No doubt responding to that clear message, meetings were held, resulting in $94 million being allocated through the City Deal.

According to (The Examiner, November 27), recent budgets reflect a further $126m to be jointly contributed by federal, state and local governments.

The progress claimed so far for the considerable public spend seems to be that water quality in the upper reaches from Launceston to Legana has moved from F to D.

No doubt a worthwhile achievement, although returning the South Esk to flush the Gorge and Yacht Basin would have an immediate better outcome.

The further advice from NRM North who seem to have run up the white flag on sediment is "get to love the mud flats".

Seriously?

However, the public will be concerned about what they can see with their own eyes, such as the emerging mud shoals in the river and at the Boardwalk, Marina and Seaport.

The all tides regatta is again threatened, rowers, tourist operators, recreational and professional marine operators are all impacted by the lack of action on this significant problem.

Even more seriously, the government-commissioned report on Launceston's flood risk is being ignored despite it clearly stating that "doing nothing about sediment build-up is not an option".

Therefore in the absence of sediment action, the recently completed $70m flood levee scheme, will give less protection than the intended one in 200-year design.

The Examiner's Tamar initiative is welcomed, as hopefully, it will result in a widening of the focus from only water quality, to also recognise the wider problems.

HOW about an inquiry into Australia Post to find out why this service is performing so poorly?

We have never paid such high postal rates, so how can six items of identical letter-size correspondence, each posted in the same red box in South Launceston to the same address in Hobart, at three-day intervals, all arrive together at their Hobart destination on the same day?

Please explain.

WHILE I understand the need to talk about domestic violence and its impact on women (The Examiner, November 27) but this time of the year, which is Movember, should serve as a way to raise awareness on the male victims of DV who are often ignored by mates, family, police and the courts.

When a woman shows up repeatedly to the hospital, she gets asked if it is DV related.

Men do not. Women can take their children to the shelter, men cannot. Women get support from the community when they are victims of DV but men do not and are often made fun of for not being manly enough.

As many as one in seven men experienced emotional abuse and many men have had their ex-partner preventing them from seeing their children therefore driving them to depression or worse. Imagine one minute not being able to see a cherished family member anymore, one you love without reserve. According to official statistics, one in 19 men has also experience physical or sexual abuse. My goal is not to stigmatise women or belittle them, but we talk about DV against women every day and maybe a word about what the other gender experiences will give us a proper insight into what DV is, and the fact that it is a societal issue and not a gendered problem. DV, after all, happens in all racial, financial, educational, generational groups.

SADLY there comes a time for some very ill people where the joy of life is so diminished by pain, misery and the indignity of powerlessness that their wish for rest and peace through death is overwhelming.

In some cultures, this is honoured.

My parents perished, serially, over 15 years (mum first after an eight-year fight) and dad followed seven years on); we plotted euthanasia pathways.

Religion is an element of culture: why is "shall not kill/murder" discounted when we go to war or arrange the assassination of "state enemies" yet heard loudly against euthanasia?

In this matter let us focus on dignity, humanity, love and care. Let those values be the hallmarks of our culture.

THERE have been many letters lately arguing for and against human-induced climate change.

The latest was from David Houghton (The Examiner, November 29).

Mr Houghton correctly quotes historical global temperature data. But he goes on to question the effect of CO2 emissions on these temperatures.

Mr Houghton points to a book by Australian scientist Dr Howard Brady that he says is "written for intelligent laymen who like to think for themselves".

I encourage Mr Houghton to read the thousands of books and published studies by the many thousands of world scientists who have concluded that CO2 emissions are assuredly contributing to climate change.

How can lay people in general, or a handful of renegade scientists, question the expertise of the vast majority of climate scientists throughout the world?

It is an insult to their intelligence and work.