Credit: Cathy Wilcox
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@theage.com.au. Please include your home address and telephone number. No attachments, please include your letter in the body of the email. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published.
Ross Gittins is spot on in shredding the major political parties’ policies and performance on climate change (Comment, 9/4). As he says, climate change and energy prices are closely related but, in this election campaign, it’s all smoke and mirrors. With the planet heading inexorably to dangerous ″climate tipping points″, climate change is still surely the biggest issue facing Australians, of all generations. Nevertheless, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton plans burning huge quantities of additional gas until the first nuclear power station arrives ″a decade or two from now″. To regain some credibility, he might be better off – even at this late stage – switching his support to renewables and changing their slogan to ″Get THE CLIMATE back on track″. As for Labor, they are only marginally better; they clearly know what has to be done yet still subsidise the fossil fuel giants and still approve new coal and gas projects. It seems Australians’ best chance for strong climate action lies with independents achieving the balance of power. Given the big parties’ lazy approach to this critically important issue, neither the LNP nor Labor deserve the trust to govern in their own right.
Rob Firth, Red Hill, ACT
Nuclear reactors oranges and apples
Some people say that because the Lucas Heights OPAL reactor is safe, Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) must be safe too. But this comparison isn’t fair. OPAL is a small research reactor, producing isotopes for medical needs, not designed or used for electricity generation. It operates at low power and is built for safety. Construction began in 2002 and completed in 2007. However, its construction shows how nuclear projects can be complex and costly. Initially budgeted at $286.4 million, the final cost rose to about $474.817 million. SMRs are different; they’re built to produce electricity on a larger scale and come with different risks. We should judge each technology on its own merits, not compare them directly. David Milner, Port Melbourne
Every home should have solar
Electricity should be produced where it’s used, eliminating the need for expensive power lines from far distant wind and solar farms and coal power plants (Gittins, Comment). Every home should have solar panels, and there should be sufficient batteries in towns and cities to store surplus electricity during the day to use at night. Wayne Robinson, Kingsley
Reform of tax mechanisms is needed
Once again Ross Gittins explains the bleeding obvious in relation to the convoluted issues around energy. The fact that no royalties are paid on the 56 per cent of gas that we export is outrageous and especially since most of the companies are foreign owned. Now Peter Dutton is suggesting that they should be taxed, which is welcome, but ironic considering that the Abbott government in 2014 overturned the Minerals Resource Rent Tax that levied 30 per cent of the super profits from the mining of iron ore and coal. This model could, and should, have been extended to all resources for the benefit of Australians. Imagine what could have been done with the millions of forgone income in education, childcare, aged care and health as well as support to small business. Denise Stevens, Healesville
Look to Saudi Arabia
Peter Dutton wants us to think that more gas ″is critical to our nation’s energy future″ (″Dutton pledge to cut gas, power prices″, 9/4) Saudi Arabia has four times our gas reserves and last year generated 67 per cent of its electricity from gas and 33 per cent from oil. Only 0.2 per cent came from renewables. But their Vision 2030 economic plan specifies that they will use less gas, not more; they want half their power to be renewable by 2030. Like Saudi Arabia, we have abundant renewable as well as fossil energy resources and live in a country very vulnerable to climate change. Maybe we too should focus on unlocking the less dangerous resources. Lesley Walker, Northcote
THE FORUM
Reassess alliance
Australia has long stood beside America in every battle and war, including the controversial conflicts in Vietnam and Iraq. While this alliance has shaped our history, it is time to critically evaluate its impact on our future.
The presence of Pine Gap, a joint intelligence facility, gives America strategic eyes. However, it also makes Australia a prime nuclear target in the event of global conflict. This is a risk we cannot afford to ignore.
Economically, our relationship is imbalanced. We import more American goods than we export, and recent actions — such as President Donald Trump’s disregard for our free trade agreement — highlight the fragility of this partnership. With friends like these, who needs enemies?
Australia would be better served by fostering mature relationships with the European Union and China, focusing on mutual respect and shared growth. Closing access to Pine Gap would be a significant step towards redefining our sovereignty and security.
Australia does not need to resort to tit-for-tat tariffs; instead, our citizens are mature enough to choose not to support American goods in our stores. The future of Australia should be built on equitable and respectful partnerships, rather than being weighed down by antiquated alliances and coercive tactics from supposed friends. It is time for our leaders to remind the United States about the significance of Pine Gap.
Jeff Cartwright, Montmorency
Pipedreams and politics
Two weeks into the election campaign and surprise, surprise, the major parties have identified cost of living as the main issue. Both parties are promoting their financial management credentials but fail to clearly articulate solutions. The likelihood of either party being able to solve the problems facing the electorate is a pipedream.
But in this increasingly mad world, what has likelihood got to do with anything?
Peter Roche, Carlton
Trying to find meaning
Your correspondent (Letters, 9/4) rightly implies that a mere $5 tax cut will be meaningless once it comes into effect in July next year. As a pensioner, I can add that the $4.60 indexation increase we received is also meaningless. By my calculations, my $4.60 will have to cover about $2000 in essential expenditure increases this year, above last year’s expenditure on the same essentials. The Age provides excellent financial advice, so I wonder if someone could tell me how to make that work?
Helen Moss, Croydon
Wanted: bold ideas
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is obviously aiming for a repeat of Bill Shorten’s 2016 election campaign. While Labor just failed to win in 2016, the mother of all scare campaigns around Medicare proved hugely effective. Medicare, a Hawke government modernisation of the original Whitlam government reform, has long been accepted by all sides of politics and is safe regardless of who wins the election. What Australians need is bold new ideas on how to keep Australia safe and solvent in the 21st century. Scare campaigns may work but they ultimately act against the national interest through their listless cynicism.
Peter Curtis, Werribee South
Merit where it’s due
Ross Gittins’ analysis of the political argy-bargy about energy costs (Comment, 9/4) offers a breath of fresh air in place of the gas that’s so misleadingly called natural. As always, he’s clear and cogent, yet he could have been even more telling.
The Australia Institute research he cites to show that 56 per cent of our gas exports yield no royalties also reveals that nurses pay more tax than oil and gas companies. That’s a scandalous indictment of our economic policy-makers. He could also have elaborated on why Labor’s battery-subsidy scheme will benefit everyone, not just those who can afford the combination of roof-top solar and home battery. In short, it reduces the peak-hour demand that sends wholesale prices skyrocketing and ends up costing battlers disproportionately. He might also have pointed out the short odds on battery efficiency rising and cost falling. All in all, Labor’s proposal has more merit than what he calls an ″electoral bribe″.
Tom Knowles, Parkville
Australia, look elsewhere
Although the federal government is in caretaker mode, it is pleasing that the Treasurer Jim Chalmers has called an emergency meeting with officials and that the trade minister is seeking to reopen negotiations on a free trade pact with the European Union (″Chalmers to hold talks over Trump tariff chaos″, 9/4). It is also good that both Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton have ruled out Australia introducing any tariffs on US goods in retaliation to Donald Trump’s destructive tariff increases. Such retaliation would be pure economic folly, causing increased inflation here and probably further tariff ″punishment″ by the US.
Australia should be very active in the World Trade Organisation and other forums in urging all countries to avoid tit-for-tat tariff measures against the US, which would only heighten the risk of the world falling into recession. The rest of the world should leave the US to endure the harm that it is creating for its own economy, and Australia should embark on developing closer trade ties with other nations and blocs, built upon free trade principles.
Andrew Trembath, Blackburn
‘Bicycle streets’ an option
I read with a certain level of shock at the residents’ desire to keep the Boulevard dilapidated (″Why locals are fighting to keep the potholes on this dilapidated road″, 9/4). As someone who lost a sibling due to a cycling accident caused by being thrown from their bike by a pothole, I am concerned that all they are doing is putting people’s lives at risk. Notwithstanding the need for emergency services and council services to be able to use the road.
However, there is something to be said for ensuring a street is not a thoroughfare and is a community space. So how do we marry the two? Look to Europe where there are designated ″bicycle streets″; the main road is a cycle lane, yet it’s still wide enough for traffic but the speed limit and other structures turn motorists into ″guests″. Bicycle streets are intentionally designed to treat bicycle traffic as superior to motor vehicles. It’s time we looked at how we use our roads and prioritise pedal (or foot) power. Our children will thank us.
Philippa Elder, Armadale
Ta for that
What a delightful diversion from Donald Trump’s demolition of the global economy to see the residents of the Boulevard declining the option to get their potholes fixed. I’m sure others can suggest many alternative potholes that would benefit from a shovel load of bitumen.
Fiona White, Alfredton
Is gravel the answer?
Regarding the paving of the Boulevard: I dream of living on a quiet country-style lane with no kerbs or street lights but still within the city area for the best of both worlds. There are a few ″country lane″ gems still tucked away in Melbourne and may they never change. Garbage trucks have to manage in the country, so they can manage here too. It’s ironic that when people are begging for the proper resurfacing of the Melba Highway, which is a genuine danger, nothing happens. How about a gravel surface in the Boulevard to fix the pot holes but retain the rural feel.
When there is a majority of residents, they should have the final say.
Julie Christensen, Blackburn North
Childhood lost to war
Re the article ″ ‘They want to destroy us’: anguish as city buries its children killed in strike″ (9/4), I am struck by the comparison of the pictures of the children in Ukraine and the children playing in the piece ″Desert springs back to life″ (9/4). Childhood should be a time of innocence, not war and young lives destroyed.
It seems unimaginable that a playground becomes a graveyard for them. Chris Hedges’ book The Greatest Evil is War is a testimony to the tragedy, especially for the impact on children wherever war is raging.
Judith Morrison, Nunawading
Ready, set . . .
If and when it comes time to panic, is someone in authority going to tell us (Editorial, 9/4)?
Tony O’Brien, South Melbourne
It’s not show and tell
It would be refreshing to hear something of substance from our leaders rather than their current ″here is my show bag″ approach to the future leadership and direction of our country.
One would think we now know enough about where Donald Trump and his mates are headed for the leaders to be saying something clearer about their trade policy and national security position in ″the new world order″.
Is there a point of difference that might have an impact on our future that we should know about?
Charles Griss, Balwyn
Puzzling trade
Why if we export large quantities of beef to the US should we import any from them under any conditions? And they want us to take beef they have already imported from Canada and Mexico. I don’t understand this type of international trade.
Ruth Hudnott, Canterbury
Hot, cross and in hell
My great auntie Bub used to tell us we’d go to Hell if we ate hot cross buns before Good Friday. I’m still a wee bit hesitant to do so.
Gabrielle Gardner, Montmorency
AND ANOTHER THING
The election
All the commentators are doing it, but what’s the point of asking Labor and Liberal politicians who they think won the debate?
Ron Mather, Melbourne
Albanese and Dutton in head-to-head talks. Would have been better for them to have ″heart-to-heart″ talks.
Myra Fisher, Brighton East
Why was the first leaders debate not shown on free-to-air TV? Voters need to be informed to make an informed decision in voting. Why should they have to pay to get this information?
Doug Springall, Yarragon
Furthermore
The Americans who voted for Donald Trump last November have a lot to answer for, given the financial crisis that the world is encountering at present.
Steve Barrett, Glenbrook
The scary thing is the same person wreaking havoc on global trade, economies, sharemarkets and global alliances has the codes to launch nuclear weapons.
David Lowe, Caulfield North
I guess we should be grateful that Donald Trump has merely ignited a trade war, and not a real war.
Matthew Hamilton, Kew
What sort of morality allows a country to uncaringly destroy the prosperity of the rest of the world to enrich itself?
Malcolm McDonald, Burwood
In the next trade period can Victoria trade its premier Jacinta Allan for South Australia’s premier Peter Malinauskas?
Richard Sykes, Bell Park
I beg to disagree with your correspondent (Letters, 9/4). Mixed peel (or ″candied citrus″) is an essential ingredient in a traditional hot cross bun. Unfortunately many bakers omit it.
Caroline Leslie, Hawthorn
Finally
We’ll sadly never know what true cricketing greatness we missed with the retirement of Will Pucovski.
Ian Macdonald, Traralgon