Steven Hamilton compliments the government on their initial pandemic financial support. However, he believes their economic plan consists of “vague platitudes but nothing in the way of concrete policy to achieve them”. Hamilton is too kind. Billions of dollars was wasted on JobKeeper, the allocation of government grants, grossly belated commitment to net zero but with no guiding financial structure, a variety of inefficient tax structures including the GST, which is too low and only covers half the economy, ill-advised privatisation of aged care, no idea how to reverse their 50 years of downward pressure on wages and a series of successful scare campaigns on any attempt to fix any of this. David Hind, Neutral Bay
Build a future for our children
I’d also like this election not to be about Scott Morrison, or Albo or Constance or Barnyard, but about our children and their future. Which party will help them tackle issues such as access to education, housing affordability, vocational training leading to well-paid employment, medical and dental care to keep them healthy, and an environment that is not under threat and spiralling towards cataclysmic change? That is the party that I want to vote for. Dale Bailey, Five Dock
Third time unlucky
Your correspondent is critical of the lacklustre campaign (Letters, May 2). Bill Shorten took a raft of strong policies, which would have benefited Australia enormously, to the last election, but was outwitted by Morrison. Voters swallowed the lies and fear tactics and chose the status quo over vision. It came as no surprise when that status quo quickly degenerated into unscrupulous Morrison 2.0. I suspect Labor’s plan is to get elected, earn the trust of voters and then introduce a stronger agenda. But it must first beat Morrison at his own game. The PM went to the election in 2019 without policies and won by playing the man. This time he is hoping we’ll prefer the devil we know. If the electorate doesn’t send this devil packing, we’ll end up with unscrupulous Morrison 3.0. Graham Lum, North Rocks
Desperate measures
To what laughable depths has campaigning sunk when one’s mother-in-law’s words are used for political gain, reportedly without her giving permission (“Kooyong contest turns ugly as Josh Frydenberg ‘misquotes’ opponent’s frail mother-in-law”, smh.com.au, May 2)? Moreover, equating this with Ted Baillieu’s son, who has chosen to publicly take a position and speak out, is obviously not valid. Louise Dolan, Birchgrove
Grey matters
Do self-funded retirees really need this Liberal-National party government promise of expanding access to the seniors’ health card (“Coalition to boost elderly health cards”, May 2)? Why has it taken 10 years in government to put this $70million promise on the table? Helen Simpson, Curl Curl
Campaign fever
The northern beaches is buzzing with excitement – it’s like a marginal seat this election. An unprecedented level of campaigning: letters, phone calls, text messages, corflutes. All that’s missing are regular visits from the prime minister. Denis Goodwin, Dee Why
Calling for change
It is all very well for Mike Baird (“Baird says Coalition must learn from the rise of independents”, May 2) to suggest Liberal politicians need to reconnect with their local communities, but the message from these communities is that the policies of the Coalition are not what they want.
The teal independents have arisen because their communities are fed up with the government’s failure to take climate change seriously and its use of pork-barrelling, together with a lack of a federal ICAC and its disregard and demeaning of women. It is not just a matter of listening, as there is a need to change and implement policies that their constituents want. Peter Nash, Fairlight
The time is now
It is hardly a revolutionary, but an evolutionary, process whose time has come (‴Time is now’: Australia-wide campaign for referendum”). The US, Canada and New Zealand have all moved to recognise First Nations people in their respective constitutions. Steve Ngeow, Chatswood
For those like me who support the Uluru Statement from the Heart’s call for a Voice to Parliament for First Nations people to be enshrined in the constitution, it is heartening to see that a campaign has been launched to achieve this. With the support of all who care about righting the wrongs inflicted on the First Australians, it can be done. The time is now. Andrew Macintosh, Cromer
Loss of landscape
I support the views of your correspondents regarding the loss of our nation’s built heritage (Letters, May 2), and I also deplore the loss of our landscape heritage. Inevitably, with every building demolished or dismantled, significant vegetation is also destroyed. If the remains of Willow Grove are ever taken out of storage and relocated, it will happen before decades-old trees will function in the environment as they did before being cut down. Lyn Langtry, East Ryde
Plain talking
Remember sports venues with simple name such as Redfern Oval, Brookvale Oval or the Sydney Sports Ground? Now venues carry sponsors’ names, so it’s a miracle patrons can find the right venue. Besides, I’d prefer to be at Lang Park rather than XYZ Stadium in Brisbane to see the Broncos thrashed. Col Shephard, Yamba
Old tricks
In Little Dorrit, Charles Dickens satirises the problem your correspondent has described (Letters, May 2). The Office of Circumlocution made applications for new businesses, patents et cetera so tortuous that people gave up trying. The computer program’s name should incorporate “circumlocution” in honour of the great writer and as a reminder that governments have been using such tactics since at least the 1800s. Isobel Page, Hornsby
$46,000 a day and we get antlers?
Those dogs don’t look too happy about the gross family income (“How a puppy picture revealed Caddick’s $46,000 per day ’profit‴, May 2) but I guess, if the only benefit for them is a set of antler ears, they might have a case. Lyn Savage, Coogee
The case for versing
I write in defence of “versing” (Letters, May 2), which (as a former soccer dad) I can guarantee has been in use for at least the past 25 years. It does fill a particular niche. “Playing” for children does not have an inherent sense of competition, and “playing against” is a mouthful compared with the succinct “versing”. Doug Walker, Baulkham Hills
Perhaps the background elected nodders could be called a poly tic? Tony Doyle, Fairy Meadow
No, your correspondent shouldn’t expect twice as much for two times more. One times more would be double. Two times more is treble the quantity. Brian Kidd, Mt Waverley (Vic)
Can we please expunge “anytime soon” soon? And if my regular Saturday punting is any guide, we should at once and forever decouple “foreseeable” and “future”. Frank McGrath, Bulli
The digital view
Online comment from one of the stories that attracted the most reader feedback yesterday on smh.com.au
Labor leads polling at the campaign’s halfway mark
From Scott55: “We don’t need miracles, we don’t need out-of-control spending promises, we don’t need election commitments for projects that are unplanned and don’t stack up. What we need is a government that makes one good decision followed by another, a government that respects all Australians, respects taxpayers money and respects our futures. There is a chance Labor can deliver these things. The Coalition government has had nine years and they have not demonstrated any such ethos or aspirations. Their time is up. Labor is the only one choice on the 21st of May. It’s time”
- To submit a letter to The Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
Rate rise will bring bank to sit at your kitchen table
Source: Philippines Alive
