Ingrained attitudes put the Pell pursuit off course

Greg Sheridan’s critique of our national broadcaster (“ABC’s groupthink on Pell a sin against journalism,” 16/4) rightly alludes to the fact that from the first whiff of impropriety, it was near impossible for George Pell to receive a fair trial.

The central reasons that the national broadcaster took a “Get Pell” attitude, similar to the Victorian authorities, is because this media behemoth has ingrained streaks of anti-conservatism, anti-clericalism and anti-Christianity. Indeed, everything that Catholicism stands for are essentially anathema to the ABC. There was the also the convenient factor of guilt by association: how could a friend of Tony Abbott be anything but an enemy of the state?

No one wants to deny the evil that has been committed against vulnerable children under the warped guises of pastoral care and spiritual ministry, but the Cardinal was portrayed as if it was the whole institution, rather than an individual, on trial.

Peter Waterhouse, Craigieburn VIC

Considering there has only ever been one inquiry into the ABC since 1932, the pursuit of George Pell presents an opportunity to dismiss the board and managing director and install an ABC czar to drive the required change. The czar would have unfettered powers to restructure the organisation and force it to comply with its charter. At the end, the appointment of an actual journalist like Greg Sheridan as managing director would be no bad thing.

Jim Ball, Narrabeen, NSW

Daniel Andrews is steaming with indignation, John Faine lost his customary objectivity, Louise Milligan is discredited while Andrew Bolt is gloating but still cynical about the judiciary.

Reading Greg Sheridan’s article convinces me more than ever that we all trust the justice system as long as its decisions please us.

Kevin Burke, Sandringham, VIC

A headache at the WHO

The World Health Organisation does invaluable work in developing countries, promoting public health with projects for disease eradication through vaccination programmes and provision of clean water and toilets, to name just a few initiatives. Unfortunately, as with most institutions, the choice of someone to head this organisation had political overtones. China may well have been instrumental in getting the current director-general appointed. Hence his sense of obligation to China. But we don’t normally kill someone just because they have a headache.

Anne Di Lauro, The Gap, QLD

By continuing to fund the WHO we are failing those who are seriously or potentially ill. Get it right and you save lives. Get it wrong and you kill people. It’s time we stopped wasting time and money trying to reform the WHO. Donald Trump often appears a goose but sometimes he gets it right.

Lee Smith, Kenmore, QLD

Are we there yet?

Niki Savva is correct (“We can’t stand for house not sitting,” 16/4). In the end, we will have to go back to our normal human interchange. There will be a risk. But just being alive is risky: look at our road toll. We will be changed. We may be more friendly to our neighbours. We may stop hoarding toilet paper and pasta. But we should take the next step.

David Tiller, East Jindabyne, NSW

Demands for a return to normal sooner rather than later are being driven by a dangerous clamour of false equivalents. Death is forever, and the risk of death by coronavirus is not equivalent to a temporary disruption to your employment, education or lifestyle. It is not equivalent to hugs from your grandchildren, your 21st or 80th birthday party, your wedding, the next round of the football or that dinner party with friends. Get real and stay the course until we have treatments and vaccines available.

Stewart Sweeney, North Adelaide , SA