While I agree that the sacking of Ed Husic and Mark Dreyfus from the frontbench was not a good look (“Cloud hangs over PM’s ministry”, May 12), one has only to look back a short time to remember the corrosive factional brawls that occurred during the last Labor years that created so much instability that it appalled us all. After the terribly damaging Rudd-Gillard-Rudd fiasco, Bill Shorten and Anthony Albanese sat down and mapped out a plan to ensure smooth succession of leadership as well as factional balance in the caucus. Rejuvenation and rotation can be healthy and helpful. Bear in mind, too, that factional brawling is not limited to Labor. Just look at what is happening on the conservative side right now with (so called) moderates led by Sussan Ley for the Liberals and David Littleproud of the Nationals being challenged by hard-right factions led by Angus Taylor and Matt Canavan, respectively. Politics is a brutal business that (hopefully) extracts the best talent available. Tony Bennett, Broke
Everyone should know that politics is a vicious business, and no one should believe it will be otherwise. Do you think if Husic or Dreyfus had been the PM and deputy PM, they wouldn’t be doing the same? Of course they would be looking at the new members and thinking: “Boy, do we have some fantastic new talent on our team”. For those who are sympathetic towards various members who “miss out”, just remember there is now a significant number of members who could do the same job as Husic and Dreyfus. Remember, too, the breakdown of female to male Labor members is now over 50 per cent for women. Some of the blokes might have to miss out. Bruce Thompson, Long Jetty
Credit: Cathy Wilcox
The Amish say you must always leave a tiny flaw in any piece of work, “lest you think you are God”. Was this the imperative that drove the leadership to demote two hard-working and respected members of the cabinet so soon after the joy of the election win? If so, their dropped stitch has resulted in a rather nasty hole. Robyn Cashman, Fernhill
Dreyfus and Husic served Australia well in their ministries, but also demonstrated diversity of views within that ministry. If Marles prefers factional appointments over the national interest, let us hope he never becomes prime minister. Let’s also hope the PM finds roles for Husic and Dreyfus. Ainslie Lamb, East Corrimal
Hear, hear for Voice #2
Sean Kelly reminds us of former opposition leader Peter Dutton’s refusal to offer bipartisan support for the very modest Indigenous Voice to parliament (“Dutton’s defeat busts many myths”, May 12). One of the other questionable “myths” has been that a new government cannot do something it hadn’t signalled before the election. Of course it can, and with Albanese’s historic majority, he should work with the new opposition leader collaboratively to revisit the Voice. Just as you and Treasurer Jim Chalmers decided to abandon your earlier promise to retain the unfair stage 3 tax cuts. You did it because it was the right thing, and people accepted that. Every year, you and other parliamentarians solemnly deplore the appalling “Closing the Gap” statistics, with no real solutions in sight, so the Voice remains an urgent issue that must be resolved, preferably during this term. Rob Firth, Red Hill (ACT)
Despite the question of who was responsible for starting and spreading the narrative about “unity”, and what the consequences were of accepting it, there is the issue of what unity the Coalition settled on. Holding the Coalition together might be seen as a good thing, but if its unified offering appeals to only a minority of the population, then it won’t get them elected. Ideally, they want to broaden their appeal so they are attractive to the majority of the electorate, while still remaining unified. Much as Labor has done, at least until the latest factional split. If the Coalition can’t encompass diversified opinions while remaining unified, so be it. Better to try and achieve some kind of unity after the election than prioritise limited unity beforehand. David Rush, Lawson
Canavan’s blind spot
Your correspondent (Letters, May 12) extols the virtues and talents of Senator Matt Canavan and suggests he would make a good leader of the Nationals. While Canavan is talented, his failure to recognise the scientific fact that our world is suffering from the effects of climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions puts him firmly in the company of other troglodytes in that party. While Canavan correctly accuses David Littleproud of dodging the issue by putting it off into the never-never with his nuclear proposal, the senator wants to dig up yet more coal and exacerbate our pollution problems. He may be a “rare talent”, but with such a huge blind spot regarding science, he is not the leader the Nationals need. Peter Nash, Fairlight
Coalition leadership
The Coalition appears to have learnt nothing from its trouncing at the recent election (“Shock contender to lead Libs emerges”, May 12). It remains out of touch – a men’s club of head-kickers, clinging to outdated tactics and far removed from the party Menzies founded as a centre-right alternative. Ley stands out as a strong, intelligent politician who represents a fresh and relevant path forward, but the party seems unwilling to evolve. If the Liberals install Angus Taylor – brash, unpolished and emblematic of old-guard politics – they may hammer the final nail into their coffin. Marina Cardillo, Beecroft
Angus Taylor and Sussan Ley will contest the Liberal Party leadership.Credit: Joe Armao, James Brickwood
No matter who the Liberal Coalition party chooses to be its leader, we Sydneysiders cannot forget how Angus Taylor publicly told lies about Clover Moore, Lord Mayor of Sydney. Karen Eldridge, Leichhardt
In all the commentary by Coalition politicians and ex-politicians, the most common words I’ve heard are fight, win and battle. It appears their only aim is to gain power. Not a word on policy development, and none have mentioned the words “consult” or “compromise”. No thoughts on anything to benefit Australia or Australians. Jonathan Hornibrook, Newtown
Pressing buttons
It is now over a week since voting day, and nine lower house seats in the parliament (at time of writing) remain in doubt while we await the Senate results to come in some time in the next month. Isn’t it time for the AEC to introduce electronic voting? Algorithms could determine the results in real time. Just have electronic, with postal voting for those who are not technologically literate. Think, too, of the money that would be saved on voting booth corflutes and how-to-vote cards. Dale Bailey, St Leonards
Nuclear deterrent
Given the current games of bluff and counter-bluff in world politics, perhaps it’s time to revisit the debate over whether Australia should have nuclear weapons. Without them, the AUKUS submarines will have no value in deterring a potential invader. Without that deterrence, wars are decided by industrial capacity. At present, only two countries have navies big enough to mount an invasion. We hope they won’t, but hope is not a plan. A single reactor would be sufficient to generate fissile material, but it would immediately become a target, so it would need to be far from the major population centres. Above a granite substrate, such as the north of the Eyre Peninsula in South Australia, or the one under Mount Augustus in Western Australia, might be appropriate locations. Alan Stanley, Upper Corindi
Get up close and personal, GPs
Your correspondent’s (Letters, May 12) criticism of opportunistic corporate medical centres focuses on the potential for doctors to over-service and so pile on their profits at the expense of government funds. But there is another cynical aspect of the profit-making ownership of these places: some doctors have left to create their own surgeries because the companies have demanded an average timed flow-through of patients, no matter the length needed to consult or treat an individual. As with large shopping centres and their tenants, the companies want to take a healthy cut of the doctors’ consultation earnings. It was so heartening recently to ask the receptionist for my doctor if I should book a double appointment for a couple of checks. The receptionist said not to bother; the doctor would take whatever time was necessary to see me or anyone else. A real doctor in a real practice. Donald Hawes, Peel
Your correspondent correctly asks: “Where is the pressure on specialists to bulk-bill?” Large fee gaps make specialist referrals unaffordable for a large and growing proportion of Australians, and waiting times for consultations at public hospital outpatient clinics are unconscionable. The solution must include Commonwealth funding of a major expansion of specialist clinics in the state-run public hospitals. Medicare makes just one core promise to all Australians: no one will be denied access to essential healthcare due to cost, or fear of cost. It never promised that healthcare would be free, nor that it should be. But the promise of equitable access to a GP or specialist is no longer honoured for far too many people. The timing is right for Anthony Albanese to be the prime minister who restored Medicare’s promise, but it will require big-picture reform. It will probably require the abolition of the Commonwealth/state jurisdictional divide in health, which wastes precious resources and underpins unnecessary dysfunction. It is federalism at its worst. The starting point is to re-establish a national health and hospital commission to plan and oversee a major transition. Medicare would return to being Labor’s greatest gift to the nation. Graeme Stewart, Avalon Beach
The medical system is under stress.Credit: Getty
Again GPs are being touted as partners in the government’s attempts to reduce the cost of a GP visit to zero. Each time this is brought up, it is assumed that GPs will lower their fees to fulfil the government’s promises. What is not mentioned is that when a GP lowers the fee, the income is reduced to below the cost of performing the service for the patient, and this is exacerbated if the GP spends longer with a patient with complex medical conditions. It all contrasts with the fees and reimbursements made to other medical specialties. After a patient reaches a threshold in medical costs, such as those to specialists and GPs alike, the Medicare Safety Net kicks in. Here there is no limit to the amount a specialist will charge, and the patient is insulated from the cost by the significant reimbursement of 80 to 100 per cent of the fee under the scheme. A single visit to many specialists will cost upwards of $300 – far exceeding the amount being earned by hard-working GPs, who are the backbone of our health system. This inequitable treatment of GPs compared with other specialists will only end when the cost of specialists is controlled and the pressure on GPs to reduce their own salaries ends. Then more doctors will be encouraged to enter GP practice, where they are sorely needed. Pamela Wood, McMahons Point
What’s to stop overservicing – “You need to come back every day this week so I can check in on you, and don’t worry, it’s free” – asks your correspondent. What’s to stop the GP billing a longer consultation than actually occurred? Graeme Milton, Dulwich Hill
Abortion protest
The protest against the Greens’ abortion bill on May 7 outside state parliament was not a “gathering” (“Liberal leader won’t show hand on abortion”, May 12) but filled Macquarie Street thousands strong. As a midwife, I cannot prescribe antibiotics, but this bill wants me to write scripts for the abortion pill. How does the midwife know the pregnancy’s gestation without an ultrasound? Why are we putting this burden on midwives? We are not the dumping ground for the government; we are there for the women and their families. Karen Childs, Carlingford
Blue-hearted Mountains
It’s sad to read of the rundown state of iconic buildings in Katoomba (Letters, May 12), including the Old Post Office. This was beautifully restored in the mid-1980s when my medical partner and I bought it to establish a health practice – one of the first focusing on women and children’s health. At the time, the Paragon was thriving. Absent landlords and the appalling lack of positive assistance from the heritage council must be major contributors to the demise and lack of restoration of these buildings. Katriona Herborn, Blackheath
The Blue Mountains: not only a natural wonder, but a cultural site too.Credit: ©iStockphoto.com/Chee-Onn LeongSupplied
As someone with a long association with the NSW Heritage Act, I must concur that the heritage system in NSW is broken. The implementation of heritage regulations – often by those who lack building or project management experience – creates unnecessary blocks and delays, frequently to the extent that owners simply give up. The unfortunate outcome is often “demolition by neglect”, or a mysterious fire. Heritage properties cannot exist merely as static museums according to government regulations. To survive, they must pay their way in the 21st century – something entirely possible if owners are not obstructed by rigid ideology and, in some cases, zealotry. Cameron Archer, Bolwarra
To all those day-trippers and tourists complaining about parking fees when visiting our glorious Blue Mountains: how do you think our small population pays for the facilities you expect? If we travel to the beach for the day, or into the city, we expect parking fees that are part of the cost. Catch the train if parking fees get up your noses. Suzanne Laird, Lawson
Privatised airports
Well stated by your correspondent (Letters, May 12). The difference is that Singapore’s Changi airport is government-owned. Wasn’t privatisation a brilliant idea? Ryszard Linkiewicz, Woolooware
- 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.