While it’s a big week for students, many parents are also under the pump as they are faced with the ever-increasing cost of getting their children ready for school.

New shoes, uniforms, backpacks, stationery – the list of things needed to ensure our children are able to be successful is a long and expensive one.

In some cases it includes things that the schools used to provide themselves – like whiteboard markers.

While the cost of everything seems to go up, wages have not. It’s why parents want their school to have enough money to educate their kids properly.

It matters everywhere, but particularly in regional Australia where the latest research shows there is an increasing gap between city schools and those in regional areas.

All Australian kids deserve a fair go, regardless of where they live. That’s why a Shorten Labor Government will provide an extra $14 billion for public schools to deliver the biggest school investment in Australian history. The National Party – in fact all regional MPs and Senators should back this commitment. Maybe they could even match it.

If our kids are going to have a chance to have a good life with a decent job they need a good education and the money we spend on this is an investment in their future.

At the moment there is a real choice between the Labor plan and the Coalition – but it is not too late for them to come out and match it.

Stephen Jones – Shadow Minister for Regional Services

How disappointing to read Mayor Col Murray’s response to the plan for the Manilla Rail Viaduct (NDL December 17).

The comments are un-helpful and do not provide any answers. What opportunity exists with the viaduct?

Given Mayor Murray’s stated position, it is understandable that TRC is reticent to sponsor a proposal for the Rail Viaduct listing on the State Heritage Registry.  

If the town values the rail heritage and considers the Viaduct an asset, their views are to be respected and ideas explored for its future use? 

The report for the meeting on December 10, Transport for NSW (TfNSW) presented an option, to retain three spans and concrete pads depicting the viaduct alignment.

The decision was predictable - the least cost to implement and to maintain.

Despite several examples of adaptive re-use of rail infrastructure cited in the report, the preferred option decided by TfNSW provided little vision. 

What is the point in retaining the three viaduct spans. Will this option lead to increased tourism and employment?

Currently the structure does generate tourism, will a meagre structure evoke the same interest?          

If the TfNSW Option proceeds TRC will maintain a monument to an era of transportation with questionable benefit to the town. 

I challenge Mayor Col Murray, ‘To envisage and sponsor a plan that will utilize the rail viaduct along with other assets of the town in a development that will embrace the heritage and provide for socio-economic opportunity for now and the future.’ 

William Swanston

B Arch (UNSW)