The Minns government inherited a hefty bill from the previous government, much of it for infrastructure problems. Some were of questionable value and some were just plain stupid, like the closure of the railway into Newcastle and the light rail in Hunter Street.

It seems many see the value of a rail service to Cessnock. Considering the track is still there, upgrading the line for passenger services makes sense. Another report spoke of projected population increases in Port Stephens. I think it's time some serious planning for railways to both of those areas was done. Railways will be needed if congestion and greenhouse gas emissions are to be avoided. Railways to Raymond Terrace and Port Stephens should have been built years ago.

I READ with interest the article by Russel Lunney ("Well-designed HSR could revolutionise Sydney transport", Opinion, 10/4). The proposal has much to recommend, but it needs a little fine tuning.

There need to be Lake Macquarie and Central Coast stations. These would add minimal travel time but would provide a service to many additional customers. Volume is what will determine if the high-speed rail is viable and successful. These are probably more important than a station at Epping.

Without a Lake Macquarie stop, a passenger from Toronto would need to catch a regular train to Newcastle, for 30 minutes before heading south. If it then takes 55 minutes to Sydney, that's 90 minutes. A regular train covers the journey from Fassifern to Sydney in two hours. Assuming high-speed rail will be more expensive, there would be little advantage for Lake Macquarie residents without a station in their area. Depending upon the route, that could be at Fassifern or Glendale. Similarly, a Central Coast station is also a necessity and would add to volume.

Will it travel into Newcastle's CBD, or would Broadmeadow be a better terminus with an extended light rail from there to the city of Newcastle? The core station should be located at Olympic Park, as that would provide a direct route from all four stops to sport and entertainment there.

THE court case ("Landmark case: trans woman suing female-only 'online refuge'", Herald 10/4), has come about due to amendments that were made to the Sex Discrimination Act by the Gillard government. The concise reality of "sex discrimination" in the legislation was replaced by the ill-defined concept of "gender discrimination".

My concern is this seemingly now allows a male who assumes the identity, appearance and mannerisms of a woman to take legal action against an Australian woman for not allowing that person to join a female-only social media platform.

Other examples of how these amendments have affected females are the AHRC banning lesbians in Victoria from organising in public to the exclusion of males (who say they are lesbians) and 24 females reportedly self-excluding from a Sydney soccer competition because five people born male were participating, and they feared being injured.

How can it be fair for a man to identify as a woman and for a court to decide that means women in Australia can no longer have sex-based spaces, sports and resources? That is what I believe is at stake.

As Germaine Greer once said, "gender can be anything you like, it is entirely cultural, but unfortunately sex is not entirely cultural. It's something you're born with whether you like it or not. Female is real and it's sex, and femininity is unreal and it's gender. It's a role you play and for that to become the given identity of women is a profoundly disabling notion".

Independent NSW MP Alex Greenwich is attempting to introduce self-ID into NSW legislation. If successful, I fear this will allow anyone to change their legal sex, enabling males to legally identify as female and to access women-only spaces. Self-ID harms women and girls and puts their rights and freedoms at risk. I believe we should be allowed to say no to biological males, regardless of how they identify.

TWO recent stories ("Capturing carbon to build green future", "University to use hydrogen to produce low-carbon steel", Herald 11/4) covered our government's latest support for 'green schemes' with taxpayers' money. Hardly a week goes by without this current government spending millions more on dubious schemes to transition us to a new renewable utopia. Most of this is pie-in-the-sky investment unlikely to ever work out.

People should realise that when the government grants and subsidies end, so might the new industries. We effectively have a giant government largesse on issues people don't care about and in ways that most voters don't think will help them, their children, the poor, the economy, jobs or national security, yet money still flows. Why is that?

A GREAT game, Roosters versus Knights. I thought with the home ground you got the 50/50 decisions from the refs, but I guess it was the Roosters. Some things never change.

MICHAEL Hinchey ("Who's gone missing on the issue?", Letters, 10/4), asserts that the "no" campaign in the Voice referendum was largely founded on Indigenous disadvantage, when it's obvious to most people that it was largely founded on the rejection of racial division being put into our constitution. He also asks about the whereabouts of the wonderful Jacinta Nampijinpa Price: well she gave an impassioned speech in parliament on March 27 about the crisis in Alice Springs. Maybe it wasn't shown as a priority on their ABC.

GLEN Wilson ("Liberal win is no impossibility", Letters, 10/4), says the Liberals could win seats in this area if they had the motivation to "give it a go." I wish I could share your optimism Glen, still I guess one can but hope.

SO the Coalition has clearly declared that they intend to continue to burn coal while they develop a nuclear energy alternative, which will take decades to develop. They have no intention in developing the renewable option. The urgency to stop burning coal plays no part in their plans. They don't care about climate change.

GEOFF Bryan ("Age is an imperfect measure", Letters, 12/4), with our brain starting to shrink from age 30 or 40 surely the 16-year-old prime minister will introduce a bill to reduce the retirement age to 40 and also ban anyone over 40 from driving and operating machinery.