I well remember when I was about 14 a maths teacher introduced matrix algebra, where - in simple terms - you can multiply a whole table of numbers by another one, and the result is a different sort of table. A whole classful of students were completely baffled; what could possibly be the use of this?

Then he showed us how to apply this algebra to the deceptively simple problem of, given a road network between a large number of towns, how many possible routes are there between each pair of towns? As boys who would be getting their drivers' licences in the coming years this was a genuine, real-world problem that we could relate to. It was a perfect introduction to the practical application of matrix algebra.

That lesson provided me with a tool that proved to be absolutely fundamental to my subsequent careers, first in transportation analysis, then urban and regional economics, and eventually criminology.

I couldn't agree more with Glenn Fahey ("Maths curriculum review has high stakes", canberratimes.com.au, October 24) that maths students need to be drilled on basic skills.

I write as a professional quantum physicist who uses advanced mathematics on a daily basis. If multiplication tables in primary school and algebra in high school hadn't become second nature early on, through repeated practice, I would not have had the necessary grounding to underpin further studies and a research career.

If the now-popular "woo-woo" approach is due to having too many maths teachers without mathematical training, then more training and salary bonuses are needed.

Almost exactly a year ago Alan Tudge, Australia's Education Minister, was apologising for having an extramarital affair with a staffer.

Now he's pontificating that school curriculum changes fail to teach values and, in history, almost erase Christianity (Schools overlook western history: minister, October 23, p12). Obviously, we should pay close attention to the views of such an expert in these matters.

I right in reference to Emma Lee's "How do we decolonise news reporting?" (October 23, p 28).

Dr Lee criticises The Age for allowing a non-Indigenous former editor to write about an historical lack of Indigenous writers and "the preponderance of Western opinion" in its pages. She says that this task should have been performed by an Indigenous writer, on the basis that "our people ... are best placed to exemplify decolonising practices".

For Dr Lee to argue that only an indigenous person can make the case for Indigenous disadvantage sets a high and dangerous benchmark for social innovation. Her position overlooks the many social advances in history which derive from the human capacity for empathy, as opposed to being the outcome of "victims" self-advocating for change.

Reforms to child labour practices, employment conditions in factories and mines, and the operation of prisons were generally spearheaded by people in social classes well removed from those for whom they advocated.

William Wilberforce was able to make a forceful and successful case for the abolition of slavery despite having himself never been a slave.

To suggest that these campaigners were inappropriate because they had not experienced the oppression against which they campaigned - which seems to be Dr Lee's contention - is patronising and insulting to people of conscience whose efforts made an enormous difference to the quality of human society.

There are many "whitefellas" who advocate articulately for Indigenous Australians. While the latter should be shown deference and encouraged to provide leadership in that endeavour, to suggest that only they can conduct this advocacy is far from correct.

It's amazing to watch the Coalition - and much of the Murdoch media - do this wonderful volte-face and suddenly decide they believe in a net zero 2050 target.

What's even more incredible - especially from The Australian and others is watching them pretend that they've believed this all along.

We're supposed to forget Scott Morrison bringing a lump of coal into Parliament, or telling people electric vehicles will ruin your weekend. We're supposed to forget Tony Abbott, Barnaby Joyce, Angus Taylor, and most other Liberal party politicians telling people that the climate is not changing.

Forget those promises about a "gas-fired recovery", or how a carbon price would "put a wrecking ball through the economy". Pretend you didn't see those, folks. The all new climate-loving Liberal National Coalition and the tree-hugging News Corp is here.

This seems to be a "gaslighting" led recovery.

Sandy Paine (Letters, October 25) asks how much electricity would be needed to produce the hydrogen to run a hydrogen fuelled car.

The answer is about three times as much as if the electricity were used directly to charge a battery electric car. This is due to the inefficiencies of the electrolysis to produce the hydrogen, the electricity used to compress the hydrogen and further inefficiency in the fuel cell to produce electricity from the hydrogen.

By comparison the round-trip efficiency of charging a battery EV is far higher. Hydrogen has many important and likely applications but I doubt that ordinary cars will be among them.

On the same page, Kevin Coughlan wonders what will happen to the petrol cars on the road as they are replaced by EVs. For the next few years I expect one could get a reasonable trade in or private sale of a petrol car when buying a new electric replacement.

A recent model petrol car won't be immediately scrapped. Instead it will be a relatively cheap "new" car for someone who will sell on their older, less efficient petrol car. That older car will be a very cheap "new" car for someone whose ancient vehicle will be sold for scrap metal recycling.

New EVs displace the oldest and least good vehicles from the fleet. The changeover will take some time, which is why it is important that strong EVs uptake is encouraged now and we stop adding new fossil fuel vehicles to the fleet.

As a career changer who has been teaching high school for the last five years in Canberra I have had my share of work struggles. Statistics point to a high level of teachers leaving the profession within five years.

Many graduate teachers do not achieve immediate permanency, and must start their careers as casuals, waiting for a call at 7 am. Graduate teachers have a limited time frame to prove their ability to teach through producing a teaching portfolio demonstrating their experience.

They must also be supported by a school panel to complete the accreditation process. There are few professions that require employees to prove that they are capable at a job they have already been hired to do.

The best analogy to sum up what teachers' working lives are like is to imagine a regular office worker who has eight hours of administrative duties to carry out per day and is then expected to attend meetings for six hours per day (leaving them to fit in their administrative duties in their own time). Many teachers work at least one day every weekend and often a few hours at night.

It is not sustainable. Executive staff need to ensure that teachers are collaborating and are given permission to work on administration during class-time. Teachers need to be treated the same as other professionals in the public service.

Gerry Gillespie (Letters, October 23) highlighted the phenomenon of people citing an invasion of their "human rights" when a decision or legitimate instruction does not accord with their particular views.

Why is it their "rights" have priority over the rights of others, in this specific instance the students under their care?

In terms of "rights" Mr Lans most certainly has the right to ignore a very proper instruction by his employer, but he and his supporters must also be prepared to suffer the consequences of their actions.

Imagine the furore if the ALP in government wanted future proofing of their carbon pricing scheme in the same way the Nationals want future proofing of their ransom payment for supporting net zero?

Have the Nationals agreed to a net zero emissions target by 2050 or have they just agreed to [eventually] agreeing to a net zero emissions target by 2050?

If, as may be the case, the Nationals' price for agreeing to net zero by 2050 is to open yet more coal mines, then the resulting net reduction in Australia's emissions will be zero. So much for "net zero".

Liberal Party member Alan Tudge is too "liberal" to declare that the Nationals are not dictating the environmental policies for the Coalition.

Barnaby Joyce has been described as Australia's best retail politician. Perhaps not. Australia's fossil fuel industry appears to have secured his support at a wholesale price.

How bizarre that the Nationals have taken this long to reach an agreement in principle to agree in principle to a target we know that in their heart of hearts they don't support. Roll out the pork barrel.

What a tragic but utterly foreseeable event. Another race horse killed after breaking down. Not just any horse though; the reigning Cox Plate champion Sir Dragonet. Not a great start for the spring racing carnival where more horses will invariably die whilst people dress up, drink and party in the name of animal abuse.

The number of letters complaining about speed limit changes and characterising them as revenue raising compels me to offer a sure-fire way to get back at those rapacious gnomes in government. Don't speed. That will show them. Simples.

Delivery of any new nuclear powered submarines won't be for decades by which time our Collins class will be decrepit. It seems Australia's submarine strategy is "Net zero by 2050".

Those who think Hong Kong has it rough with China's "one country two systems" should look closer to home. We have one country with eight systems, all exercising their "independence".

An unfortunate accident was suffered by a 14-year-old on the Kambah flying fox. But that's just it, an accident. It's a flying fox for goodness sake. Let kids be kids and please don't ban a piece of play equipment it because of one person's misfortune.