Opposition Leader Peter Dutton overstates the benefit of his proposed temporary cut to fuel excise of 25¢ a litre to the average Australian motorist, who travels about 12,000 kilometres a year (ABS) (“Dutton dumps gas guzzler tax”, April 11). At 10 litres/100km, that’s 1200 litres, saving $300 a year, or 82¢ a day. Even his outlier motorist, filling up 55 litres a week, saving $13.75 a week, would be better off running an EV, which Dutton has railed against. Then, from a national security perspective, 90 per cent of Australia’s transport fuels come via geopolitically contested areas. And Australia maintains only a limited storage of fuel because it has an arrangement to tap into the US strategic reserve, which may be problematic. Carlo Ursida, Kensington (Vic)
Australia, along with every OECD country apart from Russia, has adopted a standard on vehicle emissions that ensures the nation’s car fleet is fuel-efficient. The Coalition wants to remove this environmental standard in its aim to move Australia back on track. But how far back does it want to take us? Rebuild the P76, rebirth the giant diprotodon? Evan Bailey, Glebe
Peter Dutton visits a petrol stationCredit: Fairfax Media
The Dutton Coalition shows a woeful ignorance of car manufacturing and an almost Neanderthal desire to always be on the wrong side of history. Fuel-efficient cars are being made and sold by all the world’s leading manufacturers. To sell them here would be no great task, and overseas experience shows they are no more expensive than the dirty cars being sold here now. Furthermore, fuel-efficient cars save drivers money by using less fuel. Really, a no-brainer for anyone to understand – except the Coalition, which seems to wish to keep Australia as the dumping ground for second rate vehicles. Ross Hudson, Mount Martha (Vic)
The Coalition’s latest idea – to scrap the fuel efficiency standards – is madness. For years, overseas manufacturers have been dumping the greatest gas-guzzlers and fuel inefficient cars into Australia and denying us a better range of fuel-efficient engines and EVs. This is because we paired with Russia as the only countries in the world without appropriate fuel efficiency standards. Dutton claims new vehicles will impose costs on consumers, which is crazy as consumers are now spending far too much on poor quality fuel and getting woeful fuel economy as well as higher carbon pollution levels. The industry is opposed to Dutton’s plan and it is well-prepared to accept the new vehicle efficiency standards. Mark Berg, Caringbah South
Dutton is appealing to populist sentiment in his proposed dumping of the vehicle efficiency standard. Why remove a standard that brings Australia in line with the rest of the world in reducing carbon emissions? The benefits in terms of climate change action are self-evident, and there is no evidence to support Dutton’s assertion that enforcing the standard will increase the price of cars: just another populist smoke screen (no pun intended) to create unfounded fear in order to extract a few extra votes. Leo Sorbell, West Ryde
Labor’s vehicle efficiency standard encourages vehicle makers to export to Australia more fuel- and emissions-efficient vehicles. New generation engines reduce fuel consumption, lower emissions and are kinder on your pocket when refuelling. The Coalition wants scrap the standard to assist in lowering the cost of living on the vague proposition that old technology vehicles are cheaper. This avoids the fact that fuel costs and emissions are part of the equation. Perhaps being wedded to inefficient old technology is the reason for the Coalition election promise to lower fuel prices. What a backwards and cynical muddle. Murray Patchett, Kentucky
Treasurer Dr Jim Chalmers and Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on the election trailCredit: Alex Ellinghausen
It is clear from what the Coalition has announced that the dangers of climate change have been absent in the crafting of its policies. Dutton’s promise to fast track approval of Woodside’s 50-year North West Shelf project would also allow the $30 billion Browse Basin project to go ahead, generating another 20 million tonnes of pollution.
Nationals leader David Littleproud has previously refused to commit to Australia’s 43 per cent emissions reduction target, and when opposition climate spokesman Ted O’Brien was asked about our remaining in the Paris emissions reduction deal, he avoided answering the question directly (“Confusion in Coalition over climate views”, April 11). It is clear the federal opposition has no interest in preventing further climate change because it will not be in politics long enough to be held responsible for the future tragedies its decisions will bring. Peter Nash, Fairlight
David Crowe (“Dutton running out of time on policy”, April 11) illustrates Taylor’s and Dutton’s avoidance of detail, saying: “they perform the dance of the seven veils with every policy”. To quote Dutton: “If you don’t know, vote no.” Mike Greenwood, Hahndorf (SA)
“If you look at the standard of candidates we have selected, I think we have selected some amazing people,” said Peter Dutton, sounding very “Trump-esque” as he responded to another Liberal candidate’s past coming to light (“Dutton dodges questions about Liberal fined on finance charge”, April 11). He then suggested the prime minister “hasn’t been convicted by a court, but maybe he will because if he keeps going like this, you can’t trust this prime minister with anything”. The opposition leader has been idolising Donald Trump for so long that he is starting to sound like him. The only policy seems to be “deflect and attack”, but there is not anything of value for the Australian people. Robert Antill, Lake Conjola
Given the barrage of disguised Coalition fliers in our letterboxes screaming about the dangers of a hung parliament, it’s time to point out who you’d get if you vote Liberal.
Dutton invariably wanders around the hustings with a member of the Nationals in tow. I hope voters are taking notice. Each Liberal Party candidate’s banner should, in addition to the candidate’s picture, have an equally large picture of Barnaby Joyce, Matt Canavan or Bridget McKenzie as a reminder that, if you vote Liberal, you will get the Nationals thrown in. It is disingenuous for the Liberal Party not to show both parties in the Coalition alliance. I imagine a fair few Liberal voters would actually not approve of the Nationals’ policies, such as reversing the ban on live sheep exports. But remember, the Nationals’ tail wags the Liberal Party dog. Judy Hungerford, Kew (Vic)
I don’t agree with your correspondent’s argument (Letters, April 11) that voters should back either the Coalition or Labor. Apart from a few hastily drafted promises from Labor, neither of the two main parties has supported environmental sustainability in a meaningful way: new coal mines have been approved; native flora and fauna has been decimated; and our rivers and oceans are polluted. Minor parties and independents who do not rely on corporate donations or cosy relationships have a significant and valid role to play in federal politics, and their prowess in foreign affairs should not be underestimated. Peter Mahoney, Oatley
AUKUS change a Musk-do task
Elon Musk is certainly the right person to investigate the US sub manufacturing operation (“Musk to probe subs as AUKUS costs rise”, April 11). The US needs 64 subs over 32 years due to their 33-year reactor life. We may get operating US subs at full price if available. The real AUKUS program, on which Defence Minister Richard Marles said we would spend 0.15 per cent of GDP, is Australia and the UK building eight AUKUS subs a year for 32 years using US reactor technology – which Australia is paying for while the UK does sub design. However, the UK has allocated its sub assembly hall (shed) to its four Dreadnought class nuclear missile subs once its last Astute class sub is launched in 2026. Australia can’t wait another decade doing nothing, hoping the US will have subs for sale. We must demand the UK expand its sub assembly facilities so we can both be building AUKUS subs by 2030. Peter Egan, Mosman
Are they on the way?
To convince “sceptical voters” of the value of the AUKUS submarines, someone needs to convince us that by the 2040s possible adversaries will not have mastered remote detection techniques and will not be able to flood the oceans with swarms of killer underwater drones. In addition, future submariners will need convincing that they are
not sitting ducks. All of these are big asks. Greg Baker, Fitzroy Falls
Australia must apparently set aside just over $10 billion a year for the next three decades to pay for and acquire submarines by the 2030s as part of its obligations as a member of the AUKUS triumvirate. This is a colossal waste of money for an unnecessary military venture, the relevance of which is explicable only through a confection of imagined threats, scenarios and Hollywood-like playbooks. How much more useful to the welfare and struggling masses of our country might $368 billion be? One can only imagine, as the money is frittered away and duly pocketed by the US military industrial complex. Frederick Jansohn, Rose Bay
The AUKUS “agreement” continues to be clouded in growing uncertainty, especially in terms of its eye-watering costs, dubious timeframe and questionable sharing of sensitive data. It’s time to ditch this albatross, cut our losses, demand our money back from America, apologise to the French and negotiate with reliable European allies for an outcome that will actually strengthen our national security. Trump’s America is not to be trusted to adhere to any “deal”. Rob Phillips, North Epping
Cartoon outrage
I’m sorry to hear about your correspondent’s (Letters, April 11) outrage at Cathy Wilcox’s cartoon on April 9. Surely, Herald readers can consider both domestic and international issues? I feel more outrage for what Israel is doing now in Gaza, as there is no justice in shooting paramedics or in starving a civilian population and annexing more land in an already tiny territory. We need more outrage about this, surely?
Australia has been able to welcome and provide a home to both Jews and Palestinians, but Palestinians should not be forced from their lands. Rhyan Andrews, Faulconbridge
Credit: Cathy Wilcox
Commentary by the likes of Wilcox no doubt makes some people feel uncomfortable. The tragic fact is that both sides in the Gaza conflict have committed atrocities. Sanctioned by most nations and enabled by Trump, Israel is consciously carrying out genocide while we’ve turned our gaze to other things. Israel’s hugely disproportionate use of lethal force is clearly criminal. The perpetrators on both sides should be held to account. Unfortunately, that’s probably a vain hope in today’s fractured and distracted world. Martin Frohlich, Adamstown Heights
Your correspondent is off the mark when she references the cartoons drawn by Cathy Wilcox as being disproportionately biased against Israel. Wilcox is primarily a cartoonist, not a journalist. Admittedly, her cartoons are informed by political events, but she should never be judged as a political journalist would be. Unlike serious political scribes, Cathy Wilcox has licence to use visual techniques not bounded by the rules of exactness as in verbal reporting. The most cutting of which is comedic hyperbole, which she employs to ridicule individual and national acts of duplicity
and cant. On Thursday, Israel’s mock innocence was a legitimate target for Wilcox to hold up to public scrutiny. Trevor Somerville, Illawong
No jab, no entry
Everyone should have a jabCredit: iStock
Measles vaccination rates in Australia in all ages have substantially decreased to 75 per cent, and in young children to 91 per cent, far below needed herd immunity levels of 95 per cent. Measles kills. In 2014, the WHO certified Australia as having eliminated local measles transmission. But vaccination levels in Australia are declining, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic, after which measles cases surged. The WHO in Europe recorded measles cases doubling in 2024. The current US head of health is an acknowledged anti-vaxxer. Texas is already showing the sequelae of low measles vaccination rates, with 505 hospitalised measles cases this year and one death. As a single imported case is sufficient to trigger a large outbreak in those not, or insufficiently, immunised, should Australia have a mandatory policy, for US and other overseas visitors, to have documentary evidence of their measles vaccination status. Chris Blatch, Glebe
‘All the talents’
Your correspondent (Letters, April 11) says a hung parliament will be unable to act decisively in a crisis. Winston Churchill and William Pitt the Younger both successfully led coalition governments, during World War II and the Napoleonic wars respectively. Far from being weak, a coalition can often benefit from access to “all the talents”, to use the 18th century phrase, rather than just half of them. Lance Rainey, Rushforth
Blood and homophone
When he was annoyed or upset, one of my classmates (early 1960s) would say “Vladivostok” (Letters, April 11). It sounded as though he were swearing – especially as the sounds of “v” and “b” are so close. David Gordon, Cranebrook
Waxing spherical
If the moon waxes and wanes on opposite sides (Letters, April 11), what does it do as it crosses the equator – suddenly flip while watching the water reverse going down the plughole? John Constable, Balmain
POSTSCRIPT
You would think, wouldn’t you, in the second week of a federal election campaign, that the Herald‘s letterbox would be bursting at the seams with politics? Surprisingly, no. The letterbox is being well-fed, thank you, but there hasn’t been an overwhelming number of letters about the election. The highest number was at the beginning of the week when there was much mockery about Peter Dutton “walking back” on his policies of purging the public service and forcing people back into the office, but not much after that. There were a few routine letters about the whys and wherefores of how wrong Dutton and/or Anthony Albanese is, a few in praise of the Labor and/or Greens, a few cheers for the teals, but that was about it.
There were many letters about American politics, specifically Trump’s tariffs. He and they are widely and wildly unpopular here, but whether he pays attention to the Herald Letters page or indeed knows where to find Australia is debatable. Perhaps if the government explained to him that Australia is close-ish to the over-tariffed penguins of McDonald and Heard Islands, he would show some recognition, but who knows?
Quite a few letters came in about Premier Chris Minns and his perceived lack of action about doctors and schools. Writers were generally right behind the doctors’ strike, and the consensus is that NSW won’t keep medical staff if the staff can be better paid in every other state and territory. A few writers pointed out that they knew there would be trouble when the police got a good wage rise but the NSW government claimed it couldn’t then pay anyone else a decent wage.
The main subject away from this was education, after NSW Education secretary Murat Dizdar suggested that the education system would be better off without Catholic and independent schools.
Letters poured in for this subject, fervently agreeing or disagreeing: there was little middle ground.
The lighter subject for the week was travellers’ tales of silly people on the loose making silly remarks. Foreigners, eh? What can you do?
Harriet Veitch, Acting letters editor