Speeding fine inconsistency confusing

Anthony Bruce (Letters, July 29) wrote that he was detected departing from the Civic CBD at 47km/h, driving through a green traffic light and was fined $253. He did not mention a demerit point.

Ann Kent (Letters, August 3) said she had been caught at the same spot doing the same speed. Anne was fined $301 and lost one demerit point.

I was going the other way. (There is no mention in the article of the intersection with Cooyong Street) and I, wrongly, thought I had left the zone. I was doing an alleged 46km/h. I was also fined $301 and lost one demerit point. This was during the first week of penalties.

While Mr Bruce, Ms Kent and I may all be negligent desperadoes who need to be taught a salutary lesson surely consistent punishments should fit the alleged crimes, not what appear to be randomly generated amounts, especially since none of the cited penalties are anywhere near the stated $260 for a less than 15km/h above the limit offence. Clarity, consistency and transparency from those in authority would be a good start.

While the exact amount of my speeding fine is yet to be officially quantified, both Ann Kent (Letters, August 3) and myself are lucky for the following reasons:

We are not removalists, we don't have COVID-19, we aren't required to travel to Melbourne to earn a quid, we don't have to (eventually) return to Sydney, we were both leaving Civic and it appears we were lucky enough to miraculously get a green light in the process. What a coincidence.

Still, a $301 fine seems very steep. Maybe the 15km/h speeding bands should be only 10. The way I read it, someone detected driving at 70km/h in a 40 zone is penalised the same as someone doing 56. Both Anne and I, with thousands of others, are being fined the same as someone driving at 55km/h.

It's a matter of perspective, like the AFL using percentages rather than the NRL's points differences to determine ladder positions.

Much as I respect and admire Andrew Barr's governance I must disagree with his characterisation that wanting to get to the truth of the Namadgi fire is "playing the blame game". ("Coroner's inquest into Orroral Valley fire overdue", canberratimes.com.au, July 31). That is a "blame the victim" attitude and can only make one suspect that the ACT government is trying to hide something.

The coronial inquiry appears to be only looking at one aspect of the fire disaster; why it took 45 minutes to alert authorities about the ignition.

Other legitimate questions include why did the defence helicopter land in the Orroral Valley when there was known large risk from high intensity landing lights under the weather and fuel load conditions at the time.

Why wasn't there any direct ACT government oversight of a defence crew most probably inexperienced in bush fires?

Why did the crew not attempt to extinguish the initial fire?

It is not playing the "blame game" to get to the truth of why 80 per cent of the Territory's wonderful Namadgi national park and its critical biodiversity and recreational assets were burnt so that lessons can be learned for the future. The ACT public has a right to know.

What is this? Rates again. Up just on $500 from last year. What bad thing did we oldies do to deserve this?

We helped fund a tram to a suburb we have never been to, we are looking forward to years of traffic chaos trying to get to the city. We have signs over two years old on our local roads saying things like "making it faster for you" and "duplicating the road".

The only duplication I can see is the dangerous pot holes we swerve to avoid, making it slower and risky.

These are the reasons we voted against self-government. I agree we have had some good Labor governments but the latest lot are simply selfish and incompetent. We will remember them.

What an illogical and disgusting letter from Stephen Cobcroft (Letters, August 1).

It is illogical because he equates an animal's instinct for survival with a human being who has the foreknowledge of what is going to happen to them, who has fought to survive for so long but has been told that things will only get worse and in the end they will die in agony.

It is disgusting because it implies that people who chose to die by euthanasia are the "opposite of brave". Does he accuse them of being cowards?

I have listened to many people over the years who have made the excruciating decision to take their lives and I can assure him that none of them have been cowards.

If there is one depressing conclusion to be drawn from the pandemic it is the high degree of self-absorption among those aged under 40.

Fed by social media hype, every minor event - locally as well as globally - is viewed as a personal threat and every minor inconvenience as potentially life-changing.

Politicians milk this, despairing at the "tragedy" of a miniscule number of COVID-19 deaths while ignoring industrial accidents, obscene levels of domestic violence, including in Indigenous communities, and avoidable road traffic deaths.

Get over it. COVID-19 is less serious than polio, whooping cough or measles. Our "engagement" in Afghanistan was far less painful than Korea or Vietnam, and the economic transitions of the Hawke/Keating era were more impactful.

Instead of obsessing about how events will personally impact you, get out there and drive the changes to give all Australians the better future you hunger for.

Greg Craven ("Euthanasia is a rotten law. It should be stopped," August 4, P23) argues that voluntary assisted dying is a bad idea and that the Commonwealth should never allow the ACT to enact such a law.

I was particularly entertained by this argument: "Everywhere it is enacted the number of deaths is far higher than predicted, and in places like Belgium there are numerous cases where the required consent procedures have not been followed".

Professor Craven seems to believe we shouldn't have laws that are not always followed. Logically then, laws that won't always be followed shouldn't be enacted and laws that aren't always followed should be repealed.

I note that the law against murder doesn't seem to be followed by everyone all the time. Perhaps we should start there.

These days I agree with a lot of what my old friend and Assembly colleague Jon Stanhope says but I can't support his idea of establishing an ACT town council as well as the Legislative Assembly. ("Canberra City Council? A former chief minister wants to have the debate," canberratimes.com.au, August 2).

I would support getting rid of the Assembly and all state and territory governments as Australia, in my view, would be better served with the federal parliament and 20 to 25 big regional councils.

The federal government would be responsible, in addition to their current responsibilities, for courts, policing, health and education as well. This would be a win - win for all Australians except state and territory politicians and some of their public servants.

However, as that requires a significant constitutional change and won't happen anytime soon - if at all, we should stick with what we have; a local government that combines state and municipal responsibilities.

If people don't like the government they need to bite the bullet and vote them out in 2024.

It would not be hard for a combination of Liberal members and non ALP/Green independent members to be better than what we have at present.

Remember, voters get the governments they deserve.

Adding insult to injury an NCA spokesperson said there had been "a misunderstanding of the authority's role".

This selectively ignores the red-hot anger and opprobrium expressed by 597 (out of 600) respondents challenging the aristocracy's desecration of the AWM. ("War memorial plans to go to public for say", August 3, p11).

I nearly choked on my wheaties on Saturday morning (July 31). A David Pope cartoon which didn't attack the Morrison government and actually had a go at Albo and Labor. Will wonders never cease?

The ACT government is collecting record amounts of speeding fines from fixed and red-light cameras and mobile traffic camera vans. On the bright side, traffic congestion from the next stage of light rail means Canberra motorists will not have the opportunity to speed.

Like most people I didn't know there was an Australian shark fin export/import trade, let alone such a vile thing as live shark-finning (Close loophole in shark-finning trade: report, July 31, p20). But I'm not surprised. The human capacity to abuse, torture, slaughter and destroy other creatures on this planet has no limits.

Congratulations to my lovely city of Wollongong, Australia and Emma McKeon on her five Olympic medals. I think, from now on, it should be Emma, Emma, Emma, oi, oi, oi.

Every sporting organisation around the world should be congratulated for the hard work and tireless effort that they have put in to keep bringing us sport and along with it sanity.

John Sandilands (Letters, August 1) opines that "conflict between sports facility providers and users goes back to when Moses played fullback for Jerusalem". His assessment of the time elapsed might be correct, but I have to point out that Moses was a front rower, and team captain too.

I welcome the ad-hoc increases in the amounts payable to people who have lost employment in COVID-19 hotspots in Sydney and now in other places. But does this mean we will see the Morrison government's ministers for rorts and Liberal candidates in marginal seats handing out giant dole cheques?

Those who attended the anti-lockdown rally have now made the coronavirus outbreak in Sydney a lot worse with regular reports of more than 200 cases a day.

"Any decision [by ministers] must be justified in terms of the public interest" writes Professor Richard Mulgan ("Public service cast its lot the wrong way in 'car park rorts' scandal", Public Service Informant, August 3, p5). Makes one think of the tram to Woden. Would its construction serve the public interest? If not, cui bono? Perhaps we need a Fitzgerald-style inquiry.

Randy Knispel (Letters, August 3). Your question about the Liberals is very easily answered. They are very liberal in supporting people who do not need support.

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).