Europe, US proof immigration looms as decisive election issue

Peter Dutton may well consider recalibrating our trajectory to net zero and backing the inception of a nuclear industry to attract some voters but maybe there is lower-hanging fruit on offer.

Anti-immigration sentiments are on the rise in Europe, the UK, the US and here. Recent EU elections saw a surge in right-wing parties promising to slash immigration experiencing big gains. This prompted France’s President Emmanuel Macron to call snap elections.

In the UK, Nigel Farage, the former Brexit campaigner, has re-entered the political scene. Ahead of the upcoming elections, he is advocating an anti-immigration stance, with polling suggesting his Reform Party might draw many votes away from Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. Meanwhile, in the US, the influx of migrants from Mexico looms large as a pivotal election issue for Joe Biden and Donald Trump.

While migration has historically driven Australia’s prosperity, many voters might believe it’s time for a reassessment. Reducing migrant numbers may have economic costs but it could help alleviate housing pressures amid skills shortages.

Unchecked migration threatens our social fabric, and Australia needs to explore alternative avenues to foster growth and meet budgetary needs.

John Kempler, Rose Bay, NSW

Poll alliance risks

Peter Dutton says the Liberals must and can win back teal seats (“Dutton has zero chance on targets”, 13/6).

The teals shall be contesting additional Liberal-held seats and are a major threat to the stability of the two-party system that has prevailed in the lower house for so long.

A Labor minority government supported by Greens and teals is a distinct possibility, especially as the teals are backed by vested interests in the renewables industry and reject a key Coalition policy, the lifting of the ban on nuclear power.

Voters who support the teals might also consider the damage a Labor-Greens government could inflict, changing the nation and certainly putting our national security alliances at high risk. All because our preferential voting system can be ruthlessly exploited to facilitate the election of candidates who fail to win the primary vote.

David Burt, Quindalup, WA

Much is being made of the quandary Labor and the Greens are in, considering the placement of preferences in the coming federal election.

Despite all the chest-beating by both parties, there is only one pathway each party can go down. Labor will preference the Greens and the Greens will preference Labor. Neither party would ever contemplate preferencing the Coalition or any of the other parties. So it all boils down now for the changes to be made to our voting system.

First past the post would definitely not get considered. However, I believe a strong case could be made for optional preferential voting.

That way a voter’s number one vote will go to that person’s preferred candidate and no preferences means that their ballot will not find its way to a party that they do not want it to go to.

This would put an end to voting whisperers.

Peter D. Surkitt, Sandringham, Vic

Focus on our wellbeing

Australia will never return to energy sanity while we persist in pandering to an unelected organisation that is ideologically driven in some insane quest to control nature (“Money talks and no one walks in Paris Agreement” 12/6).

It is time to abandon the centralisation of electricity generation and return to a state-run system where each state takes responsibility for its needs and cut out the huge politically driven energy bureaucracy that has arisen over the past 25 years, with disastrous results.

We have the ECMC run by Energy Minister Chris Bowen and comprising energy ministers from each state and territory, (and, strangely, New Zealand), the AER, the AEMC and AEMO, who have the unenviable job of trying to keep the lights on as the grid creaks and groans.

The surest way to guarantee nothing will happen is to give the problem to a committee to solve.

Our leaders are responsible for the wellbeing of Australian citizens. Let others manage for themselves rather than have us destroy our standard of living to satisfy the UN.

David Bidstrup, Plympton Park, SA

Hostage rescue cost

If it is true that the rescue of four Israeli hostages cost the lives of 250 Palestinians, then Hamas has a ready-made formula to calculate how many Palestinian lives it can save – around 6000 by my calculations – by releasing the remaining hostages.

It was a war crime to take them in the first place.

Peter Davidson, Ashgrove, Qld