Barr govt continues to mislead and obfuscate over tram

As a former transport planning practitioner, it is clear to me that this project will be grossly uneconomic; an outsized white elephant. Slower to Woden than a bus and unlikely, other than by flawed assertion, to divert car users to tram (unless because of tram-induced traffic congestion and reduced highway capacity). The much-vaunted en-route property development benefits are largely illusory. They are would also be available with simple rezoning served by modern buses. A remote tram in the median strip of a freeway is hardly a safe or attractive option, even for any adjacent properties.

While little is known of the cost-benefit work it seems no allowance has been made for the costs of the massive traffic disruption during construction. It was claimed that the disruptive raising of London Circuit was not costed to the tram project, yet the work site is surrounded by signs announcing the coming of the tram.

The planners seem as contemptuous of the community and heritage value of the Commonwealth Avenue tree scape as they were for the destruction of the Northbourne Avenue treescape - seemingly deeming replanting of saplings as a like-for-like replacement of healthy mature heritage-quality trees.

Fortunately, Andrew Barr has said that the tram will only proceed with 50 per cent Commonwealth funding. The Department of Finance in which I once worked would never have advised that such expenditure was efficient or effective.

Our growing city has much higher priority needs, for example in its failing health, education and justice sectors.

It has been reported that at the proposed Vikings Jerrabomberra "the poker machine lounge and the bar would operate seven days a week from 10am to 3am".

Within the context of gambling harm-minimisation my question is: what is the legitimate and compelling reason for poker machines to be accessible at 3am?

My second question is: why do poker machines in other ACT licensed clubs need to be accessible until 4am?

The expulsion of Beatrice Tucker by the Australian National University shows a disregard for the full context of the student's words and evinces a narrow intolerance that betrays the university's duty to safeguard open debate.

As reported, Tucker said: "Hamas deserve our unconditional support. Not because I agree with their strategy - complete disagreement with that - but the situation at hand is if you have no hope ... nothing can justify what has been happening to the Palestinian people for 75 years."

The words are actually inconsistent, on the one hand urging "unconditional support" and on the other disagreeing with Hamas' strategy. Many, apparently including ANU, have taken the "unconditional support" phrase out of its context and construed it as support for terrorism. Yet the following words strongly imply the student's disagreement with terrorism.

The ANU needs to be above partisan accusations and hate speech. Certainly Tucker's words were loose and arguably unwise, but this is a young person speaking under pressure. They are not a diplomat, politician or academic reciting carefully chosen words.

To open a young person to even more vicious denunciation from partisans and to condemn them to carrying a blot on their record is disproportionate. And worse, the ANU's action betrays its responsibility to safeguard debate even of highly unpopular views.

I was horrified that the ANU expelled Beatrice Tucker for expressing views on Hamas, which were espoused on radio. I don't agree with Tucker but it was a point of view not an exhortation to violence.

It was little different in fact from the statements of those who conflate not supporting the Israeli government with anti-Semitism.

I thought universities were the bastion of free speech and supported the expression of many points of view.

Expelling a student for a controversial statement is not what I hoped the ANU has been about.

John Raison (Letters, June 7) and Dr Bartlett (Letters, May 31) have both now accused me of being misleading, so let's look at the facts.

The claim that the weight of fuel (fuel load) drives fire intensity comes from a 1959 book drawing on American pine plantations in which the fuel is a flat layer of pine needles.

This model underpins prescribed burning, but in the Australian bush, fire also burns upward through plants.

So, what does the evidence say?

I published a 2023 study showing that because of this fact, a fire can be hugely destructive even though modelled as low severity.

The 2022 Project Vesta (CSIRO and DBCA) findings were that unless plants were burning (called 'Phase II'), flames were small and of low-intensity.

The claim that doubling the fuel load doubles the rate of spread came from a 1967 leaflet showing nine data points and was never peer-reviewed.

It was later tested in a peer-reviewed study, which concluded that there was no relationship between fuel load and rate of spread.

Project Vesta concluded that the main fuel descriptor to be concerned about was instead the understorey, which forms only a small part of the fuel load.

My claim about low flammability in very long-unburnt forests comes from publishing several peer-reviewed analyses of government records, and my knowledge of burning sub-alpine forests comes from years of actually doing it and seeing the results.

We can't stop our learning halfway through last century if we want to keep our forests.

Apropos Peter Costello's physical contact with the journalist at the Canberra Airport, he argued that he didn't lift a finger or fist to the aggrieved journo.

This may be so, however, he did seem to "shoulder bump" him.

The journo was walking backward, and allegedly fell over an advertising board.

If Mr Costello maintains such defence did he step over both journalist and advertising board while continuing his walk?

I've seen lesser shoulder bumps in football cop penalties.

The Canberra Times editorial "Our political discourse is under threat" (June 6) itself undermines shared informed discussion regarding events in Gaza.

The focus should be on stopping the killing of innocent civilians in Gaza, not bashing the Greens.

Those having to wait six to nine months for a level four package in the aged care system should think themselves lucky.

Under the LNP I received an ACAT assessment in January 2017 and had to wait until November 2019 before I was moved to level four.

The main reason teals took so many conservative seats was simply because of the LNP's failure to deal with global warming in a reasoned and logical science-based manner.

Instead they followed their donors and refused to accept what has become the bleeding obvious.

They shot themselves in the foot.

They have now gone out and bought a bigger shotgun, reloaded it with nuclear pellets, aimed at both feet and fired both barrels.

They must be hoping for a better result.

The recent passing of hard man and fitness fanatic Brian Bourke brought back many memories of his time with the Queanbeyan Blues.

It was "good luck" to those running out in opposition.

I first met Brian back in 1953 when we shared a school bus, he to St Christopher's in Manuka, me to Grammar.

I presumed he went to St Edmund's in 1954 when their doors first opened, but maybe not - if he had I'd have surely remembered playing against him in school rugby.

I shudder to think what could have happened if that was the case.

One can only surmise where his football ability would have taken him if he had been born in a later era.

The Raiders for sure, Origin more than likely and the possibility of Australian representation.

His legend will thankfully live on thanks to his imposing sculpture in the Queanbeyan Leagues Club.

Sorry, Ric Hingee (Letters, June 6), but Albanese doesn't have the "baton" to pass. He lost it months ago.

Each to their own when it comes to devouring the flesh of murdered animals. The Little Oak sanctuary has successfully run vegan BBQs before without offering up beef options. I'll certainly be interested to see the offerings on Saturday, October 19, as we line up for our mystery bag democracy sausage on election day.

I'm not sure what others think, but I personally think that Trump would look good in orange; it would complement his skin colour and his excessive hair dye.

Re Douglas Mackenzie's letter (June 7). I thought the use of the term global warming had been replaced by climate change as the former didn't fit the zealots' narrative. Now everything can be sheeted home to climate change, even air turbulence affecting aircraft.

If an elected politician is incapable of expressing his or her ideas without the confected efforts of a speechwriter they ought not be elected or accept ministerial office in the first place.

Water bills are set to rise by 7.1 per cent. Why? Higher inflation forecasts. Yet the actual levels of inflation are falling. It is now 3.6 per cent, down from 4.1 per cent the previous quarter. Electric and gas bills are also rising. Why? Yes, inflation. It is time these utilities were either nationalised or have their increases capped. The only winners are the shareholders.

Further to speechwriters for politicians, I remember the speeches of Tony Benn, a committed socialist whose speeches in Parliament were enjoyed and applauded sometimes by both sides of the House. I assume he must have had a wonderful speechwriter.

I still can't help wondering if there is any truth to the oft-denied rumours Bill Shorten is being "Paris-chuted" overseas.

If what Peter Costello did to the reporter is assault what do we call what Israel is doing to the Palestinians in Gaza?

Peter Costello may not have shouldered a journalist. But equally, he didn't stop to ask "are you alright, mate?" Not a model for anyone.

I wish the media wouldn't use the word "culling" for the slaughtering of kangaroos in the ACT. I consider this to be an inaccurate euphemism for what is a very barbaric act.