Bold call proves Albanese is qualified for the job
Albanese's bold and courageous moves on Palestine in defiance of the US and Israel certainly put to bed the trope so loved by the opposition and the Murdoch press that he is weak and indecisive (' Breaking ranks is a defining moment ', August 12). Andrew Macintosh, Cromer
News of the targeted killing by Israeli armed forces of journalist Anas al-Sharif is surely a chilling message from the Israeli government that it is not interested in upholding international law (' Israel kills journalist, four colleagues in Gaza air strike', August 12). If Israel thought Mr al-Sharif was an agent of Hamas it should and could have arrested him and put him on trial. Instead, Israel chose extrajudicial murder, not only of Mr al-Sharif, but his colleagues. 'Redefining civilian targets as military ones', as Dennis Glover wrote in these pages last week (' Lessons from the A-bomb remain unheeded, 80 years on', August 7) is dishonest, and morally and intellectually dubious, and undermines respect for both the law and humanity, not to mention the ability of journalists to freely report on what they see. Doubtless the reporting of Anas al-Sharif was what the government of Israel did not want us to see, and it is why his killing must be condemned by all of us who understand the importance of independent media in a democratic society. Colin Hesse, Nowra
Daniel Aghion, president of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, says 'Australia is now recognising as a state an entity with no agreed borders' (' We will rebuild Gaza ', August 12). Mr Aghion, Palestine does have borders. That was established in 1949, the borders being the Armistice Line, more recently called the Green Line. You know, the borders that existed in May 1967? The borders that Israel invaded in June 1967 in the 'Six Day War'. Have a look at any map and you can clearly see those borders. Gay O'Connor, Manly
While I congratulate the government for its long-overdue recognition of the Palestinian state (' Both sides slam Labor over recognition moves ', August 12), I agree with Palestinian activists that a far better strategy would be for Australian to start applying maximum pressure on Israel, including through boycotts, lobbying other governments to reduce their military supplies to the country, and sanctioning any company or organisation with economic or military connections to the growing settlements in the West Bank. If we announce recognition but do nothing to change the status quo, the existence of the state of a Palestine will be for the most part an illusion – a subjugated people existing within broken lines on a map, rather than a thriving population living in dignity, and respecting the rights of its neighbours. Renee Chartres, Cremorne
Albanese must be on the right path. In internecine battles, as every parent knows, justice has been served when nobody is happy. Elisabeth Goodsall, Wahroonga
Israel's government has twisted our recognition of Palestinian statehood into a win for Hamas. Netanyahu refuses to acknowledge that Israel's world standing has diminished greatly under his leadership. At last many Western leaders have taken a united stand against his criminal barbarity. His trite criticism of Australia for doing so indicates the importance of the PM's decision. Gerardine Grace, Leura
Albanese says 'we will rebuild Gaza'. Meanwhile, the government is struggling to build enough housing for its own citizens. By what stroke of magic will they be able to rebuild an entire country? Pigs might fly. David Lloyd, Thornleigh
Finding home
Your writer Amal Naser, whose grandparents survived the Nakba and were expelled from Palestine in 1948, makes an impassioned plea to our government to help stop the war in Gaza (' Recognition is a mere distraction ', August 12). I agree with her that the death and destruction must stop. But stories of dispossession and violence are also common among Israelis. Like Naser, about 90 per cent of Israelis can claim third-generation refugee status. Their grandparents or parents were expelled from European countries, their homes stolen, their citizenship revoked and their families killed. A million Jews were expelled from Middle Eastern countries like Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen after 1948 with the same consequences. They found refuge in a new country. They do not have a right of return. Doreen Finkelstein, Croydon
My large and extended family were expelled from Arab lands, with no hope of return, in the 1950s because of our religion and ethnicity. We settled all over the world. My parents were refugees yet despite that, I certainly do not consider myself, or my children, second or third-generation refugees. Manuela Epstein, Pyrmont
Like the weekly protests she helps organise and speaks at, Amal Naser's article makes no criticism of Hamas and its ultimate goal – the elimination of Israel. That omission is what keeps me an observer, not a participant, at her protests, and makes me read her passionate and compelling article with just a touch of scepticism. Allen Greer, Sydney
Untouchable Israel
The murderous attack on the King David Hotel by Zionist extremists in 1946 is but one example of the violence that preceded Israel's contentious establishment in 1948 and has continued ever since. How disturbing, then, that Prime Minister Netanyahu's recalcitrance is fomenting antisemitism, rather than ameliorating it. Peter Hartcher's devastating indictment of the Israeli PM, arguing that he is 'making Israel untouchable' is widely shared (' Netanyahu cares only for himself', August 12). It includes the fears of many Jewish people disturbed by his warmongering determination to stay in power, his lack of care for the lives of innocents, including those of his own soldiers and citizens, his government's smashing of life, limb and property in Gaza and, in all, his failure to contemplate a two-state solution in a Middle East incessantly plagued by brutal conflict. Ron Sinclair, Windradyne
Human cost
A young girl in Gaza was recently shown on the international news, trying to play a board game with her feet because her arms had been amputated above the elbow. The heartbreaking image indeed said a thousand words: she is unable to eat, drink, dress herself, draw a picture or engage in most normal childhood activities unassisted. UNICEF estimates 3000 to 4000 Gazan children have lost at least one limb, with Gaza having the world's highest rate of child amputees relative to population size. What of those who have no surviving family to care for them? Please, let's focus on ameliorating the devastation to innocent lives, especially the children, hostages and other civilians. In Albert Einstein's words: 'We can't solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them'. Great respect to Dr Victoria Rose, Dr Graeme Groom and the other medical personnel working in the most egregious of circumstances (' The doctors bearing witness to Gaza ', August 10). Humanitarianism is above politics and doesn't take sides; it acts justly and with care to protect, improve and save imperilled lives, wherever the need may be. Dare we hope that the amputee children may be compassionately expedited by those wielding power to at least be assisted with prosthetics? Barbara Chapman, South Yarra (Vic)
Get real on climate change
Claire Snyder is dead right in her assertion that we should be aiming for real zero rather than net zero, and provides examples of companies that are well on the way to doing so (' Forget net zero. We need 'real zero' ', August 12). The net zero concept allows companies to buy carbon credits to offset their emissions. Woodside's North West Shelf project, to which Environment Minister Murray Watt has given conditional approval, blew its emissions limit in 2023-24 and used carbon credits to offset this. When claiming offsets, companies usually only offset their operations and not the emissions from the product itself. According to figures from the Australia Institute, up to 75 per cent of Australia's carbon credits do not result in real emissions reductions, so, as Twiggy Forrest has said, 'now is the time to walk away from net zero 2050. That hasn't been anything really but a con to maintain fossil fuels'. Peter Nash, Fairlight
Claire Snyder's article cherry-picks a small selection of examples and proclaims that we should forget net zero because real zero is in reach. Is this really credible across the economy? Fortescue, one of her case studies, is struggling and failing to deliver on its ambitious plans, which doesn't bode well for the 'real zero now' movement. While environment groups may not like the real politick, if Australia did drop net zero for real zero, there would be a real risk that climate action would lose its social license when the economic and social impacts hit the regular person. We already see that in regional communities today that are fighting against renewable energy projects. Undermining the fragile consensus around net zero to push for the perfect 'real zero' may very well lead to the opposite of what Claire Snyder wants. Ash Roth, Sydney
It's no surprise that Advance has taken the next step down the Trumpian road, threatening Coalition members with 'dump net zero or we dump you' (' Right-wing group targets 'weakling' Liberals ', August 11). Bullying tactics have been remarkably effective for Trump in turning the Republican Party into yes-men and getting him the presidency. The Coalition would like nothing better than to do the same thing here, despite its drubbing at the election under a hard-right leader. George Brandis and others never tire of telling the Coalition that the Australian electoral system favours parties of the centre. Why persist with hard-right politics when the rise of the teals shows they were heading in the wrong direction? The answer probably is that the hard right, or the hard left for that matter, are not for turning, and Trump's astounding success helped by the likes of Fox News has given the right a boost worldwide, which they are intent on increasing. It would be nice to say it couldn't happen here. A year ago, many US citizens would have said it couldn't happen there. Gary Barnes, Mosman
Predictable problem
Of course Donald Trump is 'a little bothered by the fact' that President Zelensky has to get constitutional approval for a land swap (' Trump praises 'respectful' Putin, criticises Zelensky ahead of crucial summit ', August 12). As someone who blatantly ignores his own constitution, it is beyond Trump's comprehension that others abide by theirs. James Mahoney, McKellar (ACT)
Hard housing truth
Although underquoting might lead to more competition and result in some bidders paying more than planned, the harsh reality is that there are people prepared to pay the higher price (' Underquoting exposed '). We haven't heard from any sellers disappointed that there property sold for more than expected. Oh no – that sounds like I'm defending real estate agents. Neil Reckord, Gordon (ACT)
Like Gerard Baz (Letters, August 12), we spent more than a year researching the local market, and I think we are being unfair to estate agents. In the heat of an auction, prices can be driven to high levels. I recall a villa being sold for $2.67 million when the suburb record was less than $2 million. No one could have predicted that. The remedies suggested by your correspondents amount to private treaty with a stated price. An auction, however, remains the best method of price discovery and maximising vendor returns. John Christie, Oatley
Clip course price
If licensing cost is a major factor pushing up the price of hairdressing, the solution is not to loosen the regulation, but to lower the cost of the prerequisite courses (' Regulation in NSW overdue for a trim ', August 12). First, let those who already have some training sit a test, like learner drivers get their driving licences, combining knowledge testing and practical testing. Do not force them to go through another Cert III course costing $13,000-28,000 and wasting time. Second, make those courses cheaper for novices. This is where government and industry can co-operate. Very often we hear complaints that regulation stifles economies, with the private sector wanting less scrutiny on their behaviour, service or product standards. What they should advocate is a smarter way to work with regulators. Kim Woo, Mascot
Mixed choices
When survey respondents are asked to rank alternative government priorities, it's important that the alternatives really are separate. In the latest Resolve Political Monitor, 41 per cent of respondents said they 'believe 'keeping the cost of living low' should be the government's top priority, with 'housing and rental accessibility' a distant second on 10 per cent' (' How inflation hits your hip pocket ', August 12). But isn't it possible that many who opted for 'keeping the cost of living low' would have considered 'housing and rental accessibility' to be part of this, and that many who opted for 'housing and rental accessibility' would have seen this as part of 'keeping the cost of living low'? Murray Goot, Macquarie University
Billy goats
The Troll Bar under that bridge is a great idea, and what a joyless bunch of burghers they are at North Sydney Council (' Sydney Council banishes 'troll bar' from under the Harbour Bridge ', August 12). Just imagine the frisson of having to answer a really hard question to gain entrance to the bar like: 'What is an acceptable cost overrun for rebuilding a public swimming pool?' or 'How much should you charge out-of-towners to watch a fireworks show?' Seriously, I fail to see how such a bar could detract from the heritage of our bridge. How sad that the pathetic fun police rule that part of the city: the trolls should gobble you up. Yours gruffly. Russ Couch, Woonona
From the small bar epicentre of the inner west, I'm at a loss to understand the thinking behind the veto of a small bar under the Harbour Bridge, citing a lack of connection with the Scandinavian 'troll' myth. Of course, Opera House architect Jan Utzon immediately springs to mind. Might I suggest resubmitting the request with the name Grinch Bar – it seems a good fit given the attitudes of our northern neighbours. Janet Argall, Hurlstone Park
The North Sydney NIMBYs have morphed into NOTUMBYs (No trolls under my bridgey). I suggest the proposed business be called Whine Bar – a nod to the locals who could meet there to mull over their next campaign. Donald Proctor, Cremorne
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
7 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Victoria is the nation's debt dunce but the competition is hotting up
Victorian Premier Jacinta Allan has previously indicated she is up for a conversation about how to broaden the tax base of states that don't have access to lucrative resource royalties. It may surprise some to learn that if you mention vertical fiscal imbalance, the premier can talk the leg off a chair. She also understands the urgency. Although a national agreement on health funding – the biggest expense items within her government's budget – commits the Commonwealth to eventually provide what the states consider a fair share, that day is still 10 years away. In the meantime, the state must find savings elsewhere or keep borrowing to make up the shortfall. This year the funding gap is $1.6 billion in a $22 billion health budget. (This column's earlier, unsolicited advice for the premier to dump her pet infrastructure project, the Suburban Rail Loop, has so far gone unheeded.) The state premiers didn't make it onto Chalmers' guest list and state/federal finances aren't on the agenda of his three-day powwow in Canberra next week. Eslake doesn't criticise these omissions from an already jam-packed roundtable program but he wonders how bad things need to get before Australia turns its mind to the thorny problem of rebalancing how money is spent and how revenue is raised across the Commonwealth. 'I think federal/state financial relations is an important issue, but I don't have a lot of company,' he laments. So, what exactly is this $900 billion elephant? According to the latest budget figures compiled by S&P Global Ratings, an international rating company that keeps a close eye on the fiscal position of the federal and state governments, this is the combined, gross debt of Australian states and territories forecast for the end of this decade. If we include the gross debt forecast to be on the federal government's own books by that stage, Australia's debt mountain will reach a $2.1 trillion base camp by June 30, 2029 along the way to a still unknown peak. Victoria, by its own budget figures, is the most indebted state in Australia. The $213 billion gross debt it has amassed as of July 1 this year represents nearly one third of the total debt currently owed by all states and territories combined. The best news for Victoria is that, in its push towards fiscal profligacy, it has some serious competition from Queensland and Tasmania. S&P lead analyst Martin Foo says while Victoria still has the weakest balance sheet of all state and territory governments, its raft of new property and payroll taxes unpopular with business has at least stabilised its fiscal position. 'We have pointed out consistently that a lot of the fiscal challenges Australia faces right now are at the state level, rather than federal level,' he says. 'Victoria has been the focus of attention for the last couple of years. Maybe it has flown under the radar a bit but some of the mid-sized and smaller states, particularly Tasmania and Queensland, are accumulating debt at a very rapid pace.' Eslake reckons his home state of Tasmania, which remains without a functioning government after two elections in the space of 15 months, already deserves Victoria's mantle as Australia's fiscal dunce. In 2019, Tasmania's gross debt was just $3.2 billion. That figure is forecast to treble this year and to increase more than six-fold from its pre-pandemic level by 2029. Loading Queensland is sharply accelerating the amount of debt it is taking on, with last year's figure of $106.6 billion forecast to nearly double by the end of the decade as the state prepares for the 2032 Olympics. Although these numbers look scarier the further you look into the future, the source of the problem is more immediate. The S&P figures show that in the last financial year, the states and territories posted a combined cash deficit of $55 billion.
Sydney Morning Herald
7 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Warning from Washington: Speak out about Chinese threat or risk AUKUS subs
Washington: Australia must speak more clearly about the threats posed by China, including how it would respond to a regional conflict, or risk the AUKUS submarine agreement, Indo-Pacific experts in the United States are warning. John Bolton, who served as Donald Trump's national security adviser in his first term, and held senior roles in other Republican administrations, said policymakers in Washington had noted the Albanese government was 'less vocal about what the problem is' compared with its predecessors. 'It is a little hard to get used to,' Bolton said in an interview. 'In the Cold War days, Labour governments in Great Britain were just as anti-communist as the Conservatives. When you see a leftist government that's not willing to talk as openly about what the real threat is, it does make some people nervous. 'I would be less than fully candid if I said it didn't make me a little nervous. Why the hell are we worried about talking about what the threat is? The struggle is on, and we ought to be candid about it.' Naval operations expert Bryan Clark, a senior fellow at the conservative Hudson Institute with close links to the administration, said the AUKUS review was about putting Australia on notice that the US expected Australia to use the submarines it bought. 'The Australians have been a little reticent to explicitly call out that they might use them against China,' he told this masthead. 'If you're not willing to say it in public, then you're not going to put the Chinese on notice. It has been privately conveyed in the past, but the US would like Australia to make it more public.' Clark noted – as have other prominent defence experts in Washington – that AUKUS represented a significant portion of the Australian defence budget, especially at the current level of defence spending. 'That's the concern in the US – that you're spending 10 to 20 per cent of your procurement budget on this one system, yet you're not talking about how you might use it,' he said.
Sydney Morning Herald
7 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Albanese is ignoring Trump's demands – it will change our place in the world
When the world changes, it's folly not to change with it. Finding itself in an external environment that is in many respects full of shocks, the Albanese government is staking out a more independent – or at the very least, a less America-dependent – security and diplomatic stance for Australia. As is its way, rather than galloping in this direction, the government is crab walking. Anthony Albanese goes out of his way not to make a big deal of it and never wants to look like he's undermining Donald Trump. He continues to send the hefty cheques to America to keep AUKUS alive and has said several times this week that Trump is an enduring 'advocate for peace in the Middle East', which is what the US president likes to hear. But the signs of the shift are mounting. The AUKUS agreement was conceived chiefly to thwart China's territorial and defence ambitions in our larger region. Knowing that the future of AUKUS is being reconsidered by the Trump administration and that Trump is capricious and often punitive in the way he applies tariffs against those who don't dance to his tune, Australia under Albanese is nevertheless steadfastly building on a more accommodating approach towards China. The prime minister's reasoning is simple: China underpins our economy and it pays not to overtly antagonise it. Meanwhile, America remains fixated on viewing China as its great economic competitor and geopolitical rival. Albanese's point-blank rejection of a series of direct and indirect demands from Trump's Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and US government factotums to almost double its defence spending to 3.5 per cent of GDP is perhaps the boldest stance he has taken as PM. Albanese's continued dismissals are truly getting up the US administration's nose; various underlings are now regularly briefing reporters against Australia. And this week Albanese and Foreign Minister Penny Wong foreshadowed the recognition of a Palestinian state, comprehensively at odds with the stance of the US, which is the Netanyahu government's chief military supplier and diplomatic enabler. These positions are not without risk, given how deeply enmeshed Australia has become in its alliance with America, and how long Australia has regarded Israel as a friend. But given the twin shocks of Trump's rapid transformation of the US government and Benjamin Netanyahu's military strategy in response to Hamas' diabolical attacks in 2023, which has failed to return all of the hostages, laid waste to Gaza, killed tens of thousands of civilians and led to widespread starvation, it's difficult to see how a prudent government could not have taken this course. Loading The adjustments taking place in our relationships are in line with broader public sentiment in Australia. Trump's Secretary of State Marco Rubio has dismissed Palestinian recognition by countries including Australia as meaningless and driven by domestic politics. In a sense, he is right. Recognition is a mostly symbolic tactic designed to impose diplomatic pressure on Israel. It might not work and probably won't while America continues to physically support Netanyahu's every action. But is Trump's foreign America First policy not also driven by his domestic political intentions? This week his vice president JD Vance said the US government would no longer send arms to Ukraine because Americans were 'sick' of their government doing so. Instead, the US will sell arms to European countries who can give them to Ukraine. Australia's strategic positions should not chop and change, but they should develop over time and reflect the general sympathies and inclinations of the bulk of its people. Because of our geographical isolation and colonial past, with a nation-state built on immigration, Australia is an outward-looking country. Most Australians see Trump for what he is: a great disruptor. Trump bases all his decisions on his own self-interest. And because he is the president and is dedicated to accruing as much personal power as possible, to the extent that he is now ignoring his own courts and militarising policing in cities that don't vote for him, those decisions and actions are expressed ultimately as being in America's own best interests.
