“I am sure the Liberal Party can single handedly make themselves irrelevant without the help of the Labor Party, while the latter could get on with governing,” says letter writer PENNY MOYES, of Hughes.

I refer to the article (citynews.com.au March 4) by Dominic Giannini that brought to our attention the number of parliamentary committee reports that have not been responded to.

These House and Senate reports are an important part of the parliament’s work and should not be ignored.

I found it disheartening that the Labor Party can find time to table the Liberal Party’s review of their election loss, but not attend to what seems to me a priority task of responding to the 100 or so reports.

Where are the responses to such reports on gambling, the review on jobs for mates, and the insurance industry?

I am sure the Liberal Party can single handedly make themselves irrelevant without the help of the Labor Party, while the latter could get on with governing.

Penny Moyes, Hughes

Liberals trip up badly on transparency

The Liberal Party excels at keeping itself in the news for the wrong reasons.

At the end of February Angus Taylor and senior Liberal Party operatives refused to be upfront and honest about the contents of an expert report on the party’s worst electoral defeat in its history (“Betrayal: Liberals bury review into election disaster”, citynews.com.au February 28), nor did they share plans and commitments about parliamentary party rehabilitation.

This raised a key question about whether they could be trusted to be frank and candid about their policy development, budgetary plans and legislative reform agenda if they were in government. 

Soon after this non-publication announcement, the report was leaked to a major media outlet, and its recommendations were published.

The Liberal Party’s continued silence, while others received copies of the report, culminated in the government tabling the document in parliament on March 3.

The decision-making group of Angus Taylor, Jane Hume and party headquarters might now realise that their bumbling intransigence, and work-shy preference for sweeping party and public interest matters under the proverbial carpet, will create bigger political trip hazards for them during the rest of this parliamentary term. 

The report’s section on the teals, local issues and local campaigns is particularly relevant to the ACT. Its Recommendation 13 on the teals opens with: “The teal movement needs to be confronted head-on in the electorates they contest”. 

Supporters of progressive independent politicians and future candidates will be very alert to any “nasty party” tactics that national and local Liberal Party machines may roll out in future with the assistance of their now more advantageous political donation and campaign expenditure limits, and their allied conservative lobbying groups and religious organisation helpers. 

Sue Dyer, Downer

There goes the Nobel Peace Prize!

If there was ever any doubt whatsoever, that Donald J Trump deserved the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, he’s removed all doubt that he’ll be winning it this year.

Can’t wait to see him on the deck of an aircraft carrier, resplendent in a bomber jacket, declaring “mission accomplished”.

Ian De Landelles, Murray’s Beach, NSW

Courageous commentary, but about the government?

The Stanhope and Ahmed column in CityNews has for years been calling on the ACT government to be more financially responsible to reduce debt and deficit.

But the ACT fiscal position is the worst of any state or territory with a debt of $13.6 billion and a deficit of $1 billion and the ACT government borrowing money to service the debt at nearly $2 million every day.

The whole situation is untenable but the Stanhope and Ahmed column, which should be commended for their courageous commentary, have fallen short of calling for a change of government.

Paul Temby, via email

Toxic pollution and Standards Australia

Dr Murray May raises important concerns about the failure of governments to take decisive action to protect the public from toxic residential wood-heater pollution (letters, CN March 5).

However, serious questions must also be asked about the role of Standards Australia and reported industry dominance of its committee responsible for setting emissions standards for wood heaters sold in Australia.

The current standard has been described by leading environmental health experts as “not fit for purpose”. Yet the ABC’s Science program reported on July 31 that the chair of the very committee setting these standards is also a senior executive of the peak lobby group representing Australia’s wood-heating industry.

The report further stated that the chair dismissed research by the university-based Centre for Safe Air indicating that more than 700 Australians die prematurely each year due to exposure to wood-heater smoke.

If that reporting is accurate, Australians are entitled to ask how such an arrangement aligns with Standards Australia’s commitment to serving the public interest.

How can confidence be maintained in a regulatory process when its chair has publicly expressed scepticism about peer-reviewed research linking long-term exposure to wood smoke with premature death?

Standards Australia should explain how it safeguards independence and public health, and why it continues to endorse an emissions standard widely criticised as failing to meet basic health and environmental protections.

Darryl Johnston, Tuggeranong 

Rapid population growth comes at a cost

Readers who question the arguments against rapid population growth should stop to consider just one of the massive costs that follow from it.

Take the example of expenditure on new road and highway construction. I grew up in south-east Queensland when you could travel from Brisbane to the Gold Coast without the chronic congestion experienced today, seven days a week.

The premier of the day boasted at the opening of the expanded eight-lane highway (from four) that one could travel between the Brisbane CBD and Southport CBD in 57 minutes in business hours! Now it can be close to or more than three hours.

The same diabolical situation prevails on the Sunshine Coast where a daytrip on Sundays can be a nightmare. This has all been a result of rapid population growth, predominantly fuelled by ongoing, patently excessive levels of immigration.

The federal government of the day picks the numbers and state and local governments have got to pick up the tab.

Similar massive expenditure is occurring on major so-called “upgrades” to the Monaro Highway in the ACT.

Such spending is paraded as positive infrastructure investment by governments when it is more appropriately described as short-term, wasteful and futile expenditure.

Much of the mega millions outlaid on new road and highway construction in this country could be far better invested in health, education, housing and enlightened transport and city planning.

Countries such as South Korea, Japan and Taiwan with stable populations demonstrate how much more they can invest in these vital public responsibilities because they are not facing the huge costs of rapid population growth.

Politicians should have the courage and integrity to advocate for a migration policy which recognises the need to address the chronic failure of current policy.

Colin Lyons, president, Sustainable Population Australia (ACT Branch)

Downplaying the nuclear waste problem

Nick Standish is a tad too “gungho” about nuclear power (“My costs come from ABS data, Fiona”, letters, CN February 26). He also downplays the nuclear waste problem, but Anne O’Hara’s preceding letter provides a reality check (“If they can’t, how can we manage waste?”).

The Japanese High Temperature Gas Reactor (HGTR) he suggested for Indonesia is not commercially available and like all nuclear projects, the cost and timeline remain uncertain.

You can rest assured they will be expensive compared with renewables even including firming as the CSIRO has shown. Not great advice for a developing country.

Nick’s cost calculation of powering the entire grid on batteries for 24 hours is cute but unhelpful. Big batteries stabilise the grid, manage renewable intermittency, and store excess solar and wind energy for peak demand. During periods of low wind and solar output, the Australian grid relies on batteries, pumped hydro and gas peakers as firming backup. These are already operating, under construction, or planned. HTGRs, on the other hand, are commercially unproven, they are not providing power now.

Ray Peck, Hawthorn, Victoria