Politicians’ shallow slogans sidestep the important issues

The leaders’ debate reinforced the alarming state of Australian politics – big promises, little substance (“Albanese or Dutton? Our experts deliver their leaders’ debate verdicts,” April 17). As a Gen Z voter, I’m constantly targeted with policies claiming to improve my future. But neither party seems willing to explain how they’ll pay for it. With federal spending projected at $734.5 billion and debt nearing $1 trillion, Australia is hitting record-high peacetime expenditure. Budget deficits are forecast for at least the next five years. Despite these disturbing figures, both sides seem afraid of the word “cuts” – evident in Peter Dutton backtracking on public service reductions. When moderator David Speers asked the leaders what they wanted to be remembered for, the answer should have been clear: restoring fiscal responsibility. Instead, we’re left with shallow slogans and a future of mounting debt. Zachary Andrews, Lane Cove North

The interesting thing in the debate was the questions left unanswered. Albo fudged on when electricity prices would come down. A more direct response would have been to point out that the government was only one influence on prices. Wars, corporate investment, and resistance to things like wind farms all influence pricing. On the other hand, Dutton refused to confirm that climate change existed. I can see why the PM avoided answering his question, but I cannot vote for a person who refuses to accept that climate change exists. Neville Turbit, Russell Lea

Peter Dutton said during the debate that he couldn’t comment about climate change because he is not a scientist. The fact that he is not an economist doesn’t stop him from commenting on the economy. What a convenient double standard. Bill Gillis, Hallidays Point

Despite the billing, the most disappointing aspect of the debate must undoubtedly be the total absence of leadership from either party. At a time when the nation needs vision, ambition and optimism to address the horrific problems of our time, the major parties seem determined to distract the electorate with a few seductive, short-term crumbs rather than satiate their longer-term hunger for change. The minor parties must surely be the winners. Simon Wright, Orange

It seems the Coalition may have taken advantage of Labor’s largesse with free TAFE education and taken a crash course on verballing. Dutton is a master at it – any invention is on the table. The Indonesian president is one of his latest victims and the debate saw his usual refrain of “people I run into say”, used on many occasions. And now his colleague, Nationals senator Bridget McKenzie, clearly freshly emboldened by her TAFE course, has weighed in, making unsubstantiated statements that Russia and China want Labor to win the election. Really? Who did she approach for that information? Clearly not Russia or China. This just goes to confirm you can’t believe a word this mob say. Bill Young, Killcare Heights

Dutton verbals President Prabowo Subianto, Bridget McKenzie verbals President Xi. Is the Coalition looking to set a record offending foreign leaders, or is this just a case of the lazy incompetence we so often see from the Coalition? Bloopers, contradictory statements, policies without detail, some not even making it past the halfway mark of the campaign. Is the new Coalition slogan “near enough is good enough”? Phil Bradshaw, Naremburn

Weak? I’ll show you weak. For months now Dutton, his federal colleagues and that other rag have tried to label Anthony Albanese as weak. If the leaders’ debate proved anything it was that there was only one weak leader on stage, and it wasn’t Anthony Albanese. The “weak” campaign just tanked. Find another slogan, Mr Dutton, and please, no more “mistakes”. Kevin Farrell, Beelbangera

Things are crook in Tallarook, or at least in the Coalition’s election campaign. The Herald could find no evidence for McKenzie’s accusation against Russia. It sure sounds a lot like 1950s “Reds under the beds” scaremongering. Chris Moe, Bensville

Coalition leaders have a history of shooting off their mouths when it comes to Russia and China (“Coalition frontbencher apologises for saying Russia and China want Labor to win election”, April 17). Whether it is Tony Abbott promising to “shirtfront” Putin or Scott Morrison’s COVID witch-hunt, the urge to act the strongman may play well in some circles, but it has done little to advance Australia’s international standing and has certainly backfired in the case of China. Genuine comments by Pacific leaders show that they are concerned about a Coalition victory, preferring a government that treats other nations with dignity and respect. This is a sign of true strength, not an indication of weakness. Philip Cooney, Wentworth Falls

Keep health public

Healthscope has made repeated requests to return the public portion of the Northern Beaches Hospital to public hands 14 years ahead of schedule, but their Canadian investor Brookfield will no doubt want its money back (“Northern Beaches Hospital failing the community, audit finds”, April 17). But how about we stop doing this with public-private partnerships? How about instead of getting the ambulance to the bottom of the cliff, we start at the top and don’t go into these partnerships in the first place? They have a poor history of corporate and clinical governance in health care in Australia. How about we express some confidence in the regulation of the public sector and plan, build and operate in the public sector. If that means higher taxes, so be it. Jennifer Haines, Glossodia

A report by the NSW Auditor General found that a PPP “creates tension between commercial imperatives and clinical outcomes”. How extraordinary! Who could have predicted this? Surely the profit motive improved efficiency? No? Ian Bowie, Bowral

Pull the plug on AUKUS

The fixation with nailing Australia’s colours to the mast (or in this case, periscope) of AUKUS will prove as effective as installing flyscreens on a submarine (“AUKUS takes toll on defence spending”, April 17). Much has already been written regarding changes in warfare technology in which crewed submarines will go the way of ironclads and dreadnoughts. The country should be as an echidna, bristling with defences that are home-grown, quick to produce and individually expendable. Let’s up the ante and invest in an array of domestically manufactured defences that don’t have a sub-plot of obsolescence, burgeoning budget and crew security. Steve Dillon, Thirroul

It’s past time to end Morrison’s poisonous legacy of AUKUS, a disaster that is already devouring the defence budget. This policy was Morrison’s signature “up yours” to his factional enemy, Malcolm Turnbull, and the eminently sensible policy of just defending our exposed sea lanes. The defence forces are already woefully understaffed and under-resourced. Where the defence budget will be in three years’ time is anyone’s guess. Restore our defence sovereignty now and end AUKUS. Solutions are but a phone call away. Richard Bryce, Shellharbour

The report from the Strategic Analysis Australia think tank is spot-on. AUKUS must be cancelled before any more money is wasted on it. There are three alternative submarine options available, all cheaper. Two have a superior product and all have shorter delivery timeframes. Australia must also consider replacing the F/A-18 aircraft with the superior Dassault Rafale. Again cheaper, and not subject to the structural and software shortcomings of the F/A-18. Stephen Healion, Wang Wauk

Stay safe, stay away

Many of us share Jenna Price’s justified feelings about “the lunacy of the Trump presidency” (“DFAT bonkers not to raise US alert”, April 17). My son made a business trip to America during the first Trump presidency; he was locked in a room for many hours and told he would not be allowed into the country. He was only let in after he asked to contact the Australian Embassy for assistance. Jenna’s detailing of the horrors of what the irresponsible policies of this bullying political thug have perpetrated are surely known to DFAT. If it was doing its job properly it should have resulted in warnings to our travellers about the adverse possible consequences of visiting the USA under this second, even worse Trump regime. Moreover, traveller advice by the likes of Flight Centre should also make clear their reservations about Trump’s dictatorial actions which are also damaging to the USA itself. Ron Sinclair, Windradyne

It’s a sad day when we are warned not to travel to the US. In my travels there, I found my accent and Akubra got me warm responses from Americans. Andrew Macintosh, Cromer

Choose wisely

As a voter in the seat of Bradfield, I would far rather my representative be someone who can become a member of the highest circles in government – of whatever hue – such as being a cabinet minister, help decide the priorities for the nation and deal with the most important problems we face overall as a country (“Even most affluent suburbs feel the pinch as businesses struggle,” April 17). This is a wealthy electorate in which, while there are some of the general problems which beset us all, our problems are nothing compared to those faced by Australians in less wealthy electorates. Electing another independent, ostensibly to deal with our purported local needs, is a pure indulgence and a wasted vote. Peter Thornton, Killara

Your article on the cost-of-living pressures on small business was followed, after a few pages of advertising for new bedding, by an article concerning the extraordinary pricing for tickets to see Lady Gaga. The tickets will be bought, as will the beds. Someone has money. Genevieve Milton, Dulwich Hill

Home offices

Peter Dutton cited poor productivity as the reason he opposed the popular work-from-home trend. While a tiny percentage of workers may take advantage, family care and savings in time and fuel far outweigh the behaviour of this minority. I suspect pressure from the real estate lobby looking to rent empty office space was the reason for this push. Marty Yeomans’ suggestion of adapting redundant commercial property to almost immediately available rental housing needs urgent consideration by both federal and state governments (Letters, April 17). Within a year, thousands presently homeless people could have a roof over their heads in buildings already standing. Barbara Watt, Frenchs Forest

Not only offices and warehouses are vacant, Martyn Yeomans – many houses are, too. They can be easy to spot – house in disrepair and unkempt yards. Perhaps the electricity providers and Sydney water could report on properties that haven’t had usage for a few months or more. These owners should be forced by law to rent the properties out for long-term leasing. Houses are for living in, not for “parking” the owner’s money to eventually turn a profit. Lizzy McLean, Bilgola

There was a general outcry when about 100 housing commission homes were built in Balgowlah Heights near where I lived while growing up in the 1950s. The main complaint seemed to be that they all looked the same and would “lower the tone” of the neighbourhood. To look at them now, with established gardens and in some cases additions, this is no longer the case when compared with modern houses. The question is, why can’t public housing be attractive to start with? Judith Rostron, Killarney Heights

The conversation about negative gearing always assumes that it is all or nothing, and each side has many passionate supporters. Why not consider a three, five or 10-year suspension of the right to claim deductions resulting from losses on rental properties purchased in that period? This will reduce the number of investors bidding at auctions against people who need a place to live without ruining the investments of existing users. Any extension can be a matter for future debate and electioneering. Stein Boddington, St Clair

Guilty as charged

In 1979, at the age of 24, my new wife and I bought a semi with a big, grassy backyard and a granny flat in Neutral Bay, which cost the equivalent of nearly five times my gross income as a first year professional, or six times my wife’s. In the interim, we Baby Boomers voted in Baby Boomers, who sold off public assets and created HECS. As an experienced lawyer, I plead guilty as I see no chance on available evidence to defend the charges that younger Australians level at me and my contemporaries. Collectively, we have feathered our nests and deprived our children of a fair go (“Back off, Boomer! You didn’t have to go bush for a house”, April 16). Andrew Cohen, Glebe

A sage on age

Private certifiers took over from council inspectors in 1998. I mention this because in a recent discussion with a long-time friend of mine well versed in these matters, I recounted that in a recent letter to the Herald, a lady from the north shore wrote among other things that she would not consider buying a unit less than 10 years old. His immediate rejoinder was “make that 25 years”. I now understand why. Tim O’Donnell, Newport

Rewrite the rote

Abandoning trimesters at UNSW is good news for students (“Not about the money’: UNSW dumps controversial trimesters”, April 17). Reasons given were especially significant. First and foremost, students wanted to “engage deeply in subjects”. This is something that good students have always wanted, and researchers have identified ways to encourage and enable such an approach to learning at university. These include the use of problem-based learning, case method teaching (especially in business schools), simulations and similar interactive pedagogies. However, most courses are still taught using lectures and assessed using exams that are primarily tests of simple recall. Such practices tend to discourage deep engagement with the subject and reward rote learning. Reform in higher education should go far beyond abandoning trimesters. Universities need to apply their own research to improve their educational practices. George Rosier, Carlingford

Straight, no sugar

Continuing the witticisms from your correspondents (Letters, April 17), one surely can’t go past Sir Winston Churchill’s acid retort to Lady Astor, who admonished him with “Sir Winston, if I were your wife, I’d poison your tea.” He swiftly replied: “Madam, if I were your husband, I’d drink it.” Vic Alhadeff, Darlinghurst

• To submit a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald, email letters@smh.com.au. Click here for tips on how to submit letters.
• The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform. Sign up here.