What happened to Labor leaders taking a stand on principles, just like Bob Hawke on the Franklin River dam (“Gas project extension is a mistake and worse, a betrayal”, May 31)? What a sad state of affairs when the Labor government gives in, yet again, to corporate Australia, whose greed in exploiting this beautiful country is never-ending. Carmen Lawrence has called the PM’s bluff, saying that the East Coast is not going to get any gas, as there is no pipeline, and the world has an oversupply of gas. Instead of giving Woodside a blank cheque for 40 years, the government could have put some extra caveats, such as every five years it would review their environmental credentials to ensure all apparently strict conditions are met and provide an extra royalty for government coffers. Strangely, all corporations never support Labor, but they get the best deal out of Labor – rather than the Coalition. Mukul Desai, Hunters Hill
Credit: Megan Herbert
For the past 40 years, we’ve been giving away our gas, for free, to international operators so that taxes on profits could be paid overseas and the East Coast states could buy back gas at overseas market prices. Some receiving countries have been able to resell the gas to other countries at a profit. This arrangement has been so successful that we’ve signed the deal for another 40 years. Notwithstanding the moral issues over climate change, can someone, anyone, please explain the logic? John Brown, North Sydney
It seems the Woodside extension of 40 years is a done deal, but the price is not. Before anything is signed, can we do what every other country does and put a tax on foreign companies exporting our oil and gas? Saudi Arabia charges 90 per cent of the oil price: not of the profits of the company, which can be avoided and manipulated, but the actual gas. If every drop or litre of fossil fuel that comes out of our ground pays 100 per cent tax, then we will see the true value of our resource to these companies – after all, no one is forcing them to mine it. If we want, we could use those profits to plant trees, do science and help our sinking Pacific neighbours. It is our gas, isn’t it? Allan Kreuiter, Roseville
Like many others, I am concerned about Australia’s continuing export of fossil fuels and the expansion of Woodside’s North West Shelf gas project. But before I rush to join the chorus of those prepared to condemn the government and the miners, I’d like to know a bit more about those exports – like who buys our coal and gas, and what do they use it for? How dependent are they on these fuels for their basic energy needs, what alternative fuel sources do they have access to and what actions are they taking now to develop alternatives? Even in Australia, with our abundant sun and wind and a government committed to a rapid transition to renewables, we will still need some coal for years to come and gas to back up renewables indefinitely. Imagine how much more difficult it must be for countries that do not share our natural advantages. Col Nicholson, Hawks Nest
Boo, Albo and Labor, you have dudded me. I believed you sincerely cared about the planet and returned you my vote. Now the cynical sell-out decision. I don’t accept that the reasoning trumps the climate change/Aboriginal heritage imperatives. Please reconsider. Stop the process now. Frances McLean, Croydon
Ditch domestic gas
While we are going to need some new gas in the eastern states, governments should be encouraging households and businesses to dispense with it altogether, and certainly should not be allowing it to be installed in new buildings (“Gas to power the nation’s shift to renewables”, May 31). Gas just locks people into paying high energy prices, and makes it harder for the nation to cut its emissions. I ditched it two years ago and installed a heat pump at my house. I can power this entirely from my solar panels, meaning I don’t pay anything for hot water. Even without solar, the heat pump would be costing me about $160 a year to run – just a quarter of what I was paying with gas. It’s a no-brainer. Ken Enderby, Concord
Wrong side of history
When your correspondent (Letters, May 31) writes that Margaret Thatcher went to war over the Falklands in 1982 to get re-elected, he’s on the wrong track. At the time, it was the Argentine military junta that decided it would be a good idea to invade the islands – without warning – to distract its population from domestic issues and to promote its legitimacy. When attempts at diplomacy failed, the British government had no choice but to retake the islands by force. The Argentine dictator, General Leopoldo Galtieri, failed miserably and was forced to resign, which led, in turn, to democratic elections. Galtieri was later held to account and imprisoned for human rights abuses during his presidency. For me, the takeout from the letter is that democratic countries must always stand firm against dictators who think it’s OK to take land from another sovereign country, by force. The Falklands remain a contentious issue with regard to sovereignty. However, the islanders have always wished to remain British. Philip Machin, Lorn
Stanley at the Falkland Islands: Who won what?Credit: Charles - stock.adobe.com
I think your correspondent is wrong about the Falklands war. That conflict, in many ways, mirrors the Ukraine war. Argentina had a military government on the nose, and flailing in its incompetence, hoping to take the pressure off with a tidy little “war”. They thought they could get away with it because, “Who cares about the Falklands?” They thought the Falklanders, and Britain, would just roll over and submit. And on all those things, the Falklanders, as did the Ukrainians, begged to differ. The Ukraine war would be over now if the US and European governments had anywhere near the balls of a Margaret Thatcher “looking to do just one good deed before she died” (Bob Dylan, Lily, Rosemary and the Jack of Hearts). Stein Boddington, St Clair
Smoke and mirrors
Vaping: What is the answer?Credit: The Age
Australia’s hostility to low-risk vaping is the most extreme among developed countries (“Youth vaping rates fall as prices soar after ban”, May 31). By any measure, it has been an expensive way of making a difficult problem much worse. After New Zealand in 2020 sensibly began regulating vaping to ensure the much less risky option was more available than deadly cigarettes, the decline in their smoking rate accelerated to 10 per cent a year, while in the same period, Australia’s smoking rate fell only 5 per cent a year. Among disadvantaged Kiwis (including Maori), the smoking rate fell three times faster than among disadvantaged Australians. Unlike the situation in Australia, there is no good evidence in New Zealand of a black market in vapes. Australia now has a $6 billion-a-year hole in government excise revenue from cigarettes and loose tobacco moving to the black market in response to the imposition of excessive excise on cigarettes and tobacco. Australia’s quasi-prohibition approach has failed abjectly. Vaping is a substitute for smoking. Anti-vaping policies are in reality pro-smoking policies. Alex Wodak, Darlinghurst
Parramatta loses in power struggle
The further delay in the opening of Powerhouse Parramatta is no surprise (“New Powerhouse opening date revealed”, May 31). It just indicates it will be years before Powerhouse Ultimo opens its doors again. It was sad to read in the Herald’s death notices of the passing of Lionel Glendenning. Lionel was the architect who headed the internationally recognised conversion of the old Ultimo Power Station in 1988. Part of the process was his design of the Wran Building and, most importantly, how it exhibited the iconic LOCO 1 with its historic carriages, the B&W steam engine, and the Strasbourg Clock. The previous government permitted the destruction of Willow Grove; this government has closed down the Powerhouse Museum, permitted the removal of its entire collection and, sadly, is allowing the gutting of the Wran Building’s interior and the extensive modification to the exterior. In other words, Lionel Glendenning’s legacy is in the advanced stages of being destroyed. Why this has to be, the public doesn’t know. Garry Horvai, Pennant Hills
Parramatta’s Powerhouse Museum has a target opening date of September 2026.Credit: Sitthixay Ditthavong
The genesis of Parramatta’s Powerhouse (alleged) Museum was the previous government’s desire to free up valuable real estate in Ultimo. It was never about doing great things for Parramatta. The opportunity to honour Parramatta’s heritage by preserving the beautiful Willow Grove and its river frontage was lost forever when the house was demolished under the cover of COVID restrictions. An actual museum could have been built on a more suitable site. This flood-prone milk crate will forever be a monument to the arrogance and dishonesty of the Coalition government, and Parramatta is the poorer for it. Bob Edgar, Moss Vale
Vivid lowlights
I’ve always found Vivid the best of Sydney, with creative sculptures and installations showcasing our beautiful harbour (“After last year’s drone show disaster, is a scaled-back Vivid working?” smh.com.au, June 1). But over recent years, it seems that money has got in the way of art. Last year we had charging far too much for the Botanic Garden displays. This year, there aren’t enough installations around Circular Quay, which should be the festival’s focal point. It is a bit boring, I’m sad to say. Next to the MCA, there are banks of food trucks, blocking the view to historic Cadman’s Cottage, which in the past used to be lit up. I don’t really see the need to expand the festival for miles through the city. It’s just too far to walk. Have a separate food festival, but please, keep Vivid all about light. Karen Mould, Maroubra
Vivid: Is it all that it could be?Credit: Sitthixay Ditthavong
Vivid organisers have missed the point. Concentrating the display creates excitement. Diffusion causes confusion, anticlimax and disappointment. It’s the same as comparing Melbourne’s vibrant Southbank entertainment district with Sydney. We have as much as Melbourne – five major theatres, two art galleries and concert halls, and two museums if you count the Powerhouse, but scattered over four square kilometres, they seem like lonely islands in a sea of skyscrapers. Vivid has no excuse. Peter Farmer, Northbridge
Hume must step up
Jane Hume is fond of reminding us how hard she worked and how high her public profile was during the recent federal election (“Hurt Hume channels mum’s advice: get on with the job”, May 31). She’s right about the profile bit, but she seems to have conveniently forgotten that whatever her messages were during those countless appearances on breakfast television, they were not heeded by the electorate. The work-from-home fiasco alone should have been enough to disqualify her from the shadow ministry. Time to clutch your pearls, Jane, and embrace responsibility. Donna Wiemann, Balmain
Rising levels, rising costs
Taree - how much more can it take?Credit: AFR
The record floods in many parts of Australia recently are, in part, an unfortunate consequence of global warming (“When Taree floods again, locals ask will they survive it”, May 31). Apart from the warmer oceans and atmosphere generating increased rainfall, the coast and its riverine hinterland suffer from rising sea levels. Taree, for example, is close to the ocean, where the average sea level has risen about 20 centimetres since the 1929 record flood, thus contributing about half the additional flood level above the previous record. The increased premiums experienced by all home owners, and particularly for victims of floods and bushfires, are a reflection of insurance companies accounting for circumstances exacerbated by climate change. Given the inevitable escalation of such threats, governments at all levels will be unable to afford buybacks and, for example, seawall construction. Indeed, if any entity should be contributing to these costs, it should be fossil fuel industries, which are profiting from environmental disaster. Roger Epps, Armidale
Won’t stand for it
Could I say to your correspondent (Letters, May 31), regarding trains and bicycles: They weren’t thinking. It’s not only bikes without a stow spot, it’s people with luggage, even cabin luggage on intercity trains – people have to put their bags on seats as you can’t stow them overhead or under seats. Not helpful when you’re elderly and get on at Strathfield to a full train. Even on suburban trains it’s tricky travelling from the airport – two people with two large suitcases takes up one side of the section ends of carriages. Trains need an extra carriage added, or a luggage carriage. But the government won’t do that as it’s more costly. Meanwhile, the public suffers. Gail Grogan, Toongabbie
Imminent danger
When you look at the aerial view of the valley that once contained the village of Blatten (“Villagers in shock after mountain collapse”, May 31), it isn’t the only village in danger from the glacier above, and the Coalition still argues about abandoning net zero by 2050 – just code for climate change denial. Peter Kamenyitzky, Castle Hill
Blow a Trumpet
Your mother was a what?Credit: International Union for the Conservative Nature
I absolutely loved Nick Bryant’s article, particularly with its online headline (“MAGA v the monarch: Is King Charles blowing royal raspberries at Trump?” , smh.com.au, May 31). It instantly conjured up the image of King Charles using the riposte “Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries”. Jo Rainbow, Orange
- 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.