?

Following the speech by the arch climate change sceptic Trump at the World Economic Forum in Davos, in which he also insulted the teenage protester, Greta Thunberg, one of our ministers was asked what he thought.

He said he thought Trump had made a very good speech. Incredible.

Such a reaction means it is doubtful this government is prepared to listen, even at this late hour, to experts telling them what needs to be done.

What will it take? Aren't the widespread and devastating bushfires, the wildlife and livestock losses and the continuing coastal damage enough to alert our government to the dangers ahead?

It seems reminiscent of the 1930s and the approach of World War II when many national leaders delayed any response to the approaching danger until the very last minute.

The early deaths of some 70 million people followed, together with millions left deeply traumatised and national economies devastated.

Are we truly willing to chance that, and even worse?

The success in recent years of Australian tennis players boosted the popularity of the game at community playing level.

To harness the success, for future development, online booking was introduced at ACT courts.

Canberra is essentially a safe Labor town. Federally we just have one Liberal senator. We were lucky to receive any sports grants.

In the 1980s, Ros Kelly was nearly beaten by the Liberal Party candidate in the election for seat of Canberra.

A suggestion for the Nationals. The best way out is to remove Bridget McKenzie as deputy leader by party room vote. Inform the PM the party no longer supports her in any ministry. That allows the PM to remove her.

Ash Barty is among the best of (female and Indigenous) regional Australia. Other sportspeople before her have gone on to successful public careers.

Re: Paul Wayper (Letters, June 28) "Is Dick Smith anti-immigration". I think I can declare with confidence that Mr Smith is, as he has declared many times, opposed to immigration at any rate that will see Australia's population grow much beyond what it already is (25 million).

As for the rest of Mr Wayper's letter, I think it in need of review and comment. Yes, he agreed we cannot grow our population forever but, no, there is really nothing we can do about it save for euthanasia.

All other solutions, he declared, are too draconian, unpopular, unethical, or likely to move the problem elsewhere.

But the most obvious and most necessary solution he rejects, a reduction of immigration to sustainable levels, is none of these things. A majority of Australians strongly support a substantial reduction in immigration because they share Dick Smith's concerns.

Draconian or unethical? Hardly.

Smith is not anti-migrant and neither am I. We are ardently against the lunacy of "growth forever" and the harm this does to the Australian environment.

Any difficulty DFAT is experiencing with the evacuation of Australians from Wuhan may reflect Chinese schadenfreude. Remember diplomacy is a reciprocating art.

I am constantly annoyed by tennis commentators who say a particular singles player needs to "regroup". In the case of Rafael Nadal they may be referring to his apparent need to rearrange things down below.

Surely this allocation of money to less deserving clubs to score votes says as much about the electorate as it does about the government. If bribery and corruption did not work they wouldn't be so widespread. Everyone has their price, it seems.

The solution for the future, according to the PM, is to seek more power in dealing with emergencies. He could, instead, consider an increased role for others, including scientists and experts on climate change risks, in deciding what needs to be done.

Concrete action must be taken before any more army helicopters land in Namadgi.

Use of a chopper's landing lights may be a preventable problem in starting a grass fire. Downdraft of hot engine exhaust gases by that mighty fan on top may be more intractable. Abseiling, perhaps?

A shop owner who shot and killed a graphic artist and stored the body in a wheelie bin for 17 years has been sentenced to six years and six months with a non-parole period of three years and six months. How pathetic is our legal system?

As Sir Humphrey said: "Never set up an inquiry unless you know in advance what its findings will be." He also said inquiries should be headed by "sound chaps" who would ensure the result the government wants. The sports rorts inquiry seems to follow the Yes, Minister script to the letter.

It is sad Bridget Mackenzie believes she has done nothing wrong. It is also hard to believe the PM had nothing to do with determining to whom, and where, the grants were distributed. They are both burning up any last integrity the Coalition had.

It's at times like these that I am glad we live on an island continent. The fact it has islands of its own is a bonus. No offence to the returnees but "better safe than sorry".

Watching "Scotty McSmirk's" performance at the National Press Club was depressing. Out came all the old obfuscations, half-truths and outright lies. He ignores the facts about carbon emissions and what they are doing. He must alter his thinking or he must go.

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 The 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 or touch here.