Australians, and the Australian Labor Party in particular, have historically taken pride in a commitment to the "fair go". Can we expect our alternative government's spokespersons to stand up for that principle now?

Or will the fear of being "wedged" cause them to say "me too" in response to this latest outbreak of petty vindictiveness.

Nigel Thompson, Queanbeyan

Words fail me to express my disgust at the cruel victimisation by this government of asylum seekers who have been brought to Australia for medical care and are now are not only losing benefits of $200 a fortnight but are being forced to leave government housing within three weeks.

These are not people who could have saved some money to support themselves; they have not been allowed to work, even had they been able to, and their chances of finding work now are minimal. Some are recovering from abuse they suffered on Nauru and Manus Island, in addition to the trauma they may have suffered before they were detained.

With little support and no housing, their options are to return to the horrific conditions in detention or to go back to the country they fled in fear.

This government is victimising vulnerable, traumatised people in order to stick to the letter of its flawed and inhumane policy of not allowing any boat arrivals to be settled in Australia.

As for Peter Dutton's remark that the lawyers defending asylum seekers are "un-Australian", how is it un-Australian to work to ensure that Australian law is followed? The Coalition is sinking lower and lower.

Clare Conway, Ainslie

An excellent article this week by Jenna Price ("The real reason Dutton wants to evict babies", Comment, August 29, p15) highlighting the absurdity of the suddenly applied new policy to remove support from genuine refugees in Australia, who had been transferred for medical care (the very lucky ones) from the Manus Island internment camp earlier. They were not returned by the Australian government for fear of legal repercussions and probable large compensation payouts.

Now, in order to avoid an ongoing case in court that they are likely to lose, this LNP government is trying to starve them out by removing financial assistance and is removing them from public housing. This is appalling but not surprising, given the clear government disregard for the physical abuses and mental degradation during the more than four years many of the refugees have been imprisoned on Manus Island and on Nauru.

Literally billions of dollars (a simply unbelievable expenditure) has been processed through these camps and for their administration, supposedly for "support and accommodation" for refugees, all at the time of a "budget crisis" for Australia.

It is laughable that Peter Dutton has now been announced as the minister for a larger, less manageable Department of Home Affairs. To date, he has been totally unable, or very reluctant, to resolve these issues and has taken Australia from a country of fairness and decency to one recognised globally as not adhering to basic human rights. When is this bastardry going to stop?

Dr K. Williams, Bonython

Last weekend I watched the AFL game between the Sydney Swans and Adelaide, and also the NRL match between the Canberra Raiders and Newcastle Knights. I noticed some (but not all) of the Swans players and most of the Newcastle players were wearing black armbands.

The NRL commentators and the media explained the reasons for the Knights players wearing the armbands, and it was a magnificent gesture on the Knights' part. There was, however, no reason given (so far as I can recall) for the Swans players' decision to wear them.

I realise that in some cases a player may have a personal reason for taking the decision to wear an armband, and such disclosure may not necessarily be in the public interest. However, there are occasions when it may be appropriate to release such information (e.g. the death of a former player or club stalwart).

I am not sure whether there are any legal or administrative issues associated with such disclosure; however, it would be of interest to most football fans if commentators could provide a few brief comments on former players who have recently died and to whom such respects are being offered, by way of the wearing of a black armband. As someone once said, footballers, like old soldiers, never die, they just fade away.

Andrew Rowe, Florey

So what if a boy wants to wear a dress to school. Good for him. A boy of independent thinking and courage, a future leader of our free society.

It is not so long ago males wore short, tunic-style dresses. The Scots still do. Prince Charles does occasionally. Prince Philip also.

Is Zed Seselja going to tell a battalion of Scots they have been propagandised? By their school teachers? Hint for Zed: males wearing short tunics and kilts predates the Safe Schools program by thousands of years. Are you sure about the causal relationship?

Warwick Davis, Isaacs

Jill Sutton (Burning Questions, CT, August 31) raises important questions about transporting of waste and whether we should burn it.

It has not been widely publicised, but the ACT goverment, through the ESPDD, has begun preliminary consultation about achieving zero net emissions by 2050, at the latest.

This process has highlighted transport and waste as major contributors to territory emissions. A discussion with the wider community about solutions has yet to be had.

But a discussion of the merits of the incinerator brings transport and waste together as an issue.

Transporting waste adds to the emissions from this sector.

Burning waste looks simple and easy, but it goes against the idea of reducing the waste we produce, reusing things and recycling. There are smarter ways to deal with waste than burning.

Those concerned about dioxin and furan gases might consider the pervasive spread of smoke from recent burnoffs, across Fyshwick and into southern suburbs.

Tony Auhl, Narrabundah