Letters: Questions raised about Jackie Trad’s housekeeping

Today readers have their say on Deputy Premier Jackie Trad’s failure to declare a house purchase and discipline in schools.

Queensland Treasurer Jackie Trad’s purchase of an inner city house is under scrutiny. Picture: AAP Image/Glenn Hunt

WHAT was Deputy Premier Jackie Trad’s political faux pas?

Was it buying a house that is close to all the infrastructure related to the Cross River Rail project or that she didn’t register the purchase with the parliamentary pecuniary register (C-M, Jul 19)?

If the house had been on the market with the usual “For Sale” signs, that shouldn’t have been a problem.

That the house was purchased for the “bargain” price of $700,000 should not be a problem either.

If the house had been purchased by any other person it would not have raised eyebrows.

But Trad has been accused of not abiding by the rules of Parliament.

As the parliamentarian holding the No.2 spot in the Government, I think she should resign as treasurer and deputy premier pending an investigation, but that’s not what happens in Queensland.

Peter Haslett, Cashmere

THE house that Jackie Trad bought in Woolloongabba looks like it is a bit of a “plain Jane”, so its value would seem to lie in its future potential capital gain.

Trad does herself no favours by making the excuse that it was her husband’s decision to buy the property.

So why is her name on the title?

Didn’t she know what she was signing?

Roseanne Schneider, Toowoomba

**********

SPARING THE ROD BREEDS PROBLEMS

I WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree with Alasdair McBryde’s observations (Letters, Jul 18) in relation to the unprecedented violence in our classrooms.

However, I would like to add that the removal of the humble 30cm ruler from each classroom as a token consequence for unruly, loud or bad behaviour, as well as the cane used by the principal in extreme cases of disrespect or violence, has, over time, led to a raft of behaviours prevalent in society today, namely lack of respect for authority, elders and others; striking out when disagreeing with someone; road rage; domestic violence; juveniles rampaging and causing damage in correctional centres; and the list goes on.

Years ago, if a child was unruly due to ineffective parenting or a strong defiant will, school would, in most cases, straighten that student out and mould them into a citizen who could get on with others and respect authority.

Today, many students face no real consequences to mould appropriate and respectful behaviour.

Furthermore, the students who would normally comply with instructions and learn from observing other people’s bad behaviour, are encouraged to try some bad behaviour of their own.

The sad truth is that by the time they reach their teenage to adult years, the police become involved with serious consequences.

It has taken a long time to reach this point, but something must be done to turn the tide towards respect for others and acceptable societal standards of behaviour by all.

Barb Dwyer, Mt Walker

ALASDAIR McBryde bemoans perceived PC government interference in the rights of parents to admonish their children using physical smacking.

There is significant and ongoing research that has revealed the psychological damage caused by the use of physical violence on children.

Many children are violent due to physical parental discipline. If we adopt the writer’s argument then let’s smack our partners when we feel they have offended us.

Smack the postie when the mail is late, and let a policeman smack you for speeding.

As well, all employers can smack other employees for misdemeanours.

After a month, we can sit down and express how we feel and let the children comment on our behaviour.

Let’s face it, smacking is about the smacker, not the child, and does nothing to resolve bad behaviour.

Tony Grigsby, Southport

**********

Join the conversation. Send your letters to couriermail.com.au/letters or email to [e-mail]