Bragging about wanting a new school gets you nowhere | Letters to the editor

Back in 2022, you gave us one of your standard thought bubble moments of getting a new school for Moore Ck. You stated that it was too early to provide a concrete timeline or cost, as they will both be determined once the "data" is collected.

Then in 2023, in a visit by the Coalition's (your) Minister for Education, Sarah Mitchell, you stated "I have raised the issue directly with the minister for education and have started seeking the "data" necessary to back up my plan".

So, when the now Labor Minister for Education, Pru Car, states in Parliament that they are" investing in getting the right "data", the same dribble you have been giving to local constituents for years, you have the audacity to shout her down and look like you care.

Let's also not forget that your Education Minister, Sarah Mitchell said at the time "the state government is in a position to deliver new schools "when they are required".

As usual you and your government couldn't deliver either. It is embarrassing to see an elected official resorting to smug TikTok style videos in order to get noticed. Action speaks louder than words Kevin and all we have is a walking dictionary. As you were Kevin 11.

Bob Snell, Tamworth

Have your say, send a letter to the editor

Pope's cartoon (15/3) depicting Peter Dutton and Sussan Ley as Monty Python Knights of the Holy Grail off to conquer the CSIRO was very clever but unlike the 1975 film, not funny given the consequences. The cartoon was no doubt inspired by the article in the same edition where Peter Dutton was quoted as saying the CSIRO's annual report for the energy market operator comparing the cost of different types of energy sources was "not a genuine piece of work" ("CSIRO chief defends scientists after attack", Leader, 15/3). The report consistently shows nuclear power to be the most expensive, making the Coalition's nuclear policy unrealistic.

Ray Peck, Hawthorn

On the cost and feasibility of nuclear energy, we Aussies can choose who we trust ("CSIRO chief defends scientists after attack", 16/3). Peter Dutton's Coalition suggests nuclear power plants can be dropped into the sites of closed coal power stations and plugged into the grid. Bob's your uncle. Problem solved. In contrast, Australia's most reputable scientific organisation, the CSIRO, outlines that "nuclear power does not currently provide an economically competitive solution in Australia". I'd choose the meticulous detail and rigour of science over political spin and ideology every time.

Amy Hiller, Kew

Why has the Mayor of Glen Innes paid for a telemarketing firm to do a survey regarding the proposed bike track?

This is quite an unnecessary expense for rate payers as the people of this region have already spoken loud and clear through the petition of 10,700 signatures, accepted by the Minister in the NSW Parliament that the people of our regions want and support the continuation of the train service north from Armidale to Wallangarra QLD not a bicycle track.

It is a pity that the Mayors of Armidale and Glen Innes have a parochial mentality. The Mayors of Armidale and Glen Innes do not appear to give a hoot about our neighbouring shires or the Glen Innes residents who have signed the petition, but doggedly close their eyes to the wishes of our communities and the benefits that the continuation of the train service between NSW and QLD will bring - support New England, the Northern regional and the Northern Tablelands people! (Mr Marshall listen and support our region's people).

Have your say, send a letter to the editor

Why should the Mayor of Armidale care about the continuation of the train service? Armidale residents are fortunate enough to enjoy the convenience and benefits of public transport by rail at their door.

Thank you to those Councillors in Glen Innes who voted their support for the train service last year. They have the vision to see the growth and development opportunities that a train service will bring to our Town whilst lowering the region's carbon emissions.

Roslyn Pelchen, Glen Innes

Following on from my previous letter to the editor regarding a bicycle track instead of a passenger train service in our region linking NSW to QLD, please keep in mind that Australia imports 90 per cent of our fuel. Sadly, we live in a volatile world and the importance between trains and bicycles may have a much bigger importance when it comes to shipping lanes and travel in northern NSW.

Roslyn Pelchen, Glen Innes

What does Ken Done's art and $6.4 Billion have in common? They will both just be memories from the Great Barrier Reef if we don't halt Climate Change and improve the water quality. Reefs all over the world are facing huge threats, from higher sea temperatures, to plastic pollution, to over-fishing, and models predicts that up to 70pc of the world's coral reefs will be gone in the next 30 years.

Our Great Barrier Reef is home to some of the world's most beautiful animals, and I am not just talking about the charismatic dolphins and whales. Corals are animals, despite their plant like appearance! I think if more people knew that those vivid structures are actually animals, they would feel more empathy for their slow deaths during bleaching events.

There are many ways you can help preserve these stunning creatures, and one of the most important is to only use Reef Safe sunscreen when swimming in the ocean, as common additives in sunscreen can harm reef life. When visiting our tropical paradises, make sure to take nothing, and leave only footprints.

Think about ways to reduce your carbon miles when travelling or ordering food. And lobby for protections for our greatest natural asset. Otherwise, we can wave goodbye to $6.4 Billion of tourism money, the charismatic wildlife, and the teeny tiny corals themselves before the middle of this century.

Alice Milson, Calala

Amanda Vanstone seemingly wants clear headed science to dominate in the debate about nuclear power (The Leader, 14 March) but her article is heavy on attack and light on facts and science.

My father was resident engineer on the very first nuclear power plant construction in the UK, and I spent time working as a young engineer on the Hunterston nuclear power station in Scotland, so I have some idea what is involved if Australia were to go down the nuclear path now.

The first question is whether or not Australians actually want to have the option of nuclear power and, if so, how long would it take to get the legislative process, the community consultation and the agreements about sites and disposal of waste in place? I'm guessing at least five years, probably a lot more. The second relates to the cost. Even for the as-yet unproven small reactors, there will be billions of dollars involved. Which power company (or government) would be willing to make that investment? And those billions of dollars will mean that the power that is sold into the electricity market will never be as cheap as that now coming from renewable sources.

Thirdly, the construction process. With no nuclear industry in Australia, aside from the small medical isotope reactor at Lucas Heights, we have no scientific, engineering, or technical expertise available. It would all have to be imported. Depending on the problems encountered, a time frame of seven to twenty years.

David Rossiter, Fadden