I stand firm in the belief that we are too far gone now as a society to be merely attempting to “educate” people on the impact of sugar.

Statistically it's shown that the majority of people are now overweight or obese. Tackle the issue with the suitable approach, that being subsidising laparoscopic banding and laparoscopic sleeves.

Having a Lapband myself and seeing not only incredible weight loss but also lifestyle change and transformation, this option is not only proven to succeed but has positive long-term effects, mentally and physically.

Having to travel two hours to see a decent specialist is hard, having subsidies for more people to have check-ups and access to surgeries I believe is key to tackling obesity, rather than another lacklustre, non-sustainable education program that will merely fall on deaf ears.

If nothing else, Bill Whitham's letter (The Border Mail, February 20) highlights how sad the far right of democracy has become.

To think that people voted for Donald Trump because they were angry over political correctness, we are now seeing a reversal of human and democratic rights – for women, for those of different cultures and religions.

Bill Whitham's suggestion Pauline Hanson could be Prime Minister is a tragic punchline to a horrible joke. If her candidates are anything to go by, we should worry. One of the latest candidates has stated single mothers are lazy and ugly.

Ms Hanson's apparent outrage of travel expenses of politicians is met with equal silence when justifying her own simply to promote her own party. And for all her outrage and outcry, Ms Hanson has not once come up with any semblance of an alternative or effective policy.

So here we are, willing to even suggest the likes of Trump (whose Presidency has so far fabricated two non-existent terror attacks) and Hanson should rule because we want to unite Australia by tearing it apart.

I hope, and pray, that Australia is a lot smarter than Bill Whitham thinks.

It is appalling to see our current government trying to cut financial support to vulnerable sections of our community, in order to fund services to another vulnerable section of our community. What are they thinking.

They are doing this at the same time as they are proposing to reduce corporate taxes by $50 billion over 10 years. There has been no indication as to how they will fund these cuts. However going on past and current form, the cost will be borne in large part by the most vulnerable in our community.

Then they try the old fear campaign that if they cannot get savings taxes will have to increase.

Taxes do not have to increase. The government only needs to collect what we as a country are entitled to. Corporate tax avoidance is estimated to be costing between $6 billion and $50 billion annually.

Then there are exports of liquefied natural gas. This is a non-renewable resource that belongs to Australia and is being exported by multinational gas and oil companies with minimal financial return to the people of Australia. Overseas countries exporting similar volumes of liquefied natural gas are receiving around $20 billion annually. We receive just under $1 billion annually and under the present arrangements that is not expected to increase over the next 20 years.

It makes you wonder whose interests successive Australian governments are looking after, as it does not appear to be the interests of the majority of Australians.