Archives: Letters to the Editor

The Albanese Government’s proposed changes to Freedom of Information laws pose a serious threat to transparency and accountability. By lowering the exemption test from “dominant purpose” to a vague “substantial purpose” linked to Cabinet, the government could block access to a wide range of documents – including major policies and national scandals.

This directly contradicts recommendations from the Robodebt Royal Commission, which called for narrower secrecy provisions. Legal experts also warn the bill may breach the Constitution by undermining the public’s right to political communication.

Labor’s justification? AI-generated and time-wasting FoI requests – a weak excuse that avoids fixing the system and instead undermines it.

Worse still, the bill proposes new fees for FoI requests – a “truth tax” that could discourage journalists, researchers, and citizens from seeking information.

Far from reform, this is a calculated move to shield the government from scrutiny. It betrays Labor’s past promises on integrity and openness, and if passed, would mark a major step backwards for democratic accountability.

This isn’t about protecting Cabinet confidentiality – it’s about protecting the government from the public. The bill must be stopped.

Professor Brendan Mackey and Professor David Lindenmayer are right to question the NSW Government’s condition on declaring the Great Koala NP. The park is home to more than 150 threatened species, including the greater glider. With habitat loss, disease, bushfires, climate change, vehicle strikes, and dog attacks, koalas are now listed as endangered in NSW and nationally.

However, the government’s condition — that the park must first be registered as a carbon project under the Improved Native Forest Management Method — would allow major emitters to buy offsets under the Safeguard Mechanism. It’s a Catch-22, but given the plight of threatened species, it seems a trade-off we should accept, at least for now.

As Mackey and Lindenmayer note, a carbon price is the most cost-effective market mechanism to reduce fossil fuel emissions. But, if the park commitment meets carbon credit integrity standards — additional, measurable, independently verified, and supported by strong governance and transparency — similar projects could “help secure both biodiversity and climate gains.” Penny van Oosterzee writes in The Monthly that high-integrity carbon credits remain the “only serious vehicle we’ve got for conservation and restoration.” To abandon them now would be, in her words, an “eco own goal of epic proportions.”

Here is a small step we might take in moving on from mere recognition of Palestine, as Refaat Ibrahim highlights the need for further steps in his article.

The RAAF deployed aircraft to Syria to bomb ISIS, which then miraculously became the legitimate government of Syria, and the ADF has shipped Abrams tanks to Ukraine.

So the RAAF could partner with the RAF and perhaps the French air force to provide air cover for the Sumud flotilla heading for Palestine, bringing much needed aid to the people of Gaza.

The RAF has a base at Akrotiri in Cyprus.

The vast level of criminality and senseless violence in the world today should be attributed to those that have caused it, participated in it and found snivelling excuses for it.

No prizes for guessing that is the self-adulatory West. Our arrogance and loss of humanity is in stark contrast with the sensitivity of those we have oppressed, butchered and deprived. It is well past time for the West to fall into well-deserved desuetude and for far more civilised cultures to rise to save humanity and the planet!

Refaat is, of course, correct. The “moral” West likes to have it both ways, gestures to satisfy the punters but without a trace of substance to interfere with making money.

The vast bulk of the world sees through us and is increasingly moving away from what they perceive as unreliable and devious participants in world events towards a grouping that favours inclusivity, equality, transparency and non-interference in internal affairs.

Will our leaders have the gumption to act decisively and with moral purpose? Not if they can avoid, it is my view!

Apparently, Sussan Ley’s concerns with those relying on government handouts do not extend to those who use taxpayer-funded helicopters to go house hunting or attending parties, something Bronwyn Bishop would agree with!

I’m sure many other names could be added, and yes, there are two sets of rules, as pointed out in a letter by another reader.

Hypocrites.

Excellent article by Kathy. Really nails the gross failures of the bureaucrats and the government to design a system which actually fixes the manifold problems in aged care.

Perhaps they should start involving people like Kathy in the planning process to overcome the broad ignorance displayed by the bureaucrats drawing up the present plans! Just a thought.

Like Britain and the US, we continue to exhibit multiple signs of looking wistfully to an imagined past and seeking to repeat it, rather than looking to a future which will we know will be different from that past. Nowhere is this more evident than in the one area in which we claim expertise – making war!!

As we hollow out our economies and turn them into heaven for our speculative class, we also continue to plan for a repetition of our past colonial successes. China and Russia are the objects of that desire for more glorious colonialism. The problem is that the world has changed irretrievably and we are repeating the mistakes of past empires in believing our own propaganda that all we need to do is arm ourselves, repeat the past and all will be good, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

Every military war game the US has conducted regarding China, shows China winning, but we ignore that! Whether we waste trillions more in the belief that our actions will lead to inevitable victory will make no difference to the inevitable outcome. Lacking brains, we will do it anyway!

For anyone who truly values our civilisational legacy from Athens all the way to the Enlightenment, the absence of a moral compass in the vast bulk of our current political and intellectual leadership class is a damning footnote to our civilisational decline.

That they feel comfortable in daily witnessing and participating in the wilful and deliberate destruction of a culture far older and far more civilised than ours, with a moral certitude that defies description, is a clear marker of the judgment which history will pass upon us.

The cultures we have spent the last 500 years looking down upon, and which constitute the vast bulk of the human species, are unanimous in believing that we lack any claim to represent anything like the best of humanity.

History will quite rightly judge us as the most violent, destructive and damaging culture ever to have infested the planet.

The reality of an isolated Israel trying to be a modern-day Sparta is stupidity on top of insanity. In the days of Sparta, a small community could be relatively self-sufficient to a certain extent when arms for fighting were swords and maces.

The sane reality is that if Israel is cut off from vast external support in funding, technology and arms supply it will be utterly incapable of producing any of the sophisticated weaponry it will need without major sources of supply of the vast amount of metals, magnets, explosives and foodstuffs that it has no capacity to produce locally.

Without the US and the West, Israel would already be a defunct society, bankrupt and with massive citizen outflows.

But if Netanyahu wants to dream about this, it is highly unlikely that the rest of Israeli society will share his Masada complex!

No caveat, no contrary thought, no correction – and no way in which the expression of repulsion to Sussan Ley’s pathetic communication to the US Republicans can be mollified.

Thank you, George Browning, for a laser beam of decency and truth.

The rules around superannuation should be the same for every Australian. And while we are at it, super should be taken as a pension as a percentage of the wage at retirement, eventually replacing the old age pension.

We should have an independent inquiry into employment after leaving Parliament: who they work for, future public service employment, consultancies etc

That the lives of my eight grandchildren and their contemporaries may well be cut short by catastrophic global heating is of great concern. Ross Gittins highlights the “weak job” Albanese has done in addressing such pressing concerns. Compounding the inadequacy of the 2035 62%-70% emissions reduction target is an outrageous Labor decision that makes even this weak target significantly more difficult to reach.

The decision to extend the NW Shelf gas project to 2070 was appalling and should be revisited. This decision was largely driven by Labor’s WA branch which behaves like a subsidiary of the mining and gas industry.

It was the WA Premier, Roger Cook, who prior to the federal election pressured Albanese into sabotaging Tanya Plibersek’s efforts to strengthen the EPBC Act. Post-election, Albo removed Plibersek from the environment portfolio and installed Murray Watt whose brief was to satisfy the interests of Woodside and WA Labor.

It’s Albanese who bears responsibility for placing the interests of WA mining and gas industries and the WA Labor Party above those of the thousands Australian youngsters who face a bleak future with catastrophic climate change.

Mike Gilligan’s piece raises a question. Which SSN is more important to the government, seniors shower needs, or SSN submarines? The new seniors care package unveiled by Minister Rae, flouting the Aged Care Commissioner, means some seniors face paying $50 for a shower, or having to go it alone.

Rex Patrick recently outlined a comprehensive defence spend without SSNs, which left $150 billion in the kitty for things like seniors care and denticare.

On submarines we have to remember, not so many years back, Indonesia was regarded as our big threat. (Note they have just bought an Italian aircraft carrier), That aside, given the recent climate change report, and Donald Trump’s UN bluster this week badmouthing climate change reduction, the biggest threat to our overall security right now may well be the US.

Julian Cribb writes that a “vegetarian diet…may yield fewer greenhouse emissions, but may also cause greater soil erosion, use more pesticides and is highly vulnerable to climate”. He argues for a move away from traditional farming production to regenerative farming, urban food, and deep ocean aquaculture.

It is hard not to panic about the prospect of sea-level rise which the World Economic Forum warns is a global threat. It notes that the Greenland ice sheet is “at a tipping point of irreversible melting” and that one to two metres of sea-level rise this century is unavoidable.

This means inundation of many food-growing deltas of the world, such as the Mekong. The implications for food security are horrendous unless we adopt other means of producing food.

Meat-eating has its downside, not least with the animal justice aspects of factory-farming, and methane-producing ruminants. Nevertheless, there are vast amounts of the planet that are unsuitable for the plough, but make perfectly good pasture. Animals are very good at turning inedible grasses into edible food, namely meat. And for many cultures, like the Masai, meat is central to their diet. Who are we to tell them to be farmers, not pastoralists?

If Anthony Albanese cancelled all future meetings with Trump, I would vote for his government.

Although it goes against my opinions on censorship, if he banned all Trump tripe on social media and on the nightly news I would hand out how to vote cards at my own expense in his electorate for the duration.

As for closing all US bases in Australia, bring it on.

It is time for Australia to grow up and stop marching off to war to defend UK and US right-wingers.

Is “isolating Israel” on the agenda of Western political elites, as suggested by Margaret Reynolds?

Given the wording of the “recognition” of Palestine proposal initiated by Emmanuel Macron in association with the Saudis, endorsed by the Albanese Government, it is obvious that the intent has nothing to do with “self-determination” of Palestine, but everything to do with ensuring a “two-state solution” entrenches and solidifies Israeli control over all of Palestine.

If that is not the case, explain why the conditions imposed on “self-determination” do not destroy all possible avenues to Palestinian statehood.

Although many of the points made by Stuart Rees and Greg Barns in their joint article make sense and reinforce what had already often been said in previous articles, qualifying the recognition of Palestine as a state by the Australian Government as a courageous act and congratulating it for having taken this step certainly doesn’t.

Perhaps it would have been a courageous act if Australia had joined the other 93 states, which by February 1989 had recognised the State of Palestine following the Declaration of Independence proclaimed by Yasser Arafat on 15/11/1988 on behalf of the Palestinian National Council. Even more courageous would have been for Australia to unfailingly advocate, since 1949, for Israel to comply with the conditions imposed by the United Nations when it was accepted as a member state, namely its acceptance of the partition plan, the internationl status of Jerusalem and the right of return of the Palestinian refugees.

Further, I don’t think someone or a state ought to be congratulated for doing what should have been done a long time ago; rather, that person or that state should be made to feel ashamed for having waited so long to do it.

Sussan Ley wants to cut government assistance, saying too many are dependent on government help. This is farcical considering no one can live even on a full government pension while paying rent, healthcare, electricity, petrol and food etc.

Here’s an idea, Sussan, when politicians retire, make them meet the same requirements as the average pensioner. That is, every single politician can only have $321,500 in assets including property and their superannuation. If they’re married, they’re allowed only $481,500 in combined assets.

Considering the majority of politicians in Australia have more than one house, many with far more than that, and many go onto big paying jobs after politics, this should exempt them from receiving any government pension at all. I wonder how much that would save the Australian taxpayer.

And while we are at it, let’s see how much tax each MP pays… The US media chased Trump for the same, so let’s see the pollie tax payroll here.

On this issue, as with so many regarding politicians, there seems to be one rule for them, and another for the rest of us. And they wonder why trust in government is at an all-time low.

I am fully in agreement with all that Margaret Reynolds says. Although Albanese would have to pull a mighty big rabbit out of his hat to salvage his reputation.

The Age (online 23/09/2025) headline “Albanese’s plea to world leaders on Palestine” would be laughable if it were not so embarrassing that so very many countries got there well before us in recognising Palestine. Strike 1.

Just as we are laggards (to put it politely) regarding Palestine, we are at the bottom of the rankings on action to address climate change and the environment. How Albanese has the gall to think Australia is a suitable place to hold COP31 is beyond me. Strike 2.

And Albanese continues to sell our sovereignty to the US. Except we don’t “sell” it. We pay to give it away, giving billions to the US for the pleasure. The Americans must know the meaning of “Come in spinner!” by now. Strike 3.

Albanese is a failure on the three major issues of our time. The sooner he is out the better.

If not the worst PM in the same way as his recent predecessors, Albanese is certainly the most pathetic, wasteful of so many opportunities to improve Australia and the world.

It’s probably just as well that Greg Barns is the former national president of the Australian Lawyers Alliance, because if he were still the incumbent, he probably wouldn’t be for much longer after expounding so eloquently on Palestine.

A certain subset of Australian lawyerdom would see to that. (Circumlocution is such a painful way to express yourself, but these days it seems to be de rigeur as a way of self-preservation.)

As it stands, I’m fairly certain that his (and Stuart Rees’) inboxes are currently under heavy fire. Stay strong, Stuart and Greg! At least, you show no signs of pusillanimity.

There is a stark contrast between Stuart Rees’ and Greg Barns’ conception of Australia’s “courage” in the (sort of) recognition of Palestine, with Chris Sidoti’s (P & I”s 23/9) “Israel must end its genocide in Gaza. But Australia must act too”.

For example, where Sidoti writes: “I can list another eight actions that could and should be taken immediately”.

He does list those eight actions. Recognition, such as it is (so many caveats and delays built in), still denies the Palestinian people the “right to self-determination” (see Sidoti).

Such recognition is not an “act”, it is theatre, a ruse. It is not courageous, at all.

“Acting” as per Sidoti’s list of eight would constitute actual courage. But, as we’ve seen for years, decades, such courage is a “bridge too far” for Australian Governments. They always prefer theatre.

When reading Jack’s excellent piece about the preferred behaviour of Albanese in his approach to the orange autocrat, I was reminded of a British civil service motto that I came across when working at Australia House in the 1960s.

Given the rigid hierarchy that characterised the British civil service, which was substantially reflected in the colonial public service at the time, the opportunities for promotion were rare and valued. The motto was that “where there’s death, there’s hope”.

That might be an entirely appropriate one for Americans to adopt to deal with the current extremity of their situation.

With the conservatives in Australian politics, it is truly difficult to overstate their utter dependence upon ideology over any observable reality. They have truly reversed the scientific method in their attempts to create a fantasy reality to replace the real one.

In the scientific method, you develop a theory, test it against reality and if they don’t match you discard the theory and develop another in an endless cycle until you get one that matches reality and is accurately predictive.

With the conservatives, they have developed a long line of theories. These have then been tested generally by the scientifically minded against reality and they failed to match reality. Instead of discarding the theory, they then discard the reality and double-down on the theory.

This might be seen by the ideologically less indoctrinated, to be curious behaviour, but there is method in their madness. If they can, through propaganda, convince the average punter to prefer their theory over the reality that confronts them, they have been successful at preserving the order that enriches and empowers them. It has worked well for them for centuries. Why change a successful habit???

Thank you to Michael Keating for his analysis of the basic flaws in Liberal strategy, raised by Sussan Ley, that too many Australians are dependent on government.

According to its website, the Liberal Party’s primary “belief” is in “the inalienable rights and freedoms of all peoples; and we work towards a lean government that minimises interference in our daily lives; and maximises individual and private sector initiative”.

The Australian Council of Social Service last week stated that the federal government “must substantially lift deeply inadequate income support payments. The routine indexation leaving 1.5 million people unable to afford basic essentials… the routine indexation of JobSeeker recently provided an extra $6.25 per week, bringing the payment to $401 for a single person, just 42% of the minimum wage.

“Around 1 million people will remain unable to afford essentials like food and medicine because Australia has one of the lowest unemployment payments among wealthy countries” (ACOSS CEO).

The hallmark of Liberal “lean government” ideology, Robodebt, is the mean spectre that hangs over Ley’s talk of less dependence on government.

Michael’s conclusion: an obvious and just source of revenue is a carbon tax. Most Australians would now see the sense in that.

Kellie Tranter correctly identifies the bull in the china shop that our “great and powerful friend” has become as it rapidly approaches its expected end as the head of the herd.

She also identifies clearly the need of our national leadership to end our infantile and bovine subservience to that increasingly diseased and demented animal.

Can we expect that kind of leadership from a class of politicians who have, over the last half-century, come to believe that their own political survival depends upon them showing appropriate submission to a very bad tempered and vindictive herd leader? Unlikely, but we can all live in hope!!

It’s not courageous to recognise Palestine – it’s humane, necessary and a long-overdue step toward equality. Australia has to go further, following the example of Spain and Italy, and show that real friendship between countries is built on justice, not silence in the face of oppression.

Standing up for the rights of Palestinians is not about fear of “rewarding terrorism” – it’s about saying that no people should ever be denied dignity, safety or statehood. Real courage isn’t measured by loyalty to powerful allies but by the willingness to defend humanity, even when it comes at political or other cost.

Recognition is the absolute baseline. What comes next will reveal whether Australia is prepared to consistently defend equality and justice for all.

An excellent summary of the truth that is becoming increasingly evident to the 88% of humanity outside the “West”.

The West, failing as it is economically without more recent colonies to exploit and immiserate, has revived colonialism but needed a plausible excuse for doing so.

What they haven’t figured out is the implausibility of their plausible reason to a world that no longer buys the b****hit. Further evidence of the declining diplomatic and military power of the dying empire!

Ian Dudgeon sets it out well. I recently provided Alex Ryvchin of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry with a parallel. In 1963, the governor-general, on the advice of the Federal Executive Council, excised 140 square miles of the Gove Peninsula from the Arnhem Land Reserve, the traditional home of the Yolngu, so that French firm Pechiney could mine it.

The Yolngu were not directly consulted and this led to the famous Bark Petitions. Israel has just recently announced that it will build the E1 settlement on Palestinian land, as part of the creeping full takeover of Northeast Palestine, a takeover clearly begun in recent days by Messrs Netanyahu and Ben-Gvir.

So does the pro-semitism that Alex and Jillian Segal wish to encourage involve Australians accepting Gove-like takeovers of traditional Palestinian land without consultation?

Just read your short article as noted above. It’s really good to read something positive about China in the Australian press.

I look forward to reading your follow-up.

I am so sick of reading nothing but negative stuff about China and the continual war mongering we get fed by mainly the right-wing nut cases in this country.