Cruel decision reflects a leadership moral vacuum

We’re sorry, this feature is currently unavailable. We’re working to restore it. Please try again later.

Advertisement

This was published 2 years ago

Cruel decision reflects a leadership moral vacuum

Thank you, Steve Biddulph, for so succinctly exposing the heartlessness of our Australian government (“Coalition’s cruelty is a sign of insecurity”, June 16). By linking robo-debt, aged-care failures and mental health with the government’s willingness to punish small children, Biddulph shows these are not just isolated incidents but indicative of the lack of empathy and moral vacuum at the heart of this government. The final decision on the Murugappan family will be made by our Prime Minister, not by Minister Alex Hawke. A fish rots from the head down, and this government stinks. Kevin Fell, Cooks Hill

I am amazed, appalled, that many Australians could think one family should be treated more favourably than others who have sought to come to Australia as asylum seekers. The parents ought long ago to have accepted the determinations of the administrative processes as confirmed by the courts and gone home to Sri Lanka with their Australian-born children. The children are not Australian citizens. Even if they were, that would not entitle their parents to be in Australia. Back home in Sri Lanka, the parents could have applied to migrate to Australia or elsewhere. They might well have succeeded. Hard-hearted though it may be thought to be, the Minister for Immigration has no proper basis for giving this family special treatment. Ross Drynan, Lindfield

I am certain that the people smugglers are hoping that, by letting the Biloela family stay, they will have a massive surge of asylum seekers wishing to come here by boat. This will lead to an influx of people wanting to spend three years locked on an island while their child contracts a blood infection. Tom Meakin, Port Macquarie

I see photos of two young girls born in Australia to Tamil parents, one seriously ill, who’ve been held in custody under intense stress at huge expense for years. According to the government, their cruel treatment is because I’m actually looking at the forward patrol for a horde of barbarian invaders poised to pour across the borders. Can’t see it; must be something wrong with my eyes. Steve Bright, North Avoca

This has nothing to do with deterring future potential boat people. There have been thousands of asylum seekers who arrived by boat and have eventually been deported – but few have been treated the way this family has. The government is pursuing blind dogmatism of the worst kind. It was cruel to give them a life in Biloela and then take it away for such a nonsensical reason. Bob Richards, Kirrawee







Illustration: Matt Golding

Illustration: Matt Golding Credit:

As I watched the Immigration Minister being interviewed about the Murugappan family, I thought of the other Hawke and his Tiananmen Square speech. I remembered the passion, empathy and actions –real leadership offered by Bob Hawke. What did Alex Hawke offer? A factitious, bureaucratic waffle. Where is the incisive, determined leadership this country needs? Where are politicians who act in a caring and understanding manner? Ron Brown, Wallsend

There may well be “no winners” in the Murugappan family case but there is one long-term loser (Letters, June 16). I, and many other Australians, will never forgive this current government for their appalling lack of compassion at the ballot box. Robert Hickey, Green Point

Church could do more to protect abuse victims

Julia Baird names me in her article on a national Anglican Church report concerning intimate partner violence and claims an article I wrote said abuse doesn’t happen in the church, or is very rare (“Church stripped bare on domestic violence”, June 12-13). I said nothing in that article – which is no longer available online – about the incidence of domestic abuse in churches.

Advertisement

But this is not about me or Julia Baird. It is about the victims and survivors of domestic abuse. I expect anyone with a heart wants to protect victims and stop abuse, and for churches to be places of sanctuary and healing, and I’m sure we could do better. Baird claims the report shows that women inside churches are more at risk of abuse than those outside them. But this goes well beyond the evidence of the study. The study surveyed those who had ever experienced domestic violence and found higher prevalence among those who now attend Anglican churches than in broader society. It does not tell us if the abusers were church-attenders (although we know some are), or if the abuse occurred while the victim-survivors were church attenders. We know this was true for some, but no doubt others come to church to find comfort and hope after the trauma of abuse. Claire Smith, Roseville

Julia Baird has revealed the depth of the problem: men rationalise individual cases, denying “a structure built on male control that silences women, denies them authority and demands their obedience. In this context, female rebellion is often cast as sin.”

The first sin was thinking all men were superior as a gender. From the blaming of Eve onwards, enough men’s assumption has been that male power is all. In the Sydney Diocese, the men hold to that, blocking women from having equal positions of leadership in the church. How many women with a sorrowful view of those men have exited the church, leaving the proportion who accept the male headship dogma to be victimised? Alice Arnott Oppen, Hunters Hill

Overdue in this country is an overturn of the anachronistic legal fiction that presumes ministers of religion are not employees, meaning that they are generally excluded from the Fair Work Ombudsman’s invigilation. The conduct of property-rich religious institutions and their clergy should be treated no differently to employers and employees in other walks of life. John Williams, Balmain

This article is no surprise. When the Sydney archdiocese wasted a million dollars to try and block the recent Marriage Equality Law passing, I thought how much the Wayside Chapel could do with that money. Lina Lockhart, Marrickville

Tax hesitancy will cost the earth

The conservative government and Australian voters who believe emission reduction can be achieved solely by mythical future new technologies obviously live in a dream world where procrastination is the norm. (“Voters want Australia to set a net zero 2050 emissions target, but no carbon tax”, June 16). A healthy taste of tax on carbon-intensive export goods paid to the benefit of governments overseas will soon bring them to their senses. Geoff Harding, Chatswood

Altruism is an unknown concept in Australia. Fossil fuels have for decades contributed substantial amounts of carbon into our atmosphere and we have been freely enjoying the profits, to the extent that the rest of the world would be justified in calling us parasites and vandals. Why are we so complacent about enjoying low tax rates while all our services are in decline? Australians have no problem accepting education, health and transport systems that favour the wealthy and penalise the wage earner. So why would we agree to a carbon tax? We’re happy to save the world from climate change as long as someone else pays. Bruce Spence, Balmain

Australians saying they want to achieve net zero emissions but not have a carbon tax is a bit like saying you want to lose weight but you don’t want to eat less or exercise more. Large scale economic transitions come at a cost and someone has to pay for it. The longer we put it off, like dieting, the higher that cost will be. Neil Ormerod, Kingsgrove

That’s it: “We will decide what’s best for Australia in Australia’s national interest”, says our PM to the world (“G7 nations make deeper climate cuts, but PM isn’t joining them”, June 15). The world can go to hell. Who cares that Bolivia has lost its second-largest lake, the victim of shrinking glaciers? What does it matter that glaciers are shrinking all over the world and when rivers dry up the result is famine? We’re all right, Jack, that’s all that matters. In one fell swoop, the PM has turned Australia into a rogue nation. Jeannette Tsoulos, West Pymble

If walls could talk

For more years than my lifetime there has been a technology museum in Ultimo established as Sydney Technological Museum, later known as Museum of Applied Arts and Sciences, then, after moving a little down Harris Street: Powerhouse Museum – being located to a large extent within the former Ultimo power station opened in 1899 to serve Sydney’s expanding electric tramway network. In fact, connections go right back to the Sydney’s International Exhibition in 1879 (“Avalanche of cash for Powerhouse restyling gets mixed reviews”, June 16).

So, with all due respect, the history of the museum in Ultimo is more about Science and Technology than the Museum at Parramatta could ever be. The former power-station building and the remaining original installations therein are as much part of Sydney’s technological history. Minister for Arts, Don Harwin, please reconsider and keep the bulk of the technological exhibits in Ultimo. Peter Kahn, Coogee

So much for Chanel, Dior, Kee et al. There is another quite forgotten place of memory and wonder, a place of extraordinary women’s and children’s narratives: the National Heritage listed, Parramatta Female Factory and Institutions Precinct. How much longer is this exceptional and highly significant site (c. 1818), with its colonial buildings and rich cultural potential, going to be ignored? The Parramatta Female Factory is the earliest purpose built and most intact female convict site in the nation. It is an important Parramatta, state and national asset and deserves a slice of the generous “museum” pie. Enneid Halcoop, Ashfeld

Liberal with the numbers

Getting rid of stamp duty, and using superannuation for a deposit, will not reduce the size of mortgage loans (“Liberal MPs suggest radical plans to tackle housing affordability crisis”, June 16). Banks lend to the capacity of the borrowing household to service the mortgage. Dollars from stamp duty and super will go to the property seller, not the buyer, raising prices further. A Reserve Bank Governor in 2010 praised bank deregulation for “easing lending standards” and widening “the range of households who can access finance”, but the consequence is actually an increase in competition between home buyers, and a decline in housing affordability. Janet Burstall, Lilyfield

Apart from removing negative gearing, another good way to ease the house price pressures would be for investors to pay the higher up-front stamp duty and home buyers to pay yearly land tax, which has the lower up-front cost. This would even the playing field quite considerably. Geoff Wannan, Dawes Point

Pity the poor Liberals, trying to solve the runaway inflation in real estate prices. Imagine how hard it must be to propose radical fiddling with deductible expenses on investment properties without even hinting at the screamingly obvious idea to abolish negative gearing. Rob Baxter, Naremburn

Long-term diplomacy

I see it will take 15 years for the trade agreement with Britain to come into full effect (“Historic trade deal struck with Britain”, June 16). I think it is pretty safe to say that by then Britain will have, perforce, returned to the EU as a fully fledged member – but Boris Johnson and Scott Morrison will play it for all it’s worth: it’s all about electioneering. John Grinter, Katoomba

Head on the shoulders

Why do so few professional football players wear headgear as protection against head clashes and is it because they worry more about being seen as “wimps” if they do, than their own wellbeing (Letters, June 16)? I wholeheartedly support the move to protect professional football players from the impact of concussion but what continues to puzzle me, is why no one is suggesting that headgear, worn by some players, should at the very least, be considered. God forbid, they might even pass a law making it mandatory. Nicholas Beauman, Neutral Bay

Better dead than red

Note to Victor Diskordia: why are the Scandinavian countries always at the top of the lists of the world’s best countries to live in (Letters, June 16)? These countries are all social democracies of the type he impugns and his letter denouncing progressives is in itself reactionary. Carol Witt, Boronia Park

Methinks such an intellectually lazy generalisation of both progressives and socialists lacked accuracy and was only an attempt to spread discord. Helen Lewin, Tumbi Umbi

For the boys

Women should be relieved they will not be accepted as members of the Australian Club (“Male order: Club sticks to clique”, June 16). Who wants to be around grumpy fractious old men; we have enough of that at home. So much better company to be found elsewhere. The blokes are welcome to their steak and oysters. Elizabeth Kroon, Randwick

Is the Australian Club being unAustralian ? Peng Ee, Castle Cove

Mysterious Ways

Don Squires should change the voice on his GPS to Bono’s (of Irish band U2). He’ll find that the streets have no names and he still won’t find what he’s looking for (Letters, June 16). George Zivkovic, Northmead

The digital view

Online comment from one of the stories that attracted the most reader feedback yesterday on smh.com.au
Voters want Australia to set a net zero 2050 emissions target, but no carbon tax
From Wunderkind: ″⁣Australians want to decarbonise yet they have consistently voted for the opposite for nearly a decade, go figure. The future of the planet and the wellbeing of future generations is clearly not a priority in this country, or at least not as much as tax cuts and franking credits.″⁣

  • To submit a letter to The Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.

Most Viewed in National

Loading