Letters to the editor

TIME IS MONEY: A reader says a reluctance from our elected officials to make a decision on same sex marriage means taxpayers will foot a $122 million bill.
TIME IS MONEY: A reader says a reluctance from our elected officials to make a decision on same sex marriage means taxpayers will foot a $122 million bill.

Costly indecision

Due to the failure of our well paid elected representatives to do their job and make a decision on same sex marriage we, the long-suffering taxpayer, are to be slugged with a $122 million postal plebiscite. 

This entire exercise is based on the premise that they can’t break an election promise.

Given the track record of previous liberal Prime Ministers I can’t understand why have they decided that this one bad promise is sacrosanct.

The current Prime Minister’s well-known lack of a backbone when it comes to standing up to the Far Right, the main reason the plebiscite is happening, leads me to recall a time when Phillip Adams, a well-known Melbourne columnist, suggested a fund be established to provide brain transplants for Young Liberals. 

I know times have changed but maybe someone could start a crowd-funding website to buy the Prime Minister a spine.

Failing that maybe our MHRs and Senators could make amends and dip into their own pockets to pay for this totally unnecessary waste of taxpayers’ money.

Frank Smith,


Rising costs hurting

Councils have been forced by governments of many years to undertake more and more responsibilities that they never used to have to do, and without adequate compensation.

Rates and other financial payments for various services plus often hard fought for grants and some government project payments are the usual way councils try to cope to providing maintenance and services.

In a perfect world, no fair-minded person would object to a 5.55 per cent rate increase and those who can, do it willingly in order to see projects and services done and maintained.

There are however, in the community, those who are struggling with the increasing rise in the cost of living, especially to pay for power bills, which admittedly affects council as well, feel that they should be quarantined from any further rise in rates which they struggle already to pay.

These in particular are pensioners, low paid income earners, even still there are some farmers and some small businesses, many of which try to contribute to worthy community causes, but may not be able to anymore with such a high rate increase.

Last budget, council put into place commendable cost cutting measures, now is not the time to discontinue these incentives.

Barry D Thomson,


Drastic change needed

The Auditor-Generals' report about the decade of neglect of V/Line services “V/Line told to address ‘high failure rate’” (The Border Mail, August 10) is of no surprise.

Albeit it is true to an extent that Jacinta Allan “inherited an operator in crisis”, much of it was left over from the Bracks/Brumby-era and exacerbated by the Baillieu/Napthine government with the view that governments shouldn't invest in infrastructure and businesses – regardless of their importance to a community’s economic well-being and social connectivity.

While the Andrews' government has started to make up for years of neglect, with lack of detail and political will to take a holistic view of public transport, particularly in regional areas, and to pursue existing recommendations in the Regional Network Development Plan, the Albury V/Line service is going to continue suffer, unless there are drastic changes such as, for example, parliamentary representation.

Geoffrey Butt,


Say it with glitter

If you support marriage equality but object to the plebiscite, vote Yes but fill the envelope with glitter.

Gavin Doherty,