For our children’s sake, we must protect the environment

November 14, 2026 — 8:00pm

To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@theage.com.au. Please include your home address and telephone number. No attachments, please include your letter in the body of the email. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published.

Nature’s bounty
I completely agree with your correspondent that we must consider younger generations when planning high-rise developments (Letters, 13/11). Prioritising their physical and mental health means placing climate and environmental considerations at the centre of urban design.
As discussed in the article ″⁣Doctors keen to prescribe fresh air and nature″⁣ (9/11), regular access to nature and open space is essential. Because high-density projects inevitably clear existing trees and gardens, developers must actively replace this greenery within their designs.
Removing tree canopies, biodiverse gardens, and permeable ground surfaces will only worsen the urban heat island effect, drive up carbon emissions, and increase flood risks.
If we want to enhance the lives of younger generations, we must ensure their future living environments are resilient, and safe.
Jennie Epstein, Little River

Impossible task
The Liberal Party Sussan Ley led for a short time was never going to create the world she now seems to yearn for (″⁣Empathy, democracy’s biggest threat″⁣, 14/11).
Judy Kevill, Ringwood

Political discourse
Sussan Ley succinctly summarises the depressing state of political discourse both here and in the US. She captures the growing apathy and disillusionment of the average voter with our political class. The only thing that she fails to acknowledge is that she was part of the problem.
Ross Hudson, Mount Martha

Vote for future
The latest polls predict there will be a total wipeout of Labor in Victoria.
Any acknowledgement of the range of achievements by Labor over the past 12 years are ignored, including the massive number of infrastructure projects overtaken by scandals and the level of corruption in the unions associated with the Big Build program aimed at the growth of Melbourne over the next 30 years.
The rising costs on these projects is disturbing as reported that government ministers were reluctant or ignored corruption advice when told by their departmental heads.
It is a fact that any government can run out of steam while oppositions can offer all sorts of inducements to voters without evidence or experience.
We the voters need to assess Victoria’s current challenges and vote in the best interests of the state’s future not simply on outrage, ideology, anger and failure but on the basis of greater attention to integrity oversight and regulation and take the politicians out of infrastructure decision-making once programs have been approved. This applies also to unions and business and corporate elites. Regulators must be put in place to ensure any infrastructure project is completed according to sound economics.
Ray Cleary, Camberwell

The Lasso approach?
What a mess the sandpapergate saga has become. Sadly, many seem to be taking sides. Perhaps, we might do better to adopt the Ted Lasso approach: be curious but not judgmental.
Terry Kelly, Coburg

Show Treaty respect
I am increasingly frustrated at Jess Wilson’s response to questions on her decision to repeal the Treaty Act passed by the Victorian Parliament exactly a year ago. She equates the Act with the Voice Referendum and states that Victorians gave a very clear message. The actual result in Victoria was 54 per cent No and 46 per cent Yes. A significant cohort – around 15 per cent of No voters cited fears centred on the amendment of the Constitution as the main reason for their decision. The Treaty does not involve any constitutional change and it does not preclude any existing or future First Nations programs. It is simply a way of showing respect for our Indigenous heritage and a step towards change and greater opportunities for our First Nations people.
Judy Nicol, Sandhurst

Acknowledge history
Your correspondent correctly asserts that Jess Wilson, if elected, has an ″⁣undeniable mandate″⁣ to repeal Victoria’s First Peoples Treaty (Letters, 13/11). What I take issue with, however, is their claim that because of the No vote in the 2023 Voice referendum, the Treaty ″⁣should never have been brought before parliament″⁣.
The Treaty-making process began in 2016, in other words, a decade-long commitment to advance justice and self-determination for First Peoples.
Whereas the referendum was a model not tried and tested, Victoria was implementing something that had existed successfully for the First Peoples’ Assembly for the preceding six years.
The Treaty is (or was) an opportunity for all Victorians to acknowledge our shared history and move forwards together.
Neil Hudson, East Melbourne

Kew here for doubt
The profile of the Opposition Leader Jess Wilson (″⁣How a daggy Millennial came to hold a party’s hope in her hands″⁣, 13/11) overlooks one crucial detail: Kew is a marginal seat.
Wilson holds it by around 4 per cent, and former Boroondara mayor Sophie Torney is standing again as an independent. If the Coalition wins government but Wilson loses Kew, who becomes premier? Would the policies change? Voters across Victoria might want to consider this before they cast their vote.
Amy Hiller, Kew

Give Treaty a go
The article on Jess Wilson covered many reasonable questions about her beliefs and approach to politics. Sadly, an important subject to many Victorians was never broached: Treaty. Why is Wilson dead set on removing Treaty? Why would it not be fairer to at least give Treaty a chance to prove its value over a reasonable timeframe, to follow Treaty for a year at least? Please, give Treaty a fair go.
Lynn Heath, Doncaster

Counting the coast
The two medically qualified correspondents (Letters, 13/11) commented that the deinstitutionalisation of Victoria’s mental health services in the 1980s was, in itself, a good idea. However the equivalent resources were subsequently never allocated into community mental health services and we continue to see the social consequences today.
There is an opportunity cost in not properly funding mental health care and that is found in the news every day in reports of homelessness, crime and domestic violence. The only conclusion one can reach is that the bureaucrats and politicians who went down this path believed that society should bear the social cost of the cynical funding priorities that they foisted upon us.
David Fry, Windsor

Debt benefits
So Labor has notched up unbearable levels of debt, at about 30 per cent of the state’s GDP. Debt under the Liberals reached 58 per cent when Henry Bolte was premier. And in both instances the expenditure was on much needed infrastructure – schools, hospitals, roads, public transport.
John Andrews, North Fitzroy

AI’s failure
Recent developments have made it clear that where human relationships are concerned, artificial intelligence does not have all the answers.
Melanie Carter, Semaphore, SA

Exterminate!
Your correspondent (Letters, 13/11) calls for AI to be asked how to attain world peace, end poverty and solve climate change. AI’s obvious answer would be to remove the human race. Then there would be nobody left to care about Essendon’s AFL flag prospects.
Phil Bodel, Ocean Grove

From our partners