Why do corporations get to ride roughshod?
Australia's population seems blind to the disgusting activities of corporations.
They can blow up a significant sacred site thousands of years old; they can sell our taxation and military secrets to the highest bidder; they can fraudulently sell airline tickets to customers for flights that don't exist; they can incompetently block the telecommunications of millions of people; they allow them to poison the air, ground and water; they allow them to price-gouge us for food, and they allow banks to reduce services and make obscene profits off the back of supply driven inflation, created by the greed of these same corporations. All without consequences for the corporations responsible.
Why? I reckon it's due to the complacency and disengagement of the people and the protection corporations enjoy from our so-called governments. Politicians obviously protect them to assist their post-governmental quest for a sinecure in the corporate world.
This must change.
Australians must dump the she'll-be-right attitude, get vocal, and demand legislation that fines or jails the CEOs and executives who orchestrate situations and activities that don't pass the pub test.
Also, Aussies must demand legislation that curtails the revolting excesses of these creations of neo-liberal thought because, like any greedy or dishonest entity bereft of morals, they will destroy everything we hold dear. Everything that's left, that is.
John Lawton, Belmont
Protecting our Pacific neighbours
We are a long way from Gaza and feel powerless to help, but let us not lose sight of our own region's problems where we can make a positive difference.
The article by Jeremy Moss ("Let's take responsibility for climate in our part of the world", Opinion, 8/11), reminds us of our obligations. Who doesn't enjoy a Pacific Island holiday and the wonderful hospitality of our neighbours? Then, on return to Australia, we promptly forget their problems due to climate change.
We are big emitters of greenhouse gases and we help other big emitters by exporting fossil fuels to them. From the huge income generated, $233 billion a year (according to Professor Moss) we need to do much more to help these Island communities combat climate change.
It is our moral duty, and if we don't do more, I'm sure the Chinese will.
Sue Boele, Hamilton South
PM fixing diplomatic mess
AIRBUS Albo? Apart from the fact that Scott Morrison holds the record for most overseas trips in his first year (not including his infamous Hawaiian holiday), Albanese has had to travel to undo the diplomatic mess left to him.
Morrison tried to score domestic political points by ham-fistedly attacking the Chinese over COVID, costing Australian exports billions of dollars. Dutton insulted the Pacific Island nations by mocking their predicament with rising sea levels, opening the door to China.
It came with funds, solutions and empathy for their plight. Albanese wouldn't have had to make most of these trips if the previous train wreck of a government had done its job.
John Arnold, Anna Bay
Policies creating energy poverty
Many overseas countries are realising their folly in pursuing the net zero CO2 emissions dream as their populations react to higher energy bills and supply shortages.
Private investment in renewables is declining, as a number of large overseas solar and wind projects have been suspended or cancelled due to problems with supplies, higher interest rates and failure to obtain tax credits, i.e. subsidies. Meanwhile, the federal government's renewable policies, under blackout Bowen, continue to stumble towards energy poverty.
The latest saga comes from AEMO. The energy market operator has asked for commitments for extra generation this summer and tenders from heavy energy users to stop production to lower demand and prevent blackouts. In other words, what will be the cost to taxpayers to stop production? It's just another example of government and bureaucratic net-zero intelligence.
John Cooper, Charlestown
Natural balance destroyed
Nature designed Earth's atmosphere to hold just enough carbon dioxide to provide sufficient heat to allow life to flourish. That is, not too much carbon dioxide that would heat the Earth to a point where life would not be possible, and not too little so that it would freeze all living things.
It is obvious that humans have ignored life-providing examples set by nature. Humans continue to burn fossil fuels to provide energy, thus releasing massive volumes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
Brian Measday, Kingswood
SHORT TAKES
Patronage not only deciding factor for buses
GEOFF Black ("Bus subsidy would go a long way", Letters, 1/11), Keolis Downer don't have to care about seats on buses; my understanding is they get paid per kilometre by the government, hence why they don't care if people don't pay their fares (as so many fail to do now). The NSW government controls the frequency of service, and on-time services must be kept or Keolis Downer is fined per breach of service, whether that be running late or early.
Felipe Stevens, New Lambton
Pacific Islands a costly neighbour
ANOTHER money grab from the Pacific Islands: $350 million from us, the poor taxpayers to help Tuvalu. Looks to me like Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has been conned again. What a rip off.
Don Fraser, Belmont North
Was release the only option?
I THOUGHT that, in my 78 years on this earth, I had seen and heard just about everying. Then, I turn on the TV and hear the refugees (and people held in detention for other reasons) are to be released into the community. The government decided on this when it deemed that these people were held illegally. At least three of these people have reportedly been convicted of murder, while several are serious sex offenders. Take a bow government, and, while you are at it, have a deeper look into our prisons. I am sure there are a few Australians incarcerated at the moment who would welcome the same opportunity that you have afforded these detainees. Who will take responsibility if any of these people released reoffend?
George St John, Jewells
Time for a full Voice accounting
I AGREE with Shane Tull ("Why not disclose Voice spend?", Letters, 13/11), regarding local government spending ratepayers' money on pushing the 'yes' vote in the referendum. These organisations are speaking only for themselves, not the council employees or ratepayers, many of whom would not be 'yes' voters anyway. They should not take political sides. That is not part of their job descriptions.
Ian King, Warners Bay
The low-down on Dutton
Peter Dutton's disgraceful attempt to paint the Labor party as anti-Semitic is a new low even for him. He's like a limbo dancer - no matter how low the bar is set, he finds a way to creep under.
