It goes on to say that "the most commonly reported type of harassment or bullying [is] verbal abuse". Thus, if any employee in the APS referred to a colleague as a "lying cow", they would be in hot water. They would probably end up having to explain themselves to HR. Claiming that they verbally abused their colleague "in the heat of the moment" would not cut it.

If a supervisor was to verbally abuse a more junior employee in public it would be even more destructive. Apart from humiliating the victim, it would send the message to all those present that it is okay to bully and abuse others.

When, however, the Minister of Defence, Linda Reynolds, publicly referred to one of her ex-employees as "a lying cow", the Prime Minister brushed it aside as a regrettable remark that was said "at a time of frustration" when the minister "was under significant stress".

This is yet another example of Scott Morrison accepting a lower standard behaviour from his team than is demanded of others in other workplaces. Rather than being exemplars of probity, Scott Morrison's cabinet seems to live by the dictum "Do as I say, not as I do".

The move by Italy to ban the export of 250,000 doses of the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine to Australia is a pretty putrid example of vaccine nationalism at work.

For many weeks Macron, Merkel et al have been downplaying the effectiveness of the AstraZeneca vaccine to the extent there is now wide spread resistance to its use in Europe and vaccine is sitting in warehouses with nowhere to go.

Presumably Australia sensibly raised its hand and said "if you don't want it we can use it". But no, it will remain locked away unless and until the EU can persuade its citizens to accept it into their arms.

As I said, putrid vaccine nationalism.

I sympathise with Alison Chapple in her dealings with Housing ACT to try and get some action on a nuisance public housing tenant (Letters, March 1).

From my experience getting any action from Housing ACT requires perseverance well beyond that of dealing with a private landowner.

Not that the staff are unpleasant and willing to help where they can, but they are shackled with ACT government, and in particular Greens, policy that favours the wayward tenant over the surrounding land owners.

There is nothing wrong with the salt and pepper policy, provided there are rules in place that are policed and a three strikes and you're out approach is taken.

My experience with a similar problem is that despite numerous representations by the neighbours, including to the tenant, it took just on two years to resolve, and then only when the tenant nearly burnt the house down while on drugs.

While I accept some private property owners and tenants also fail to do the right thing, public housing belongs to the people of Canberra. The government has a duty of care to make sure it is properly maintained and kept neat and tidy by the tenant.

It is a small number of people the government is unwilling to take action against, at least until things get beyond the desperate stage, who cause so much angst.

There is no rocket science involved here as one only has to drive by the houses in question to see where there are problems and where regular inspections are warranted and warnings need to be issued.

I was a bit bemused to see that the ACT government had agreed to take a payment from the builder in lieu of going through a legal process to decide who would foot the bill to bring the Gungahlin pool back to a useable state.

Building a tiled pool is not rocket science. Hundreds of thousands of them must have been built down the years.

If the builder could not get it right it would seem they did not have the required skills to do so. Blaming the glue, the tiles, and so on are furphies.

I hope that when the tender process is undertaken to fix the pool the government procures the services of a pool expert with demonstrated experience in this type of construction. The preferred company will price the job accordingly. No one likes to clean up someone else's mess.

I was saddened to read Greg Pritchard's article "Snowy 2.0 defaces a national park" (March 2, p23).

In 2018 Andrew Blakers of the Australian National University demonstrated there were 6000 sites for small pumped hydro stations available in Australia; none of which would require the extensive and expensive tunneling required for Snowy 2.

A feasibility study found there were serious risks associated with the scheme and a water quality expert from the University of Canberra pointed to the "catastrophic" effects it would have on the freshwater systems involved.

Furthermore, the scheme was to produce the most expensive electricity in Australia. Why was this scheme ever approved? It has no "green credentials". Was it a case of politics over sanity?

To now read more about the devastating effect this scheme is to have on our already fragile alpine national park and the now doubtful sustainability of the scheme, calls for a full independent inquiry into its future viability.

When John Howard privatised aged care, he killed two birds with one stone (interesting metaphor): his government abrogated their responsibility for aged care, and he helped big business make a killing.

Private aged-care providers get money from both sides: from the residents, but also from the Australian government, i.e., from us, the taxpayers.

Last year the Liberal-National-One Nation coalition rejected a proposal that would have made private aged-care providers accountable for the funds that they administer.

Driving down Northbourne Avenue on Wednesday I admired the native grasses and gum trees. I thought it a clever representation of the"long paddock", the saviour of many a drought-afflicted flock.

But Peter Sherman (Letters March 4) prefers bird-attracting shrubs, a different way to represent Australian highways by decorating the avenue with roadkill.

The problem with our politicians is that their ethics are easily corrupted by the power. Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese are in group 2a for the COVID-19 vaccination roll out.

They convinced themselves they should jump the queue ahead of emergency and quarantine workers dealing with COVID-positive people, group 1a, and jump the queue on the elderly, group 1b. Scott Morrison had some spin about him showing anti-vaxers that it is okay to have the jab.

Contrast this with the news that the World Bank recently threatened to suspend financing Lebanon's vaccination drive after it was reported that politicians got jabs while priority groups were still waiting.

Anthony Albanese paints himself as being more socially responsible than Scott Morrison, what happened?

Re: "Ministers could be untouched by Coalition's proposed integrity commission, former judges warn" (canberratimes.com.au, March 8). Fancy that.

Still, the strong possibility that ministers could avoid scrutiny for non-criminal corrupt behaviour and other improper conduct under the federal government's plan for a national integrity commission must be an unfortunate oversight caused by sloppy drafting.

No doubt all involved would claim to be innocent of any intent to deceive the public about the future handling of matters that are becoming too prevalent and disturbing in the parliamentary arena.

If nobody has given this latest draft law to the Attorney-General for his perusal and so he too could claim to be blameless.

Maybe the acting chief lawmaker, Michaelia Cash, could perhaps send it back quietly to the drafting room for a careful rewrite.

Why all the fuss about Italy and France blocking our supply of the AstraZeneca vaccine? If we can locally produce our own from March 22 we have the potential to be self sufficient - and even to supply other countries.

In lieu of Scott Morrison applying ministerial standards to his cabinet, could we at least negotiate a good part of his front bench being on permanent sick leave? Paying them to stay at home and not govern us would certainly put us ahead.

Is it under China's influence that the Myanmar military have decided they don't believe in democracy? Or don't they like female leaders?

The latest absurdity (presumably American) to corrupt the English language seems to be the use of "uptick". I expect the users of this word are trying to indicate an increase in something. Does it follow that a decrease is a "downtick"? And what would that look like?

Defence Minister Linda Reynolds calls a former member of her staff a "lying cow" in the privacy of her office and the opposition wants her head on a platter. Bob Hawke called an elderly heckler a "silly old bugger" in public and got away with it. Silly me. Bob was one of their own and therefore untouchable.

Scott Morrison is Prime Minister because the tribe spoke. His being Prime Minister and Christian Porter being Attorney-General has nothing to do with justice; it has got a lot to do with the "mob rule" of democracy.

On the one hand Mick Gentleman has changed the law to stop waste hubs in Fyshwick. On the other hand he has allowed the open air toxic fragmentising of vehicles just 50 metres from Harvey Norman's and Nick Scali's on Barrier St. Does the right hand know what the left hand's doing?

In reflecting on the difficult issues concerning the Attorney-General we should note there can be a terrible chasm between justice and the actual implementation of the law. It is the former rather than the latter that should be the guide.

The "tell them this and they'll believe it" approach might have been fine in the PM's former marketing world but it doesn't cut it when you are governing the nation. We need less spin and more genuine action.

In her article ("Christian Porter's career is finished", March 5, p50) Jenna Price informs us Christian Porter has had two marriages fall apart. If, as she also states, there is nothing wrong with that, why raise the matter except to imply - unjustly - that there is some fault in Porter's attitude to women?

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:

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).