For starters the Inveresk Tavern was not flooded. It was inundated by stormwater and sewerage in January, 2016 and was closed for nine weeks after but went unscathed during the June flood event.

As did all of Invermay (I can find nothing to substantiate Mr Fitch’s claim the Tram Sheds were flood affected) as it sat well protected by the new flood levees.

Those flood levees use both the Tamar and Charles streets bridges as part of that system, hence they were closed at the time. The area of Launceston that did have floodwaters flowing through homes was in Newstead, which is not protected by flood levees.

Mr Fitch’s misinformation is typical of the hypocrisy that opponents to the university’s move to Inveresk continually demonstrate.

IT IS with Interest you read and listen to various parties complaining about each other, which to me is unproductive even if it’s a good result it is always criticised.

Take the current Liberal state government, I believe they are doing a pretty good job in difficult circumstances sure they get criticised on health mainly, this will never get fixed whilst my era the “baby Boomers” are still around because of the large portion of the population that we are caused by the increase in population just after the war.

Once you get over 60 you start to wear out and require ongoing health treatment just a fact of life. It’s alright for Labor to say they will fix it they can’t and that’s a fact unless they raise taxes to pay for it and I don’t believe they could raise them enough to pay the cost. The only other way is to reduce spending in an area that generates large amount of cash and there isn’t one.

We are a small state with limited population and a large ageing population so until the aged part move on health and hospitals will always be a problem.

I work in an Industry that relies on a good economy and it can’t be a coincidence that during the Labor/Green accord work was way down but since the Liberals came into power this sector has gone ahead dramatically.

With an election looming the rhetoric will be in full force I am of the belief if it’s not broken it doesn’t need to be fixed.

GRAHAM Moppett  (The Examiner, October 26) raises an interesting  point as to whom we might elect as a president if Australia becomes a republic.  

Yet, a greater fear might be that we get Bill Shorten as Prime Minister. A government controlled by the CFMEU is more than slightly discombobulating.

AUSTRALIANS are you aware of the injustice you are being sold by the federal government. How many of us want to travel via a motor vehicle to the mainland or to Tasmania?  

We have a National Highway System in Australia which is funded by the federal government with one exception – no highway to Tasmania.

Information costs (as at October 25, 2017): Wanted to leave October 26,  2017- no availability until November 8, 2017, for two people and a car.

Journey 1:  Melbourne to Wagga Wagga (452km) via  National Highway M31 – $50.27. Journey 2:  Melbourne to Devonport (447km) via  state route 30 $659.

The federal government needs to change the rogue sea highway to a National Sea Highway opening opportunities for all Australians. Bass Strait; cheapest federal highway in Australia to provide and maintain. Why do we pay excessive taxes to use?

THE true blue way to deliver life solutions to youth challenges (The Examiner, October 26), is to allow young people to access work with fair pay.

Our current system creates problems for youth, by driving a system fuelled by fear and greed, so some can get more pie, and others hit the street.

A kid in poverty, sleeping rough on the street, denied income by the Centrelink robot, can starve, or break into your kitchen.

When Finland wanted to solve homelessness, they built homes, and that worked. We can do that.

We can also solve unemployment, by creating work. If we will not offer hope for all young people, what kind of nation are we voting for?

Will we dare to vote for politicians who will fight for the right of all youth to real work with real pay? 

We can offer hope for all young people, by getting tough on the politicians who would like our vote.

Are they fighting for a fair society? Are we demanding a fair go?

IN READING in between the lines of the debate on the production of electricity for consumers, there seems to be two central issues guiding lobbies from both sides of the argument.

On one side you have people who want to have clean energy so that Australia can meet its Paris Accord promises and provide a healthier environment for future generations.

This however is at a financial cost to consumers.

The other side contends that we should make the most of our natural resources like coal and gas for the production of cheaper electricity thereby keeping a lid on the cost for domestic electricity use.

This has polarised opinions, a third option would be to invest in nuclear for electricity production, and then both sides of the argument would have their conditions met.

Seem like a “no brainer” to me, but I’m sure someone will find a reason not to.