Aussies need to be proud of us

The Australia Institute does patriotism differently

Casting around in 1993 for a name to give the new think tank, I checked ASIC records and was delighted to find no one had registered “The Australia Institute”. So I grabbed it. Chris Kenny (“Patriots can’t hate nation’s top export”, 9-10/2) is outraged that a think tank bearing such a name could be so “unpatriotic” as to advise other nations against investing in Australian coal mines.

Kenny’s nativist, beggar-thy-neighbour idea of patriotism is not one of the founders of the institute. We thought we could be prouder of our country if it acted as a good global citizen. Sadly, Australia’s reputation in this regard has been trashed because of our repeated failure at international climate conferences to do the right thing by the world's poor and vulnerable.

I’m so pleased to see the Australia Institute under the leadership of Richard Denniss and Ben Oquist pursue the institute’s goal of allowing Australians to feel proud when we walk the world’s stage.

Clive Hamilton, Manuka, ACT

Narcissistic threat

Having been “down under” for the first time over the past week, I must say that The Australian strikes me as the equal of the three best US newspapers. I especially appreciate your opinion pages’ civil, cogent back-and-forth reflecting both liberal and conservative views. That said, Greg Sheridan's piece “Greatest showman on earth keeps his foes on their toes” (9-10/2) provokes my reply as an American who fears the far-reaching threats posed by Donald Trump's unhinged reality-show governance.

  Sure, when he sticks to his handlers’ well-crafted speeches, Trump can come off as prudent, even presidential. But most of the time he reveals himself to be a cynical political triangulator who’s long on optics and short on substance. If such a narcissistic scammer somehow manages to win re-election, our democracy — and others around the globe — may not survive his inept reign.

Edward Alston, Santa Maria, US

By royal decree

Chris Merritt (“Power to probe comes with risks”, 9-10/2) has done well to point out that Kenneth Hayne's royal commission lined up the banks as sitting ducks by demanding they provide written details of all their misdeeds. Witnesses were required by a young barrister, feted by a cheering media, to admit to offences they had already helpfully documented. Whether this gave an accurate picture of Australian banking, was entirely fair to witnesses who had no right of reply or played up unduly to the nightly news is arguable. What is certain is that, after the destruction of the NAB chairman and his chief executive, the precedent has been set. When a royal commissioner says “Bow down”, the only acceptable response is “How low?”

Geoffrey Luck, Killara, NSW

Abandoning children

I refer to your story “Awful truth couldn’t save Case 6” (9-10/2). In the northwest of Western Australia are many caring families fostering at-risk indigenous children. The families are both indigenous and white. But when a white family seeks long-term guardianship of such children, it faces immense obstacles due to a fixation on keeping them within their communities, culture and country. It doesn’t seem to matter that the children are safe, healthy, and much loved by the fostering family. And it doesn’t seem to matter that the communities and culture to which they might be returned are often seriously dysfunctional.

It’s a form of reverse racism, this compunction to return children to harm’s way simply because they are indigenous. And it’s creating another stolen generation: a generation of children without a voice as their childhood, innocence and very futures are stolen from them.

John Quilty, Warnbro, WA