How many times do we have to read stories about the NSW government’s failure to deliver the Great Koala National Park (“The government promised a koala national park. Then the loggers moved in”, November 10)? When will we see the environment minister, Penny Sharpe, step up and do what was promised and what must be done, in curtailing the destructive work of the Forestry Corporation? Sharpe says nothing, the premier says nothing, but the destruction of the forests continues unrestricted. It’s a continuing disgrace and we should all hold the minister and the premier accountable for their inaction and the resultant destruction of our forests and our koala population.
Stuart Laurence, Cammeray
Clearcut forest in Clouds Creek in 2022, within the area proposed to be part of the Great Koala National Park.Credit: Paul Hilton / Earth Tree Images
The Great Koala National Park has a nice ring to it. Outrageously, it’s a furphy. Promised into existence by our NSW government many years ago, this pledge has been itself trashed, just like the forests it seeks to encompass. While the policy is being “formulated”, the NSW Forestry Corporation is beavering away, grabbing as much timber as possible afforded by this loophole, leaving forests in the assessment area essentially bare and koala-free. Another Rome is burning as Chris Minns ponders and this wonderfully unique Australian icon fades into the sunset. How can we let this happen in our name?
Judy Finch, Taree
Public pays for private tradition
The Independent Education Union wants to maintain its “traditional premium” and charge 3 per cent more than public schools for their teachers (“Sydney private school fees to increase by as much as 9 per cent”, November 10). And they expect the public to help fund this luxury simply because it’s their tradition? Why should the public give them money when public school teachers are paid less? Let private schools pay 3 per cent more, but only on the condition that public funding is reduced by the same amount.
David McMaster, Mosman
Apparently there is one thing they don’t teach in private schools and that is belt-tightening.
Eric Sekula, Turramurra
Legislation v disinformation
David Swan rightly identifies Elon Musk’s role in Trump’s victory as both financial and, probably more importantly, disinformation on X (“For $US130m, Musk bought himself a spot in Trump’s inner circle. But what exactly has he gained?”, November 10). He and other tech billionaires will benefit from market deregulation. Musk rightly identified Trump as a super-effective spreader of lies adding to social media’s and influencers’ role in this. Meanwhile, governments elsewhere struggle to legislate against disinformation. Who will win?
Gary Barnes, Mosman
It is extraordinary that in the US, a country which developed the incredibly effective mRNA vaccines which saved countless lives during the COVID epidemic and continue to provide protection, an anti-vaxxer and proponent of health misinformation could be placed in charge of public health (The Herald’s View, November 10). The removal of fluoride from US drinking water, against expert advice, will likely be the first destructive decision. There is no reason Australia should follow the US example. In contrast to the US, with the appointment of competent, well-informed government health ministers there is no possibility Australia’s excellent record on health and vaccination will be put at risk.
Geoff Harding, Chatswood
Choice provides balance
Peter FitzSimons’ interview with Simon Holmes a Court discusses the impact of the US election on Australia (“Simon Holmes à Court: Dutton has ‘localised Trumpian tactics to Australian tastebuds’”, November 10) In both America and Australia about one-third of eligible voters vote for the two major parties. The big difference is that in America the other one-third don’t vote whilst in Australia, due to compulsory voting, those votes go to teals, independents, Greens, One Nation etc. Particularly in our Senate, it means that the major parties don’t achieve complete control and there is balance. In the US Trump will have the Reps and the Senate on side; he will have close to absolute control.
Steven Lee, Faulconbridge
What part of the word “no” is so hard to understand? No, Climate 200 does not target teal candidates or have any input into issues as Simon Holmes a Court repeatedly stated. I am proud to be one of the 11,200 donors who contributed to Climate 200’s support of community-backed independents at the previous federal election. Independent MPs don’t have the luxury of major party funds, but their constituents have the luxury of knowing that every vote by their MP is a conscience vote in line with community values, not just toeing a party line.
Joy Nason, Mona Vale
A Commons misconception
Parnell Palme McGuinness’ opinion piece postulates that if the American colonies had remained under the British crown, then a Trump presidency would have been impossible (“US War of Independence was a mistake. Consider Trump and be grateful for our King”, November 10). This seems to be based on the common misconception that the monarchy was responsible for the decades or centuries of relative political stability in Britain.
That honour should largely go to the British parliament, in particular the House of Commons and its prime ministers, with the monarchy just the decorative cherry on the cake. So in America, a ceremonial non-executive president, no matter exactly how they are elected, would be the solution.
Herman Beyersdorf, Bangalee
- To submit a letter to The Sun-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.