Someone has to take a stand against ABC misuse of public money for vendettas

Let me hazard a wild guess about the purpose of the blind trust donating money to support Christian Porter’s legal fees (“Porter in new strife over $1m legal fund”, 16/9). It is to encourage Porter and others to act against the ABC’s unbridled attempts to destroy certain individuals and groups, and to counter both the ABC’s bottomless pit of public funding and their almost total lack of ethical and editorial standards, which empowers them to do so on a whim.

I for one would think that such a donation, far from being a threat to our democracy or polity, is fundamental to them, especially seeing as few if any politicians or public figures have shown the intestinal fortitude to act against such abuse of publicly funded power.

Andrew Lake, Edwardstown, SA

The Australian today reports on the blind trust set up by Christian Porter to fund legal fees for his action against the ABC. The real concern should be the fact that his legal fees were a million dollars. This action did not drag on over years and was settled relatively quickly.

It is beyond the means of most Australians to have legal representation in court. The courts are for the rich. There is no possibility of the legal fraternity addressing this issue. The federal and state governments have a moral obligation to do so. I suggest they reacquaint themselves with the definition of justice.

Chris Blanch, Spring Hill, Qld

The good general

It’s a bit rich for Donald Trump to demand General Milley’s sacking based on a book that Trump has denounced as fake news (“China warning a breach of duty”, 16/09).

In normal times, a senior general communicating with a potential adversary behind the president’s back would indeed violate the American tradition of civilian control of the military.

But Trump’s final months in office were anything but normal. He refused to concede defeat at the election and incited violent insurrection on the capitol to overturn the certification of the result. His erratic public statements and private behaviour were a cause of concern for both allies and enemies amid speculations he might take drastic steps to save his political fortune.

Viewed in this context, General Milley’s intervention was a desperate yet understandable attempt to prevent accidental war with another nuclear power.

Han Yang, North Turramurra, NSW

Boutique nukes

So the US is joining the shut-down-your-coal-power-Australia lobby (“Australia isolated as US ups ante on coal power”, 16/9).

Having lived for a while under the coal-fired fallout of White Bay in Sydney, I am inclined to follow the US lead, and that of Europe also, in getting rid of cheap coal-fired electricity. And I am also inclined to continue following their lead, especially that of France, by plugging in boutique modular reactors for baseload maintenance in Australia.

Sane placement would be one at Port Augusta in South Australia, where the previous government conveniently demanded the demolition and removal of the coal-fired power station; Portland, Victoria, to keep an aluminium industry alive, and in the Latrobe Valley as convenient to the entire Victorian grid; at Newcastle/Tomago and Lithgow in NSW for similar reasons; two in Queensland for the southeast corner and central and northern coasts; one at Katherine in the Northern Territory (for security, rather than Darwin); and one for southeast Western Australia.

Tasmania, of course, can build bigger dams for more renewable hydro generation, surely a greater good for the climate.

Dr Tim Fatchen, Mt Barker, SA

US lack of support for coal industries is a bit rude when one considers that the greatest coal reserves in the world are located in the US and the former USSR and have provided the backbone for their industrial development.

While Australia’s coal resources rank third, it should be appreciated that China with nearly the same coal reserves as Australia actually extracts 7 times more than we do annually, and India and the US also currently outstrip our mining activities.

Rex Womersley, Edge Hill, Qld

Back the odds

Ramesh Thakur (Letters 14/9)

asks about the legitimacy of the push for vaccine passports when naturally acquired immunity offers superior protection.

Firstly, logic dictates that the authorities would grant a vaccine passport to those who have acquired natural immunity through a proven Covid-19 infection.

The second and more critical reason is that on a community wide basis, the acquiring of natural immunity involves untold Covid-19 deaths, while immunisation delivers highly significant protection and causes a minuscule number of deaths.

Back the odds because dead is dead, regardless of the cause.

John Allsop, Mont Albert, Vic