'SURPLUS' DOES NOT EXCUSE EVERYTHING

GARY HUMPHRIES says that it would make no sense to reject the "first ever
surplus Budget" because it included funding for an injecting place
("Injecting room: Carnell could fall", CT, 24 June, p.1).

Does this mean, then, that as long as a Budget can be described as being
"surplus" and a "damn good Budget", it should be passed, even if it
included things like funding euthanasia, or execution by firing squad? I
don't think so. Stick to your guns, Paul Osborne!

IVAN HOY
Chifley