It’s been fascinating to watch as group after group of technicians and hole- and trench-diggers arrive to make their contribution, very few of whom speak understandable English.

Each time a new group arrives, I ask: “What does NBN mean to me? I have a copper wire phone and a 4GX modum for my computer.” The reply is different, group by group, ranging from “Nothing” through to “Your copper wire phone will be switched off soon” or “Your house will be WiFi”.

There is a certain word I’d like to use, but in the interest of propriety I will resort to a milder retort. “Organised chaos,” that’s what it looks like. I can only hope our taxes are being spent responsibly.

To reinforce our collective belief that behind all these installations there is a well-planned time frame, the local manager of the Telstra franchise has agreed to unravel all of the misinformation floating around our city by seconding the assistance of the official NBN Coordinator for Southern NSW at the Goulburn Men’s Shed on Friday, August 19 commencing 10am (ish).

Please, fellow members, make the effort to attend and bring a friend (especially one that’s likely to become a member). Admission, the usual $2.

John Cody, Goulburn.

CYNTHIA Harris’s reply on live exports (GP 25/7) demonstrates her concern for animal welfare, which we all share. Everyone has been shocked and appalled at those tragic losses in the past, but it is simply untrue to suggest that nothing has been done to prevent those losses from re-occurring.

Regarding shipping: ships are being constantly upgraded to improve animal welfare. There have been eight new ships built in the past five years. The average age of ships today is five years, compared with 43 years for general shipping.

Mortality rates for cattle since 1995 ranged from 0.1 per cent to 0.42pc annually. In 2014 they were 0.12pc and often with no losses. For sheep, losses in the late ‘80s to early ‘90s were 2-3pc. Since 2003 losses haven’t exceeded 1pc. In 2014 they were 0.71pc.

It is blasé and even disrespectful to pastoral families in northern Australia to suggest their entire supply chain can be replaced by abattoirs and chilled beef exports. It’s important to understand livestock production systems in the north are limited by the timing of the wet and dry seasons, which makes it very difficult to fatten cattle. 

In simple terms that’s why animals are shipped at lighter weights, where there is a demand for them, to be fed for several months. Building a series of abattoirs in the north wouldn’t replace the live trade because they are unable to finish stock consistently to the point of slaughter.

The other argument, that Australia should follow New Zealand’s example and ban live exports, overlooks the fact that New Zealand hasn’t banned live exports and does, in fact, export thousands of breeding cattle each year. But NZ lacks the advantages of supply, proximity to market and an in-country supply chain assurance system, which all combine to ensure the export of feeder and slaughter stock from Australia makes economic and ethical sense.

It is true that wealthy countries such as Saudi Arabia and Jordan that can afford boxed meat and have refrigeration now import much of their meat in boxes, but they still import live animals for social religious and cultural reasons, even where economic considerations aren’t a factor.

In the event of a ban, poorer countries, which are unable to handle or pay for refrigerated meat, would still be able to access live imports from the 100 or so other exporter nations who don’t have Australia’s high professional animal welfare standards.

Abandoning live exports would mean abandoning a force for good: improved animal welfare in destination markets.

Tony Morrison, Goulburn.