As columnist Ross Gittins and cartoonist Cathy Wilcox show, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has lost his spine (“In one awful decision, Albanese has revealed his do-nothing plan”, June 4). Labor has been intimidated by the reaction of mining companies to the prospect of a resource rent tax, and then by business opposition to changing negative gearing and capital gains tax, despite majority support for such measures. The electorate thought Labor would better protect our environment, do more to help prevent climate change and provide more funding for the ongoing needs of its constituents. Instead, its steady-as-you-go approach to government is now totally inadequate to address our current issues, let alone those to come. Peter Nash, Fairlight
Anthony Albanese and Woodside CEO Meg O’Neill.
An awful decision indeed. It is difficult to comprehend why Labor approved the North West Shelf gas project extension. There is, as Ross Gittins details, more or less nothing in this for Australia. Doing all this damage to our net zero credibility, and for what? The companies will sell all the gas overseas, none will flow to the struggling east coast, and they will pay little or no tax or revenue to Australia. The only winners are Woodsides shareholders. Why, Albo, why? Make it make sense. Ross Hudson, Mount Martha
Bad defence
I am already considering taking my vote away from Labor come next election. I am very unhappy with the prime minister’s response to the US request (and the obvious need) to significantly increase Australia’s defence spending (Letters, June 4). As a former employee of the Department of Foreign Affairs and current small business owner, I understand that spending decisions are always about trade-offs, however a government’s primary responsibility is the safety and security of its citizens. In this regard, our prime minister unfortunately either has his head stuck firmly in the sand, or in another part of his anatomy entirely. David Sinclair, Franklin
If the US wants us to increase our defence spending in order to do our “fair share”, our response should have been “OK, as soon as the US rejoins the Paris climate change agreement and does its fair share on reducing global emissions”. After all, the biggest global security risk is climate change. There is no room for leaners like the Americans, who won’t do their bit. Brendan Jones, Annandale
Mike Reddy’s letter hits the nail on the head when he says Ukraine’s drone attack on Russia is the way to go (Letters, June 4). To invade Australia, the only way is by air or water. The way to defend us is drones and satellites looking over our coastline. Brian Ireland, Burleigh Heads (Qld)
Free up homes
Taxation of unrealised assets is a current target for OECD finance ministers (“Housing crisis singled out by OECD”, June 4). However, much of the motivation is resulting from the huge increases in wealth accumulation from property, an asset that rarely reduces in value over time. In Australia, we have only allowed property investments to be included in self-managed super funds since 2007. Rather than drafting complicated legislation to tax unrealised assets fairly, why not simply remove property from the allowable list of assets an SMSF may purchase from July 2025? This would not only reduce excessive wealth accumulation in super, but take some pressure out of the housing market. Ray Thompson, Randwick
In Australia property investments have been permitted in self-managed super funds since 2007.Credit: Steven Siewert
Labor’s disastrous tobacco taxes are a timely warning about their proposed super taxes (“Only Canberra can stop the black-market tobacco trade it fostered”, June 4). Hundreds of billions in productively invested funds will be quickly diverted into tax-free family homes, created by Labor’s 1985 capital gains tax. Minimal tax will be collected and housing affordability will be much worse.William S. Lloyd, Denistone
It seems we’ve learnt nothing from our achievement of the trifecta in failed “get tough” attempts to manage humanity’s vices. Trifecta? The US prohibition on booze. Failed. Australia’s drug laws. Failed. And now, huge taxes on smoking. Failed. I know these let’s-get-tough laws are beloved of conservative folks, but is it not time we used our brains and adopted a new approach? This is a health issue, not a law enforcement issue. And who knows? It might just work – and be cheaper. Brian Haisman, Winmalee
I hate smoking, and ideally the rate of tobacco use would be zero. But I’m also a realist. Our lawmakers are making the same mistakes with cigarettes and vapes as they’ve been making for decades with the unwinnable “war on drugs.” Excessive price manipulation incentivises criminal gangs. Banning vapes in the hope they disappear is deluded. Forget about being tough on drugs. When will our legislators be smart on drugs? Jeffrey Gabriel, Gladesville
Rampant hunters the real pest
No professional vertebrate pest manager I have spoken to supports recreational hunting as an effective means of reducing the damage caused by feral animals (“Shooters Party demands new hunting body”, June 4). That’s because hunters take out a tiny percentage of a pest population in an area, leaving the majority free to breed and continue wreaking havoc. In contrast, professionals, like the company I recently engaged to manage a large feral pig population on my farm, adopt best practice methods to rapidly remove the animals from the landscape. In our case, 37 pigs were trapped in a single night. There is no way a group of hunters would achieve these results and in fact, by scaring the survivors who simply melt back into the bush, the problem gets worse over time. If the NSW government is serious about controlling feral species, they should engage professional vertebrate pest management specialists to work in national parks and state forests on a permanent basis. Paying bounties to weekend warriors for taking out a couple of animals will do next to nothing for people like me, who end up footing the costs of trapping the pigs and repairing their damage because the population was allowed to get out of control inside a national park. Cath Henshall, Bungonia
I live near a state forest where some shooters have special licences to hunt. Some try to take shortcuts through private properties to the hunting grounds. Some shoot without permission on private properties, from public roads, at anything that moves. I have had several altercations on our property. Some intoxicated hunters have even threatened me. I have recorded these incidents and reported them to police, and thankfully they have stopped. Shooters care not that so-called “conservation hunting” is known to be ineffective. It’s simple – it’s not in the interest of shooters for pests to be eradicated, and most would not be skilled enough to shoot small feral animals like foxes and cats. Australians are proud of our gun laws and to diminish them for votes is a crime. They have been watered down enough already. Katherine McKenzie, Putty
An Australian feral pig.
Nick O’Malley deftly exposes what is wrong with the Shooters Party bill to set up a new hunting authority. This taxpayer-funded agency would have its own hunting minister to effectively promote the hunters’ wish list, regardless of the impact on the rest of the community. The push for “cultural hunting” is risible. Guns were a colonial import, and the so-called “culture” of non-Indigenous hunting is seen by many as cruel, ugly and violent. Just ask Emma Hurst MP, who gets death threats and vile abuse from hunters. “Give them an inch and they take a mile” is an apt adage for the hunting fraternity. Let’s hope Premier Chris Minns shoots down their bolshie demands. Em Wilkinson, Blackburn South (Vic)
Cox on the run
Dorinda Cox has left the Greens for the greener grass of the Labor Party (Letters, June 4). But why did she defect? Was it losing the vote for the Green’s deputy leader position? Or was it losing the vote for the party’s deputy whip position? Perhaps all of those could have come into play. It might also be the case that she is simply a bad loser. Whatever the answer, I suspect that the Greens are better off without defector Dorinda. Michael Davis, Balmain East
Family name
Well said, Brian McDonald (Letters, June 4). A woman taking a man’s name is an archaic tradition signifying ownership. But let’s take it further: why does a baby almost always inherit the father’s surname? After his fleeting contribution, the man steps aside while the woman endures nine months of pregnancy, navigating the immense physical, mental and emotional demands, and ultimately faces the agony of childbirth alone. Given that she carries 99.9 per cent of the burden, shouldn’t she at least have the right to share her name with her child? Jane Lieschke, Woonona
Brian McDonald must associate with very different women from the ones I know, none of whom are or feel owned by or inferior to their husbands – probably the reverse. The ancient practice of taking a husband’s name is to create and denote a family unit and is more for the benefit of children feeling secure. Some women choose to retain their maiden names for professional reasons. On the other hand, at least two I know told me they didn’t like their maiden name and were more than happy to take their husband’s. Peter Thornton, Killara
Ah, Brian McDonald, you may be right, changing your surname is a small thing, signifying much. I remember feeling sad as I signed the marriage register, thinking “this is the last time I’ll use this name”. But conditioning was such that I did not complain and saw it as a given. How naive we were. Unfortunately, many religions still assume that men are innately superior, are “head of the house” and wives must obey ’til death do us part. Jennifer Fergus, Croydon
Kind of hush
How ironic that Tuesday’s edition included, first, an article about new Sydney University restrictions on public comment and internal communications (“New rules for Sydney uni students”, June 3), and second, an article by former student Sophie Gee, who I remember as articulate and unafraid to speak up during her undergraduate days (“Trump fears Harvard’s excellence”, June 3). In my 40 years lecturing at the university I was often asked by students if they could address the lecture before it started. They were often competing groups seeking election to student societies, sometimes they encouraged auditions or performances in the faculty musical and dramatic review, support for inter-faculty or inter-varsity sport, and occasionally information about a meeting on an issue such as HECS or the environment. Once the address took the form of madrigal singing. Not once can I remember a student speaking without my permission or giving a political or racist diatribe. As Sophie Gee wrote, at the heart of a university will be different viewpoints adding to complex knowledge. I have learnt so much listening to colleagues and students. But what a hush has now fallen over the university. Barbara McDonald, Woollahra
A large boring machines used in the Western Harbour Tunnel. Credit: NSW Government
Road to nowhere
The new Western Harbour tunnel may well be an engineering marvel, but that does not mean it is a good idea (“Underground city preparing for machines to connect Sydney”, June 4). Despite having a diameter that allows three lanes in each direction, it only has a capacity of three lanes at 30 cars a minute, or 5400 cars an hour in each direction. Optimistically assuming two people per car, that’s barely 10,000 people per hour in each direction. A much smaller metro tunnel could carry at least three times as many people and would not need expensive ventilation. As for the 5400 cars, they all need road space to their destinations and many will need parking in dedicated facilities. Meanwhile, despite policies to encourage the use of public transport, we are told that funds for rail expansion are scarce. Jim Donovan, Lindfield
Fine not fair
A parking fine under your windscreen wiper was never welcome, but the new practice of a fine through the post is unfair. It prevents members the public from checking the details and, if contested, taking a photograph to support their case. Parking fines carry a hefty penalty in NSW, more so than any other state or territory in Australia. I note also the new advice regarding $65 “enforcement cost” – if you are under 18 it is now reduced to $25. This is good, but reveals that the $65 is not for the cost of enforcement. It is, in part at least, a tax in disguise. David Allen, Woollahra
Taken for a ride
Taxi rides are not the only rip-offs at Sydney airport (“Plan to stop taxi ripoffs”, June 4). Another is the station access fee (“excess fee”) charged by the operators of the two airport stations set up under a Greiner government public/private partnership (PPP – public perpetually pays) to 2030. It is currently $17.34 for adults. The Perth airport station access fee is zero. Philip Laird, Keiraville
Performance anxiety
Travel writer Ben Groundwater rightly questions the use of client surveys to assess a worker’s efficiency (“A hotel staffer begged me for a good review. Her job was on the line”, June 4). It is one thing for an organisation to want to evaluate its own performance, it’s another for each worker’s efficiency to be open to the whims of whichever clients chose to complete the surveys. Client feedback surveys would have to be one of the most flawed systems for evaluating workers’ performance as they are totally subjective and will vary from one client’s expectations to another. I now refuse to complete such surveys. If I have a gripe I will contact the organisation’s complaints section directly. My dissatisfaction should be an organisational matter to solve; not a reason for punitive action against a single worker. Such worker surveillance strategies, although sugar-coated in client relationship speak, are controlling, subversive and devalue the worker. If a worker is not performing well enough it is the responsibility of the employer, not me, to monitor that and take action. Warren Marks, Richmond (Tas)
Client feedback surveys are a flawed system for evaluating workers’ performance, a reader writes.Credit: istock
Worth the money
If small business owners can’t afford to pay a modest and overdue minimum wage increase, as their representatives keep telling us, then they should close their business and seek employment at the wages they object to (“Millions to get pay rise as wages boosted”, June 4). Alynn Pratt, Grenfell
States of disgrace
Grant Heaton’s grasp of British political history is at best sketchy (Letters, June 4). He compares the House of Windsor with the Trump administration, however, since the Magna Carta was instituted in the 13th century the power of British monarchs has been increasingly restrained by the political system that has evolved into the Westminster system, the one we and other democracies use today to curb the power of elected officials. In comparison, the US Constitution hands overarching power to one individual. If you’re looking for the political system that nurtures the possibility of a despot, look no further than the USA – the land of the free and the home of the insane. Elisabeth Goodsall, Wahroonga
Made good
Made in USA. Yes, it was once considered a plus. I remember travelling in Japan 40 years ago when goods made there were considered cheap. I bought a nice local souvenir with the label “Made in USA”. It was a clever marketing ploy, as Usa is a city in Oita Prefecture on the Japanese island of Kyushu. Bernie Carberry, Connells Point
Credit: Cathy Wilcox
- To submit a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
- The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform. Sign up here.