Buttrose should have waited

Of course the ABC has a progressive bias

I am pleased with the appointment of Ita Buttrose as chairwoman of the ABC, but she needs to be there for a while before commenting, incorrectly, that “there is no bias at the ABC?” Get your feet under the table before making untrue and naive comments, Ita. There is serious bias everywhere in the ABC. Much success otherwise.

Keith S. Bales, Bibra Lake, WA

Another ABC chairwoman and another claim of no bias at the national broadcaster because 80 per cent say there is no bias and trust their news from the ABC more than any other source. When quoting a percentage to prove your point, it usually means it is from a tiny group or the poll was selective. We are doomed to keep paying for this green/Left staff collective until we have a chair and MD who have read and enforce the charter, irrespective of the consequences.

Don Spence, Ashmore, Qld

Why did the Government, again, ignore the proper process and recommendations of the panel and go for another “captain’s pick”?

Margaret Ludowyk, Brunswick, Vic

Sound judgment

A recent article by Henry Ergas (“Rocky Hill decision tarnishes rule of law”, 22/2) concerning a decision by the NSW Land and Environment Court on the Rocky Hill coalmine contains what the Judicial Conference of Australia considers a number of serious unsubstantiated allegations against a judge.

It is the view of the JCA that the article claims a sitting judge has not dispassionately applied the law but started from the premise that coalmining is undesirable, effectively pre-judging the case. It ends by implying the judge’s reasons for the decision are not his real reasons, but rather “figleaves” designed to cover up the judge’s own biases, prejudices and personal commitments.

This allegation would be a grave breach of the judge’s duties if it were true, and to have this published without evidence in a national newspaper is very disappointing.

The JCA takes no issue with people in the community debating judges’ decisions and criticising them if they wish. That is what reasons are for — so people can follow the reasoning process (and criticise it if they find it wanting). But the article in question went much further than that.

The JCA is most concerned that serious allegations of impropriety and dishonesty have been made against a judge for which the author has offered no basis other than the fact that he doesn’t like the logic of the judge’s reasoning.

Justice Judith Kelly, president,
Judicial Conference of Australia

Poor or dead

I have a question for KPMG senior partner Paul Howes regarding his opinion (“Howes accuses ‘both sides’ of super failure”, 27/2), or is it both his and KPMG’s opinion, that politicians should legislate the purpose of superannuation. He suggests that enshrining the objective of super would help prevent savings being used as a vehicle for intergenerational wealth transfer, stating, “At the end of the day, their account balance should be zero (at death)”. This opinion raises many questions, including how politicians can determine just when those with super are going to die? Without this answer many will be without sufficient funds for God knows how long while having to rely on a pension,

Laurence Jones, Caloundra, Qld

Unlike minds

Chris Kenny is right to draw attention to a worrying polarisation in our society (“Those gloating over jury verdict quick to attribute guilt by association”, 28/2). But he is wrong to denigrate Q&A for what he sees as bias against Jordan Peterson. That program deserves high praise for its spirited discussion among panellists with widely divergent viewpoints.

Terence Hewton, Henley South, SA