For example, at what time of day were these cars speeding? Was it outside the morning and afternoon arrival and departure times? Speeds above 40 km/h are clearly unacceptable during these periods, but other jurisdictions seem to manage perfectly well by limiting school speed restrictions to these times.

Are students just down the road in Queanbeyan in peril because their school zones don't apply all day? I don't think so.

My attempts to get evidence from the ACT government that all-day school zones provide better results have failed, because I suspect no such evidence is available.

If motorists were speeding when the camera van was present then presumably it happens all the time. Have there been a rash of speed-related accidents outside Narrabundah College?

In the absence of any evidence that all-day school speed zones provide better safety outcomes I think it is entirely reasonable to conclude that the main reason for their existence in the ACT is the revenue-raising opportunity they provide.

I was intrigued to read the recent article on mobile speed vans, particularly the assertion that they "don't hide in the bushes" ("We don't hide in the bushes", March 14, p6).

It is my observation mobile speed vans are consistently positioned behind trees, bushes, road signs and parked vehicles.

Rarely are they located in an open space and away from other, apparently fortuitously obscuring, objects. I suspect that according to the ACT government, this positioning would simply be coincidental.

Furthermore, following a recent downgrade of the speed limit on Hambidge Crescent in Chisholm (from 60km/h to 50km/h), I have regularly observed a mobile speed van positioned behind a large parked vehicle during the morning peak travel period.

Prior to the speed change, mobile speed vans in the area were a rare occurrence. I can only assume that this increased presence must also be a coincidence.

So, some current media reporting suggests that comments made by someone who isn't going to be king might boost calls for a republic.

Maybe, but this idea highlights how surreal and irrelevant the debate is about whether we should have an Australian republic or not.

The real issue, and solution, is to put in place a purely Australian process for appointing our governor-general and state governors, to be the basis and source of their constitutional authority.

If people want to elect a president, that means they get a politician (just ask the Americans how well that's worked for them recently).

What we could do is simply replace the current nomination to, and commissioning by the Queen, with nomination to, and commissioning by the outgoing governor-general. The Canadians manage to do that, at least with their provincial governors being appointed by their governor-general.

Enough with the endless and irrelevant chatter about republics when what we simply want is an Australian head of state.

"Not in the public interest" was the phrase Mr Gentleman used in August 2019 when announcing he was not approving the Canberra Service Club's plan for redevelopment of inter alia their site beside Manuka Oval.

Some weeks ago Allan Williams wrote a letter drawing our attention again to the depressing and cringeworthy state of the site. He pointed out that this was not a good look for all the sports fans visiting Manuka Oval. It is also an everyday sadness for local residents.

If Mr Gentleman can't get his department to make up its collective mind, at least authorise a clean-up of the site and move the Kokoda Memorial Monument even temporarily to a respectful location (perhaps in Telopea Park).

Or does he think it is somehow in the public interest for the site to remain derelict for another 10 years?

I was disappointed to note that Jack Waterford's Canberra Day oration ("Canberra's a treasure for all Australians", March 13, p28) stuck pretty much to the "old white male" view of history.

I understand that history, in a strict interpretation, is usually written history, and that usually begins with white European ideas. However, as I noticed on a T-shirt worn by a little school kid recently, "White Australia has a black history".

It may have been a nice touch if Jack had been slightly more inclusive with even a very simple recognition that what we call Canberra today is built on country inhabited and cared for for thousands of years prior to the notion of a federal capital, especially for we whitefellas, complete with big houses plonked on little suburban blocks, and no trees.

"Attending to the task of the national capital's stewardship", boring as it may be, might best begin with attending to the task of recognising that the stewardship of the plot we call Canberra had already been happening quite successfully for millenia.

It looks like we have a far longer journey to true reconciliation if a respected, high-profile journalist and 2007 Canberra Citizen of the Year, with a long "history" of insightful comment, has yet to grasp the idea.

Your editorial ("Time is running out to act on carbon", canberratimes.com.au, March 13) failed to ask Australia's most important climate question.

Australia is a party to the Paris Agreement, which aims to to limit the increase in the global average temperature to "well below two degrees centigrade above pre-industrial levels".

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that we may reach that limit when, since 1870, we have emitted between 2200 Gt of carbon dioxide, and that we will almost certainly reach it when we have emitted 5000 Gt.

For the period from 1990 to 2050, that equates to between 200 and 600 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions per person.

Since 1990 the average Australian has caused over 500 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions. Our national target is to increase that to over 600 tonnes by 2030. If we then reduce annual emissions to zero by 2050, then by 2050 our emissions will reach 700 tonnes per person. The most important climate question for Australians is "how can we persuade other people to not follow our example on emissions?"

I was shocked to read in The Canberra Times ("Fatal crash survivor wins $300,000 payout", March 12, p10) that Justice Elkaim had chosen to reduce a car crash victim's compensation payment by $160,000 on the basis that she contributed to her own injuries by getting into a car driven by a drunk driver and failing to put on her seatbelt.

To effectively "fine" someone $160,000 seems extraordinarily harsh.

I really can't see how this is anything other than the same sort of "victim blaming" we see so frequently when intoxicated women are assaulted or harmed.

I also find it damning that the insurance company funding the defence against her claim chose to use the driver as a witness against her claim.

The same evidence had already been given and rejected in the driver's original Supreme Court trial for culpable driving and in his subsequent appeal to the ACT Court of Appeal. At least Justice Elkaim also dismissed his evidence and his reliability as a witness.

Australians seemingly do everything opposite to us Americans: your water drains in an opposite direction; you drive on the opposite side of the road; your winter season is opposite our summer.

That must be why you make it compulsory for all eligible citizens to vote in national, state and territory elections subject to the penalty of fine if one doesn't, while we enact laws to keep us from voting.

We live in the area that is serviced by Wing and our only annoyance with it is that for some reason we aren't eligible for deliveries.

For people working from home, instead of jumping in the car to get a coffee from the shops they can get it delivered by drone. For people that are sick, they can get medicine delivered by drone. I'm sure people complained about the noise of cars when they were first introduced; thank goodness those naysayers were ignored.

I for one welcome our new drone overlords.

I agree that we should vaccinate people in New Guinea as a very high priority. Not only is it the right thing to do, it is also in our interest. A small boat is all it would take to bring COVID-19 into the Torres Strait Islands.

I know of women who were unable to attend the women's March 4 Justice this week, in Canberra or anywhere. Those were women who had, during the course of their lives, experienced rape. Just attending the rally was too confronting for them. Enough is more than enough.

I continue to be astounded by the depth of talent in the federal LNP government. The way Matt Canavan has seamlessly stepped into the role previously filled by Craig Kelly is remarkable.

When the federal Attorney-General returns to work with reduced duties and responsibilities, will this mean a similar percentage reduction in his ministerial salary?

In reference to remarks re deportation to New Zealand, can someone please tell our friends across the Tasman that Peter Dutton does not represent the majority of Australians' views?

Could it be the reason Marise Payne, our minister for 51 per cent of the population, did not attend the March 4 Justice was that she is more committed to supporting the male-dominated and -controlled Liberal government, than to representing the women of Australia?

Following Saturday's Western Australian elections, the Liberals are the first organisation to achieve gender parity, with their election outcome of winning only two seats, one female and one male. Good one Liberals.

The federal government does not have a compassionate bone even in its little finger. Flash out lots of bucks so people can fly off for a holiday, while dribbling meagre coinage to those in need. What do we make of this? A fair go? Hardly.

So what was the final cost to the Australian taxpayers to fund Cormann's "JobSeeker allowance"? Will he be asked to repay us for our assistance?

If Labor can win the state elections, why can't it win federally? The polls show Labor just ahead on the two-party-preferred polls but Anthony Albanese is performing poorly as preferred PM. If Labor can change this at the next election it can win.

Harry and Meghan ... a storm in a Royal Doulton teacup.

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).