We have desperately sought and expect this economic benefit for our scenic route towns, and we are all mindful that tourists do not stop anywhere near a maximum security prison. Don't be fooled by the Liberals' false promises. Proponents of the proposed new Northern Regional Prison at Westbury keep banging on about "economic and social benefits" for the region.

I wonder what makes them think that there will be any such benefits? You can look anywhere you like, all around the world, and nowhere will you find a small peaceful town like Westbury happily co-existing with a large maximum security prison. The truth is wherever you find a large prison in close proximity to a village or small town in a rural area, that area is run-down, neglected and riddled with crime. None of us should believe the web of disinformation being spun around us by those who have something to gain at our expense.

The whole of Meander Valley needs to be wary of their relentless propaganda. They are trying to make fools of us all.

Scott Grisman, Westbury.

WHAT a joy it must have been for the state government's AFL taskforce when asked to show the relevant figures if an AFL team were to be established in Tasmania.

True to form, the taskforce numbers show great gains by having a team which just goes to show that you can prove anything by using numbers.

Bill Chugg, Campbell Town.

JOHN Biggs seems to mix reality with partisan politics in asserting that 330 is 73 per cent of 684.

Try 48 per cent at which point the whole thing disappears up its own fundament it would seem. It just makes me wonder if the whole hoo-haa over this is alleged controversy is a complete media beat up. It's just the sort of program that both major parties set up when they can and the Greens would too if they ever formed a government.

M Seward, Port Fairy.

CHIEF scientist Dr Alan Finkel assumes wind, solar and gas would provide future electricity and dreams of highways, batteries and much more robust networks all becoming affordable. As an engineer he fails dismally by not even alluding to how we're going to survive the economic disasters that will befall us over the next few decades before his assumptions and dreams are realised. Perhaps if he used the the term 'reliable' instead of 'firming' he might begin to understand.

Gordon Thurlow, Launceston.

MUCH has been written on planning schemes recently and all mainly from a pro-development perspective but there is, as always, another point of view and that is that of the 'little person', 'the noisy minority, 'the faceless people' or indeed the community.

Planning schemes are established for a number of reasons but mainly to establish the use, development, protection and conservation of land within a municipality.

Developers might prefer to have open slather for all of their projects however the environment and the community need some protection and this is what planning schemes are all about; without them, development could proceed unhindered and we would soon have all sorts of inappropriate development in sensitive areas such as the last remnants of native wilderness and incredibly tall buildings clashing with historic low rise architecture such as exists in Launceston.

The city has been described as a low rise city full of historic buildings and Victorian architecture and tourists can often be seen wandering around photographing these often quaint and beautiful buildings and indeed it is a unique and wonderful place. Sadly many of Launceston's historic buildings have long since disappeared under bitumen and concrete making it even more important to preserve what is left. Launceston is not Melbourne, Sydney, Singapore, London or New York and should not attempt to be so and surely no-one would like to see it turned into something along the lines of the Gold Coast? The redesigned and lowered (due to public backlash) 24 metre Verge Hotel under construction in Cimitiere Street flies in the face of this philosophy graphically showing just how easy it is to destroy the sensitivity of a fragile historical area.

Professor Michael Buxton, (Professor of Environment and Planning, RMIT University) commented in an interview in 2016: "the principle is you don't destroy what people come to enjoy". Well-known local historian Dr Eric Ratcliff recently said that when it comes to building heights: "Launceston needed to avoid the mistakes of Hobart where many important heritage buildings had been lost in the name of progress." (The Examiner, February 2). Yes, the current interim planning scheme may be a pain in the proverbial for developers but any replacement scheme should always protect the interests of the general community, the environment and not simply smooth the way for inappropriate development.

We would do well to keep in mind Launceston's motto: "progress with prudence".

Jim Collier, Legana.