‘Inappropriate touching’ is no worse than invading someone’s personal space

It seems the former ABC chairman simply invaded Michelle Guthrie’s personal space.

Who remembers the “Lizard of Oz”, the British media’s description of Paul Keating after “inappropriate touching” of the Queen in 1992?

The conjecture about former ABC chairman Justin Milne’s “inappropriate touching” of former ABC managing director Michelle Guthrie is that he may simply have breached a non-contact rule by invading her personal space. It can also be seen as a gesture of power and contempt by a man denigrating the “little woman”. If this is the case, I can relate to Guthrie’s outrage. However, in this climate of #MeToo, has the speculative interpretation been an over-reaction?

Sandra Reynolds, Fulham, SA

The ABC is in serious turmoil. It seems that every day brings a new and negative occurrence at the public broadcaster. Allegations are flying around like flies on a rubbish dump. Accusations of bias and unbalanced reporting have moved into the background amid what is occurring in the wake of Michelle Guthrie’s sacking.

By running a Four Corners program on itself, the ABC seems to have widened the cracks in the internal structure of the organisation. Our ABC is quickly becoming a basket case, and if it was a privately run entity there would be most serious questions asked by shareholders.

Peter D. Surkitt, Sandringham, Vic

Justice surrendered

An independent review of NSW state MP Jeremy Buckingham found there was no evidence of any wrongdoing in relation to sexual harassment claims brought by fellow Greens MP Jenny Leong. Yet despite the lack of evidence, Buckingham is being pressured to resign. This pressure extends all the way to federal Greens leader Richard Di Natale.

Should Buckingham capitulate, Australians will be demonstrating that natural justice has now surrendered to subjective complaint. It will no longer rest on whether you have, by some objective measure, assaulted anyone but whether the plaintiff feels that you have.

Despite the desire to find equality between the sexes in the workplace, this new social maxim is going to bring about the opposite effect. Male employees will have no choice but to eschew as much as possible their business and social interactions with women lest they too are tarred by this purely subjective measure of guilt.

Graham Hood, Green Point, NSW

Plebiscite caper

Thomas Keneally forgets that the 1999 republican campaign was as close to bipartisan as it could be. You could have counted the number of federal Liberal MPs who were active constitutional monarchists on your fingers. Fortunately, three ministers, all sound and capable, were closely involved in the engine room of the No case. Although a monarchist, John Howard properly stood above the fray to ensure the process was fair to both sides. Republicans know a second referendum would be disastrous, hence the plebiscite caper. It won’t work; Australians are not fools.

David Flint, Bondi Beach, NSW

Nuclear potential

I agree with Jim Molan (“We can’t ignore our unique nuclear opportunity”, 13/11). Cheap energy is essential to the security of any nation and uranium could provide us with good value for money and smokeless energy for centuries.

But we should understand the incredible potential of nuclear energy. For example, 1kg of uranium is required to achieve the same task as 14 tonnes of coal. And if one solar panel produces only 500 watts, then 2000 solar panels would be required to produce 1MW. So, if a modern coal-fired power station produces 2000MW, then 4 million solar panels would be required to replace one coal-fired power station. Is this really as sustainable as the industry claims it to be?

Stephen Miller, Rutherford, NSW