Letter writers have recently expressed their views on trust and broken promises in politics. Most PMs in recent memory, from John Howard to Anthony Albanese, have been accused of breaking election promises. No wonder all politicians are considered liars.
Yet Amanda Vanstone (Opinion, May 21) comments on journalists asking politicians to rule out policy changes at elections are relevant in the context of Labor's recent changes of heart in the budget.
As a former senior cabinet minister her views should be respected regarding ruling out policies, particularly when circumstances change and a change in position is necessary. She said: "Asking for a complete lockout of a policy is just stupid. Journos, however, are looking to run a lazy 'refused to rule out' story. Ho hum ...how clever."
Ruling out forever is stupid. It limits governments making sound decisions necessary for the benefit of the nation which may well be politically unpopular for some. By not ruling out a policy "journalists will run with the idea you are secretly planning to do whatever it is". Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Not surprisingly Amanda understands exactly the position Albanese is in. Politicians of all persuasions hate ruling out questions of policy for obvious reasons.
The perturbing reasoning expressed by Australia's Sex Discrimination Commissioner Dr Anna Cody in Senate estimates concerning pregnancy laws reminded me of the peculiar conversation between Humpty Dumpty and Alice in Lewis Carroll's book Through the Looking-Glass.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."
"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
Indeed.
The majority of citizens understand that words have meaning. It is how we conduct the daily domestic stuff of life with clarity.
Pregnancy requires ovaries, progesterone and a uterus; all features of having XX chromosomes. Or in simpler terms: a woman.
Men, by very definition, do not have these biological features and thus cannot fall pregnant. Why aren't the teals speaking out against this administrative absurdity and the effective erasure of womanhood? This is not positive progress, it is regressive madness.
The ALP's cowardice on big resource sector diesel consumers is staggering. They're game to tackle tax rules for property investors albeit in a limited way but not big fossil fuel producers or other mining corporations.
This has to do with the corporate donations gravy train surely as there's unlikely to be many votes at risk in phasing out what is now a perverse subsidy. With fuel rationing still a possibility for the rest of us, this would be a very timely incentive for electrification.
I completely agree with Lottie Michaels (Letters, May 27) that we shouldn't be killing kangaroos. However, I completely disagree with her blaming introduced species such as rabbits. The main driver for the loss of native wildlife is habitat destruction. Human activities such as land clearing, urbanisation and climate change are to blame.
A 2025 doctoral thesis on kangaroos in the ACT uncovered falsehoods by the ACT government about their "conservation cull". It outlined, among other things, the main reason for killing kangaroos is urban development.
Suburbs such as Lawson and Googong were built after culls took place, which supports this finding, as does the proposed development backing onto Red Hill Nature Reserve again after culling began in 2022.
Minister Yvette Berry's update on addressing her latest "challenges" - maintenance and restitution of ovals - may well become a more general post-June budget mantra for government MLAs ("ACT govt accused of 'papering over cracks' on sports fields", May 27). Anything that has fallen into disrepair or disarray from inadequate monitoring, upgrading, maintenance, and budgeting over the past 20 years, as well as from insufficient forward and replacement planning, might receive attention with versions of the current advice:
"The ACT government is taking practical and considered steps to address current challenges. This includes directing resources to the areas of greatest need, bundling works geographically to improve efficiency and value, and leveraging technology and innovation.
The level of demand, changing conditions and competing expectations mean there will always be pressures and, at times, differing views on how ... and ... are managed. This is an ongoing effort."
With the anticipated election of Tony Abbott as federal Liberal Party president, let's hope he has been advised that parading his endowment behind budgie smugglers is no longer the thing.
Likewise, the "Doctor No" approach he displayed as opposition leader won't resonate with a more sophisticated public, and open aggression toward journalists is increasingly frowned upon. And social media now dominates the political landscape - a space full of pitfalls for anyone who operates under the old rules.
I have been utterly disgusted by the greed, selfishness and avarice displayed by those opposing the government's modest proposals to reform capital gains tax and address the taxation of trusts. Let us call this what it is: greed dressed up as principle.
Those resisting are defending their own privilege and wealth.
On the other hand, the government has once again rejected the advice of its own economic inclusion advisory committee to deliver a meaningful increase to the JobSeeker payment.
This has received widespread support from business, welfare, union, economic and research and church bodies - even John Howard is a supporter.
People trying to survive on this payment are not doing so by choice and they are being left behind. I have seen barely a word in the press about this.
The "fair go" is supposed to be a defining Australian value. But what does that phrase mean when a government ignores its own expert advice on economic inclusion?
What kind of country are we becoming when those at the top fight furiously to keep every advantage, while those at the bottom are told, once again, to wait?
What does it say about our current government which professes concern with fairness and equity for all Australians yet ignores the poverty of the unemployed?
Within your excellent editorial (May 18) urging financial and workplace improvements for our nurses, you acknowledge the critical contribution of skilled migrant nurses.
Should the LNP-One Nation coalition achieve success at a future election, this cohort (despite their payment of taxes, and their crucial engagement) will be denied access to benefits for several years, until they have worked through the administrative complexities of the citizenship process.
This is how Australia will treat members of a valuable resource, trained and skilled at the expense of another nation.
I'm trying to find the logic of reducing the speed limit from 90kmh to 60kmh on the whole 4.5-kilometre stretch of the long-awaited duplication of a section of William Hovell Drive when there is nary a roadworker to be seen anywhere along this whole stretch of road except for about 100 metres of both ends. And it has been like that now for some weeks.
Is it any wonder ACT drivers become frustrated by absurd situations like this and then become easy targets for ACT revenue coffers; much like the parents at our sportsgrounds with insufficient parking facilities.
C. Garnet (Letters, May 27), the US did actually drop the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945; how is it problematic to show that this fact is being used for propaganda purposes?
Showing how such facts are used reveals much about the users but without the additional need for a long explanation, and we all really need to know as much as possible about how the minds of the Iranian leadership work.
It also, perhaps, hints at the hypocrisy of the only state that has ever used atomic bombs in war inveighing against state that doesn't have them and has publicly claimed not to want them. They might be lying of course, but then again they might not.
If J. Grant (Letters, May 28) cannot spell my name correctly, I suspect that the difference between "avoidance" and "evasion" eludes them. Both are illegal. Methinks the words were not chosen carefully enough.
I couldn't agree more, Penleigh (Letters, May 25). I have always maintained that we have an obligation as Canberra residents to "waste" water on our gardens. If we didn't, the people of Adelaide would go thirsty.
If the Aboriginal players in State of Origin are not going to sing the Australian national anthem, then why do we bother with yet another welcome to country? To get respect you need to give it.
The news that The New York Times review of cabinet meetings found one in every six sentences spoken by current cabinet members offers Trump some sort of flattery. It ranges from direct compliments and giving Trump credit to bashing his enemies (Yahoo! News, May 27). This is hardly surprising because authoritarian leaders surround themselves with subservient and sycophantic supporters. And Trump is an authoritarian leader of the totalitarian mould.
Mankind can't wait to get on the moon and establish a colony - can't wait. Go wreck another joint like we wrecked this one.
Slashing climate-science jobs as extreme weather intensifies is a direct threat to public safety. Australia needs more climate modelling, not less. Properly taxing the exports of multinational gas corporations would fund the CSIRO many times over. We can't afford the Albanese government's climate blind spots.
The belligerent President Trump is pushing for regime change in Cuba, and who knows which country will be next? Trump has brought great shame on the American nation. Many Australians also want regime change, but in Washington, not Havana.
In light of the Barr government's "soft position" on recreational drugs and its massive debt, I wonder if they have considered cultivating hydroponic cannabis. Most states in the US make millions of dollars through government-sponsored cannabis dispensaries. Not only would our government make millions, it would also reduce the black market and separate medical and recreational cannabis from dealers who often sell other harmful drugs like ice.
It is madness that a wealthy country already feeling the effects of climate change cannot properly fund the climate scientists whose modelling we rely on. Somehow, the Albanese government won't properly tax the polluting gas companies profiting from exporting our resources, yet allows a public institution as fundamental as the CSIRO to shed staff. The contradiction is absurd.
