Petrol
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
WHY is it that petrol is under $50 a barrel but at the bowser Tuesday (March 24) the price of 95 octane was $1.46-9?
The Federal Government/ACCC is doing nothing.
— PAUL BULLOCK, Ravenswood.
Swim Club
WHEN you read the article that seems to blame council and their high cost of swimming fees for the decline in membership at the Launceston Aquatic swim club, the same article notes that their rival club South Esk has tripled its membership in the same period of time.
If fees were the issue, why would their rival club triple their membership?
Surely they too would be in decline.
Looks to me like there are other reasons and as usual people are looking for someone else to blame.
— D. SUMMERS, Prospect.
Get serious Labor
MANDATORY sentencing for gun thefts, eh?
On the "for" side we have the Liberals, presumably the police, the community at large and, yes, even us cranky reactionary gun owners.
Why, surely the planets must have aligned.
Yet who do we have on the other side of the fence.
Labor, the Greens and, of course, home invading gun thieves.
Is there a lobby group I'm unaware of?
The Gun Thieves Association?
Perhaps they call themselves the Council for Firearms Theft?
Whatever the case, they seem to have friends in high places.
— LEONARD D. NEUBACHE, Scottsdale.
Public education
THE State government is proposing changes to legislation that will permit independent church schools to discriminate in favour of pupils who belong to a particular religion.
This amendment should be applauded.
It would, of course, be unethical to expect taxpayers to fund an institution that discriminates against any members of the community, so presumably any school that does this would, as a matter of conscience, renounce its claim for government financial assistance.
This would result in worthwhile savings in the education budget, making more money available to be spent in the public education sector.
— W. J. GREER, Beauty Point.
Uni of Tas
THERE has long been discussion in the media and governing circles about the possibility of closing down the Launceston campus.
It should be blatantly obvious that such a move would be met with an enormous amount of confrontation.
Why would anyone even consider doing this?
The University of Tasmania in Launceston should be expanding, not downsizing.
I have first hand experience of the gross financial wastage that occurs at the university year after year in several areas of the organisation.
The loss of the Launceston campus would be a crime.
If this is the only answer that the people making the decisions can come up with, they are unquestionably the wrong people to be in such a position.
— BRENDA CASBOULT, West Launceston.
Safe schools
MARK Brown's myth-making about the Safe Schools program is getting a bit tiresome ("Safe schools", letters, 24.3.15).
Mr Brown is just plain wrong to claim that the Safe Schools program, as it will be implemented in Tasmania, is about "allowing students to use the toilet of their choice" or "encouraging whole school participation in pro-homosexual marriage rallies".
The program trains teachers so they have the skills and information they need to effectively deal with classroom bullying on the grounds of sexuality and gender.
It will mean fewer students are bullied because they are different.
— JEN VAN-ACHTEREN, Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group.
Replacement submarines
AT present we have six Collins class submarines, with all of these not fully operational at the same time.
Their expected lifespan is until 2026.
Why, if we are able to survive with only three or four submarines available, do we need to double the number at a cost of $50 billion?
Given the alleged perilous state of our economy, the money would be better spent at home.
Perhaps the government should explain fully who it is that we fear is a threat to this country given that the US is committed to come to our aid as Australia has so many times done for US under the ANZUS Alliance.
— A CARTER, Mowbray.
Fish stocks
SO, the fishing trawler 'Geelong Star' is on her way from South Africa, headed for our precious waters.
I don't care what Seafish Tasmania or Senator Richard Colbeck says, in my opinion our fishery is depleted because of mismanagement over many years, not only locally, but worldwide.
Trawling by vessels of this size will almost certainly sound the death-knell on recreational fishing in Tasmania.
In February 1950, five boats fishing out of George Town caught about seven tonnes of barracuda in nine days.
Individual catches were as great as one tonne per boat, with some boats having to return to port early, fully loaded (The Examiner, February 22).
These fish were caught on lines and jig-sticks, not by trawling huge nets.
Before bag limits were introduced, I would have defied 100 boats to catch seven tonnes of 'couta in one month off the Tamar Heads.
Today, there would not be seven tonnes caught in a year.
I rest my case.
— DARYL CAMINO, George Town.
Nikolic
I CONCUR with Max Wells (Letters, March 24) that the Bass Liberal MHR Andrew Nikolic seems to always respond to letters that disagree with the government’s policy decisions or backflips.
Readers would have noticed that he is always given a right of reply.
Blind Freddie would attest to that, how privileged is he?
Mr Nikolic should apologise to Dr Michael Powell for contacting the Vice Chancellor of UTAS.
I would advocate an urgent public debate between the MP and Dr Powell, with a neutral moderator and settle this unresolved spat in a civilised and good natured manner.
The people of Bass deserve no less.
— SYD EDWARDS, Launceston.
Criticism
THERE is just no pleasing some people is there?
Max Wells (Letter, March 24), states that "Bass Liberal MHR Andrew Nikolic seems to spend time scanning the pages to write rebuttal letters”, plus another criticism of Mr Nikolic.
Well, duh, since when has it been a crime for anyone, politician or not, to reply to criticism, especially in a democracy?
People would complain if Mr Nikolic, or at least his secretary, did not do this, by claiming that ``Mr Nikolic never answers his critics”, "fails to keep in touch with his constituents”, and asking why, "once a politician gets elected, they are never heard from again”?
Get the picture.
Sometimes you are damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.
— CARMEN FRELEK, Launceston.
Joint reply
WE reiterate the University of Tasmania’s commitment to academic freedom and the right of all academics to engage in critical enquiry, intellectual discourse and public controversy within their area of professional expertise.
We support our academics engaging in public debate on issues in the knowledge that they are reflecting their own views and are not necessarily representing the views of the University.
In engaging in public debate, Dr Michael Powell has not sought to test the bounds of academic freedom, has presented his views as an individual and has occasioned no disciplinary action in relation to any correspondence.
We look forward to continuing public debate on matters of importance.
— PROFESSOR SUSAN DODDS, Dean, Faculty of Arts and DR MICHAEL POWELL, Lecturer, School of Humanities.