Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews (Image: AAP/James Ross)

John Peel writes: To quote someone else (Barry Humphries?), who could give a wombat’s fart if or where the Commonwealth Games are held (“The games’ up: Dan Andrews rescues Victoria from his own stupidity”)? I feel sorry for our ambitious and mega-talented athletes but their chances will come elsewhere and in a much fairer environment.

Basically, the games’ appeal here is all about whether or not Australia can win more gold medals than the Isle of Wight. Absolutely thrilling for some, no doubt, but the rest of us will remain sound asleep.

Graham Johnson writes: Even a quick review of the history of the Commonwealth Games shows it to be a leftover of another time that is slowly dying. Dominated by two or three countries and increasingly hosted only by cities from those three countries, it has simply passed its use-by date. If the cancellation of the Victorian games brings on a conversation about the need to continue them, that’s a good thing.

Given the changing demographic composition of the Australian population to a much greater presence of citizens with a family background in Asia, surely the Asian Games are of greater relevance.

Colin McCormac writes: Cancelling the Commonwealth Games was the right thing to do. The “British Commonwealth” is a meaningless group of countries left over from colonial times. Why not hold them every four years in London? That’s supposedly the centre of the Commonwealth.

David Simpson writes: Now that Victoria has made the logical decision about the games, it should turn the same lens to the F1 GP. Every year the F1 GP creates more disruption and loses taxpayers more money — a non-earning investment that this indebted state can ill afford.

The solution is to invest in the regional Victorian economy by moving the F1 GP to Phillip Island. Most of the infrastructure is already there and it’s a brilliantly photogenic track. Lower cost = higher returns = better investment for all Victorians. Win-win.

A dog’s life

Melissa Harrison writes: As president of Free the Hounds I have been heavily involved in finding greyhounds that have been, and still are being, exported to China from Australia, and was sickened to read this story (“‘Feel-good’ greyhound story disguises an industry indifferent to overbreeding”). Surely Americans can find another breed of dog to have as a pet. I’m sure the spin over there is that these poor dogs have nowhere to go, rather than the fact that we are overbreeding them to such an extent we can’t find them homes here.

As for the latest male to hit China, he has already serviced more than 35 dams there, in a country with almost no animal welfare laws, a country where greyhounds are not even allowed into its capital or its other largest cities.

When will someone finally uncover why greyhound racing has such a hold over the governments of this country? It can’t be for the money — reports by research specialists IER say what the industry spits out and the government consumes are rubbish, and here in WA, Racing and Wagering Western Australia is within the government.

Peta Akester writes: I was dismayed to read the story about the rescued “retired” greyhounds being sent to the US without any real vetting of the way the program will be run there. What will become of those dogs deemed unsuitable to be rehomed? We all know of one. I’ve have had some very dubious characters but have persisted with my hounds. I ensure there are no small children around them and that they are not disturbed while asleep (as I have had one boy who suffered very badly from “sleep startle” and would attempt to bite my face off if disturbed while sleeping).

I firmly believe the greyhound racing industry should be forced to stop breeding, but it needs to be policed by an outside body. Surprise spot checks need to be carried out on all racing participants. In fact, I believe that racing should be shut down.

Lyn Payne writes: As the biased owner of an 11-year-old greyhound, I say greyhound racing should cease. Full stop.

Susan Berryman writes: The greyhound racing industry has well and truly demonstrated that it will not take animal welfare seriously, even after the reports and studies and scrutiny it has been subjected to. The only way gross overbreeding will be stopped is if the industry is forced to and knows there will be serious consequences for non-compliance.

The industry is resistant to change and many of the recommendations of the review that followed the attempted racing ban in NSW are still not implemented. As well as no cap on breeding there is no whole-of-life tracking so dogs can still disappear. Greyhounds are still exported to China where there are no welfare laws, no rehoming requirements and no tracking. Of the dogs rehomed in Australia, most are rehomed through charities that rely on volunteers and donations rather than through industry bodies.

Despite surveys showing that most people do not support greyhound racing, our state governments (apart from the ACT) continue to prop up this cruel industry because they are addicted to the revenue from wagering. These beautiful dogs deserve better.

Here’s your hat, what’s your hurry…

Steve Brennan writes: Philip Lowe stuffed it up badly, and in my view was like an extension of the appalling Coalition governments we have had for the past 10 years, like icing on a pile of dung (“Why Lowe had to go”). Let’s face it. His misleading statements about interest rates were unforgivable and the full repercussions of his “advice” are still yet to be felt. Added to that, in doing this he threw fuel on the fire of exploding house prices. Obviously the banks loved all this.

He moved late on raising rates and then adopted the narrative that wages were to blame for inflation, which blind Freddie knew was false. After years of structural wage suppression, he had the audacity to prosecute this claim while ordinary folk were bleeding. We all could see profit gouging was and is driving inflation, as are external factors.

He absolutely had to go. He had zero credibility in the eyes of ordinary people, and I imagine many decent economists. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is silly for taking this guy to a G20 meeting — clearly a farewell junket. At least the Labor government has got rid of this clown — one good thing it’s done.

Damien Westbrook writes: Lowe is a symptom, not the cause.

Colin Ross writes: On the question of business profits, offers dissembling nonsense. Profit margins, expressed as a percentage, may not have blown out but profits have because they come from a bigger base loaded up with higher input costs. The quicker Lowe goes the better.

A learning experience

Barry Welch writes: Re “Won’t somebody think of the children? Qld LNP votes no to consent education”. As the P&C president at a primary school on the Darling Downs in the late ’80s and early ’90s, I had to deal with virulent opposition to introducing sex education from local right-wingers and some connected to the Christian ministry Logos Foundation. The principal argument they presented at the P&C was that sex education would encourage bestiality because girls would learn they wouldn’t get pregnant from sex with animals (apparently a line from the John Birch Society, the American right-wing political advocacy group).

At that point, those in favour of sex education won the vote.