Letters: Drought in Australia

Sir: Current water shortages in Australia are affecting many facets of ordinary people's lives ("A global warning from the dust bowl of Australia", 20 April). My wife and I emigrated from England to Brisbane in August 2003. We bought a large detached house on a block of land a third of an acre in size - not unusual in the neighbourhood. The lawns were soft and emerald green, as well they would be given the electronic irrigation system which pumped water on to them while we slept. And we were not alone. The suburb was a sea of green. People were free to water when and as much as they liked.

The once-green lawns are now brown, and the soil baked as hard as concrete. Our neighbours' lawn has a large crack in it, big enough they tell me for their children's feet to fit into. Recently introduced water restrictions in Queensland have all but banned outdoor water use and the focus has now shifted to indoor use. We are being encouraged to use no more than 140 litres of water per person, per day. Households using more than 800 litres per day will be required to explain their usage.

I was concerned to see from a recent rates notice that my wife and I were using too much water. In order to comply with the target we have radically altered our way of life. We are still using approximately 194 litres of water each per day. This, despite taking four-minute showers (the bath is but a dusty relic of our former lives), having the taps on low, turning them off while we wash, not using the dishwasher, not watering the garden etc etc. Next month a plumber is coming to fit more efficient shower heads. I doubt there is much more we can do, but I now feel guilty about using any water at all.

Plans are in place to try to safeguard the water supply - including building an expensive desalination plant - but they may not be implemented in time. The unthinkable may happen - we will run out of water altogether. That prospect is rarely discussed publicly. I wonder whether it is because people cannot face up to that happening.

SAM KENDALL-MARSDEN

BRISBANE, QUEENSLAND, AUSTRALIA

Brown avoided the brave choice on tax

Sir: It is clear that the "Great Pensions Robbery" as it is referred to by Johann Hari (Comment, 16 April) has had a detrimental effect on what was one of the best pension systems in the world. It is not the sole reason for all the pension problems as some argue, but neither is its impact "minimal" as Mr Hari states.

Company pensions do not just provide for those at the top of the company, but for people at all levels. Possibly some people, as Mr Hari suggests, will be able to afford the loss of pension, but as with other tax policies of Gordon Brown, it will be those who cannot afford it who will suffer.

Money invested in improving the NHS is, without doubt, money well spent. But if people who should have been supporting themselves, even contributing to them, diverting money from the NHS, what will the impact be on waiting lists in the future?

Gordon Brown's decisions on pensions are questionable, particularly given that he received advice to the contrary. What is even more questionable is that for a supposed strong and knowledgeable hand running the economy, when a number of different factors were damaging the pension system, no effort was made to alter one that the Chancellor had control over.

The brave choice would have been a modest increase in income tax, not targeting pensions or imposing massive stamp duty at the £250,000 level on families who have already had to borrow heavily to afford a basic home.

CHRISTOPHER RACE

CHELMSFORD, ESSEX

Sir: Saving for a pension is not a tax "perk" (and therefore liable for attack by the Chancellor), as Jeremy Warner would have it (Business, 11 April). Rather, a pension is a form of deferred remuneration for employment.

A pension is taxed at the recipient's marginal rate on payment in retirement. It would be mad to tax such remuneration twice (once on payment to the scheme, once on payment as pension), since no one would then see the slightest point in saving in such a form. An employee would be better off taking the benefit as plain salary, taxed once only, and with immediate access to it.

But this is what the Chancellor has done. It may be right that there are other issues that have, to some degree, created the collapse of defined benefit pensions schemes (failure to plan for longevity being the obvious one), but the Chancellor should not have made a bad situation worse, nor, either in arrogance or madness, should he continue to do so.

JAMES MCLEOD

LONDON W4

Sir: Your reference to people who have inherited so much that they never need to work has suggested to me a new risk-free source of revenue for a Chancellor to exploit ("The bluffer's guide to being posh", 17 April). Economically/socially/culturally/politically nugatory drones could be fleeced to general applause and if they chose to inflict themselves on other nations I suspect the applause would be redoubled. Let's tax the idle rich (with strict criteria for meaningful work) more than those who actually earn their wealth.

STEVEN FORD

HAYDON BRIDGE, NORTHUMBERLAND

Clinical trial of vaccine in Russia

Sir: With reference to the article "GSK at centre of Russian vaccine scandal" (4 April), GlaxoSmithKline respects the privacy of all the participants in the clinical trials its sponsors. But the company is aware of several media reports and an anonymous email campaign reporting an alleged adverse event on a child in a clinical trial in the Volgograd Railway Hospital, Russia.

As a sponsor to this trial, GSK is greatly concerned that despite repeated efforts by clinicians at the Railway Hospital, and GSK, no clinicians involved in the trial have been able to gain access to assess the child and provide the necessary help.

The child is a participant in a European clinical trial to evaluate the long-term efficacy of varicella (chickenpox) vaccines. The trial is being conducted in centres across 10 European countries, and 5,700 children are participants, including 1,000 children in Russia.

While an independent medical assessment cannot validate the alleged adverse event reported in Russia, the adverse event is alleged to have occurred 52 days after vaccination. On this basis, Russian medical authorities have stated that any clinical relationship between the adverse event and the vaccine is highly unlikely.

GSK is committed to the highest ethical and safety standards in the conduct of its clinical trials. GSK and the Russian regulatory authorities have both conducted independent audits into the conduct of the trial and have reported no evidence of misconduct.

DR OLEG MILENIN

MEDICAL DIRECTOR, GLAXOSMITHKLINE, MOSCOW

Football provokes spectator violence

Sir: David Walker is naïve to suppose that violence among football supporters results from the frequent failure of the game to produce "a fair result" (letter, 14 April), and that enlarging the goal mouth would bring street-fighting to an end. Nor does he address Doug Meredith's issue regarding the better behaviour of rugby followers (letter, 10 April).

The explanation for the contrast between football and rugby league supporters, whose socio-economic backgrounds are broadly similar, lies in the structure and rules of the games.

Football leaves its supporters frustrated. They attend matches anticipating an intense physical struggle, but it doesn't happen. The only legitimate bodily contact is the shoulder charge. All other contact is an accident or a foul, and it is left to the referee to judge which.

Rugby league is essentially a game of bodily contact, in which full-blooded tackling is constrained by defined rules which penalise high tackles, kneeing etc. Supporters may disagree with the referee's off-side and forward-pass judgments, but rarely do so on matters of foul play. Players don't argue with the referee on anything, since doing so is itself penalised. And as soon as a tackle is made the teams are immediately separated by five metres.

For the supporter, witnessing the high-impact spectacle gives a cathartic release of aggressive energy. Disappointment at losing is tempered by admiration at the raw physical courage of those who play.

Football will always be popular worldwide because it requires few facilities and is easy to play (though hard to play well). But how often do we actually admire the moral qualities of footballers on the pitch?

HENRY FINCH

FRODSHAM, CHESHIRE

Boy racers released on to the roads

Sir: Howard Jacobson ("The Americans will give up their love affair with guns when we do the same with cars", 21 April) may be interested in a conversation I overheard on the bus the other week.

Two teenage boys behind me were discussing their soon-to-be acquired driving licences: "If you can only afford a rubbish car, what you do is drive really fast then slam on your brakes. If someone goes into the back of you it's their fault and you can claim on their insurance to buy a better one".

On second thoughts, when do scientists now reckon that empathy develops in the brain? I think 30 might be more realistic as an age when people are safe to drive.

DES MOGG

PENZANCE, CORNWALL

Lucky to live in the age of HRT

Sir: Like Joan Bakewell (Opinion, 20 April), I have taken HRT for a number of years and throughout this time I have been subjected to alarmist stop-start headlines in the press. Last week HRT went from good to bad in the space of just a few days.

Journalists seem almost gleeful when something that makes women's lives better is apparently discredited. My generation were the first beneficiaries of the Pill, something that changed our lives more radically than any government equal-opportunity legislation. The Pill has been now taken worldwide for 40 years and is reckoned to be generally very safe, yet at one time we were subjected to the same misleading headlines about this drug.

I would be surprised if HRT does not eventually go the same way. Why are we expected to be stoical about menopause and its unpleasant symptoms? Women are no longer allowed to shut up shop at 50 and thanks to HRT they no longer have to.

JULIA DOHERTY

UCKFIELD, EAST SUSSEX

Sir: Like Mrs Reid (letter, 23 April) I am in my mid-sixties and lucky enough to enjoy excellent health. I certainly do not regard myself as having sunk into "grey and moribund old age". However, unlike her, I have never had HRT. Individual cases prove nothing.

ROWENA QUANTRILL

BRADFORD-ON-AVON, WILTSHIRE

Why 'King Lear' first night was delayed

Sir: Pandora's report on the circumstances of the Stratford opening of King Lear (13 April) cannot go uncorrected.

The decision to postpone the planned first night was taken by the RSC (not by Trevor Nunn) when the doctors decided that Frances Barber's badly injured knee required surgery. King Lear performances are already sold out and a new press performance can be achieved only by the company doing an additional show.

Since the ensemble is rehearsing The Seagull - the second play of their world-tour repertoire - an extra performance cannot be added for several weeks.

It was decided that the extra Lear performance will happen on the same day as the scheduled press night of The Seagull, by which time Frances Barber will be able to appear in both plays. In liaison with the Critics Circle, every critic has been contacted with an explanation and apology.

The RSC is immensely proud of the brilliant job Melanie Jessop has done taking over two major roles at dauntingly short notice. The productions will arrive back in London in November after several months of international performances.

MICHAEL BOYD

RSC ARTISTIC DIRECTOR, STRATFORD-UPON-AVON

Armed US citizens

Sir: Thanks to Philip Patterson (letter, 20 April) for explaining what's going on. So, US citizens don't own 300 million guns so that they can shoot each other; they're preparing to rise up and resist an oppressive government. Philip's right; we should support them. When's it going to happen, Phil? Tomorrow would be good.

RAY LUFF

SOUTHWICK, WEST SUSSEX

Misery train

Sir: When the Second World War doodlebug attacks on the south of England ended, there was a sudden return of families to London from the north. My parents and I endured seven hours of jam-packed misery on a train from Newcastle. We could not even get along the corridors to the toilets. When we finally staggered off the train and walked down the platform, we saw other passengers pointing and laughing at the locomotive. The nameplate proudly read "Sandwich".

JOHN MIDDLETON

HANGING LANGFORD, SALISBURY

New Labour efficiency

Sir: I saw the letter from a Labour MEP ridiculing the Conservatives for inviting him to stand as a Tory candidate (16 April). The Labour Party is much more efficient. I was recently invited by Labour's national office to rejoin. My membership lapsed eight years ago and since then I have moved house four times, without informing the party. But they wrote to me at my present address. I do not know whether I should be impressed or frightened by their efficiency.

DAVID SMITH

ST EDMUNDS SUFFOLK

Don't judge the weather

Sir: Whichever television channel I choose, the weather forecast presenters share a common fault. They insist on referring to the "risk" or even the "threat" of rain. Out here in the south of England there are millions of gardeners and quite a few farmers. Most of us would welcome regular showers. I hate having to get out the hosepipe in April. So why can't they just talk about the "chance" or the "possibility" of rain and leave it to us to make the value judgements.

DAVID DAY

BURFORD, OXFORDSHIRE

Smoky streets

Sir: Emily Ingham may feel that the smoking ban has a positive side by encouraging those outdoors to converse (Letters, 18 April) but there is also an unfortunate downside. Every evening now when I take my "constitutional" I am forced to take refuge in a pub.

A N LEE

LLANDEILO, CARMARTHENSHIRE