Letters to the editor | August 26, 2022

The other week I checked pricing on Fuel Check Tas to compare diesel and U91 for Launceston and the East Coast around the St Helens area.

Taking an average over a number of sites, these are the results: diesel in Launceston is 24 cents a litre cheaper while U91 is 20 cents a litre cheaper.

As has consistently happened in the past, I'll bet my bottom dollar (or half-litre of either fuel) that no one, either in government or the fuel industry, will give us an explanation we can understand of why it is so.

Yes it costs more for transport and you can throw in lack of competition, but is this level justifiable? These entities should also remember that when you live in regional areas, you have to travel longer distances to get the basics like food, health care, education and so on.

We don't have public transport.

How about looking beyond the almighty bottom line and giving us a break? Really looking forward to when the fuel excise is removed, not.

ROSS Grange (The Examiner, August 15) is correct to support requiring elector polls or equal for any agreement to proposals for council amalgamations or boundary changes.

Elector polls should be essential for the approval of such proposals.

The residents are the ''shareholders'' in such decisions affecting their council.

The fact that any proposal will need to be supported by the residents puts real pressure on proponents for rigour in their thinking, not just slogans, ''29 councils is too many'' will not cut it.

It is alleged that residents will never support proposals.

Not true. Rockhampton has just had residents vote to approve a major boundary adjustment.

Residents of the West Tamar would be more reassured if the recent proposal from Launceston City to take over their suburban areas required residents to agree.

Were that the case, I doubt it would ever have been put forward.

REGARDING the article for a much-needed conference centre in Launceston (The Examiner, August 15), there was no mention that the Albert Hall is about to undergo a multi-million dollar upgrade to provide such a large-scale, modern, professional venue and, even better, it is my understanding that it can be operational next year.

That is basically now, not maybe years down the track.

But the various stakeholder groups, the Tourism Industry Council of Tasmania, the Launceston Chamber of Commerce and Business Events Tasmania make no reference to the Albert Hall upgrade as a suitable venue, or are unaware of the proposal, or simply consider it won't reach conference expectations.

What then is the purpose of the multi-million dollar spend on the Albert Hall?

THE Morrison government all at sea?

In the end, ''on-water matters'' was the only boat in which Morrison chose to sail.

Just like the sneaky and arrogant Bjelke-Petersen, ''nothing to see here'' has proven to be a subterfuge for exercising power and control to serve the narrow ends of a shameless political manipulator.

This government was not just poorly led; it was misled to such a degree that its own ministers were unaware their authority had been usurped.

Right-wing Christianity has dangerously undermined America and its institutions. There are those that would like to see it take root here.

IS the Liberal state government fair dinkum?

We have many of our public services in total crisis like never before, yet the government has multi-million dollars available for a new AFL stadium in Hobart.

It beggars belief that with health and education in crisis, along with other funding short-comings, the government fails to correct these anomalies.

A new stadium can wait. However, our health and education services are critical to meet social and community expectations of a caring government.

Why not have your say? Write a letter to the editor here:

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: