Because of the secrecy imposed and upheld by Australian authorities on any and all conditions in offshore detention prisons, the book was written entirely by text messages on Boochani's mobile phone and translated from the Farsi.  He hid his phone and on occasions when his phone was taken from him, had to halt further text messages until he could furtively obtain another phone.

The book, written partly in poetic style, partly in descriptive prose, tells of starvation, denial of rights, the searing tropical heat, the stinking toilets and showers, beatings, deaths in detention, protests and the dire consequences to the protesters, and the refusal of the authorities to show mercy or compassion in any situation whatever.

The system governing the prison is described as a Kyriarchal System, a term which means a system characterised by domination, suppression and submission.

It is a remarkable book and deserves to be widely read and to give people more of an idea of the hell being imposed on asylum seekers who fled from persecution and fear in their country of origin.

A RECENT letter writer (The Examiner, September 25) said she drew no comfort from the Prime Minister’s religious affiliation.   As a minister of a Christian church, I sadly must agree with her.

On the one hand, political leadership with a close affiliation with a faith community (Christian or otherwise) would be a very positive thing if it means that the leadership is of the calibre of a Gandhi, a Desmond Tutu, or a Martin Luther King. On the other hand, such affiliation would be highly destructive if the leadership is of a similar sort to that of a Rasputin, a Khomeini, or an Ian Paisley.

In an ideal world, one’s faith could have a positive impact on the work of a politician.  

With a politician who was inclined to be to the right of centre, it could “sand off the rough edges” of ideology, encouraging the emergence of policies that were less harsh and more inclusive than those pursued by purely secular right-wingers.  

With a politician to the left of centre, a faith affiliation could emphasise the need for policies that emphasised active compassion to all vulnerable people, rather than ideology for its own sake.

However, in the world in which we live, politicians (whether right, left, or centre) tend to put up a firewall between their spirituality and their politics.  

The only time we hear of a politician’s faith impacting on public policy is when the politician’s faith commitment results in a certain squeamishness regarding sex.

It’s sad, really.

AS THE proud parent of a humble chimney sweep, I would like that it be known that the recent law about wood smoke has been a burden on our economy and family since day one. How is one supposed to get ahead in this current economic climatic environment? Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

On Wednesday I attended the Launceston Mayoral Candidates Forum.  

I was dismayed to hear groans and moans from some audience members when several speakers acknowledged the traditional owners of the land. Acknowledging the traditional owners is about being respectful of this nation’s Indigenous Peoples. 

As Professor Mick Dodson explains: “When we talk about traditional ‘Country’ … we mean something beyond the dictionary definition of the word. For Aboriginal Australians … we might mean homeland, or tribal or clan area, and we might mean more than just a place on the map. For us, Country is a word for all the values, places, resources, stories and cultural obligations associated with that area … While they may all no longer necessarily be the title-holders to land, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians are still connected to the Country of their ancestors and most consider themselves the custodians or caretakers of their land.”

I am not Indigenous.  I can only speak from my own observations and one which clearly stands out above all is this: they were here first.  Why can’t we acknowledge this? 

If we must have an Australia Day then let’s have one that unifies. Celebrating white settlement of little over 225 years will always remain divisive. 

It’s time we moved on in the best of all possible ways – embracing our first people and combining their long historical narrative with our recent arrival and settlement. With good will it can be done.

Once again, we see the racism in Tasmania rear its ugly head when white privilege is challenged. The Aboriginal Land Council has pushed to take back Aboriginal land from the Crown, a move that will ensure the land is cared for and not sold for investment purposes.

It also demonstrates our right to self determination, something that has attempted to be suppressed since colonisation.  

I hear outrage at the thought stolen land could be returned to traditional owners. Yet, they don’t stop to think of the horrific circumstances the land was stolen under and, by acknowledging the past, you allow for a harmonious future between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Tasmanians. 

We’re not asking you to apologise for the decisions of your ancestors, we’re asking you to recognise the place of privilege you’re in due to their actions. You have the power to right past wrongs, why are you so hesitant?