Joel Fitzgibbon (“Why voters believe One Nation can resolve their state of angst”, April 4) is right: if voters want to know what One Nation really stands for, they should stop listening to the slogans and start reading the voting record. One Nation has built a business model around anger – cost of living, regional neglect, housing stress – while pretending outrage is the same thing as a solution. Because when it comes time to vote, the pattern is often the opposite of the image they sell. Just a couple of examples, and there are many. Pauline Hanson has continually supported the removal of Sunday and public holiday penalty rates and backed tax cuts for high-income earners, a strange way to stand up for the workers she claims to represent. That is the real story. They speak the language of battlers, but too often vote against their interests. Voters should stop listening to what One Nation says and start looking at what it actually votes for. Denise McHugh, Tamworth
One Nation backers have identified some of the issues that have caused that angst: cost of living, declining industrial base, energy insecurity, gun ownership and immigration among them. Many of us would share those concerns, but we recognise that it is easy to identify problems and issues. The real test is to explain just how you intend to resolve them, and that is where One Nation has so far been silent. It is surprising and disappointing to read that more than a million Australians are prepared to vote for a party with no clear policies at all, just because they are not Labor, Liberal, the Nationals or the Greens. Let’s hope things become clearer before the next state election.Col Nicholson, Hawks Nest
One Nation, or more accurately the “No Notion Party”, is now being seen as a genuine political force. This is a party that is devoid of any worthwhile offering on complex issues. In essence, it is a compendium of grievances that lack well-thought-out, or costed, alternatives. One Nation’s simplicity and seemingly readily available solutions are what disaffected and politically naive voters find so attractive. To embrace these solutions, we risk becoming a tawdry copy of Trump’s America. Trevor Somerville, Illawong
Competence-plus
We all love competency in the people we count on and are amazed when we see it in others we encounter (“Why I’m hooked on competency porn”, April 4). When medical practitioners can diagnose and treat our problems competently, we owe our lives to them. When a journalist competently interviews and breaks a story, we trust every word they write after that. When business leaders deliver what they promise, we become loyal customers. This is all good, but competency can solve problems today only for those solutions to create future problems – unless the leaders have T-shaped skills. The vertical line denotes specialist knowledge for depth, while the horizontal line represents generalist knowledge encompassing other affected areas. Unfortunately, we see business and political leaders relying only on narrow specialist skills from experts in specific areas to generate solutions. Cost-cutting solutions lead to safety problems, privatisation leads to profit motive supremacy rather than community and service, interest rate rises may curb demand and harm industry, cuts to migration might win an election but lead to labour shortages, and using AI may cannibalise your own job in the medium term. Unless competency includes other touchpoints and long-term considerations, it can generate only short-term solutions. Manbir Singh, Pemulwuy
Thank you, Julia Baird, for pointing out the general lack of competence we see in our politicians. After many years of incompetence we eventually ended up with the current Labor government, voted in on a promise of competence, better than the low levels of competence accepted by far too many. We seem to have ended up with a modicum of competence, which when displayed is accepted as something exceptional – in reality it isn’t, it’s simply competence. Sadly, this competence seems to be increasingly eroded by politics. I’m repeatedly told such politics are normal, no matter how much we desire competence. Does it have to be so? Mark Tietjen, Redfern
Julia Baird nails it again. As she suggests, many Australians are good at recognising competence in everyday workers and expect it in their political leaders. But it is rare to find it in MPs. We are suffering from inept leadership at state and federal levels alike. A good example in Baird’s article is the level of immigration. Our immigrant society has thrived on the skills and initiatives brought by new arrivals, including more than a million refugees from war-torn countries. The continuous economic growth since the late 1940s has been possible only with the influx of migrants, which our extremist political parties now want to extinguish. Baird quotes former Treasury secretary Martin Parkinson, who decries the “culture-wars garbage” on immigration. His 2023 review of migration avoided the big or small quantity debate by asking for an updated skills test to get the “best people”. Why can’t our leaders call for this objective from their exalted positions? The endless cry for net zero immigration must be squashed by competent leadership. Doug Hewitt, Hamilton
I would add to Julia Baird’s definition of competent leadership, having the courage to revive the best of what we’ve lost instead of simply reacting to the latest crisis. Even within living memory, the list of casualties is endless – cheap rents near work and study, free tertiary education, paying off your first mortgage in under 10 years, parks and yards to run around and dream in, and pre-poker-machine era pubs presenting the likes of Midnight Oil and AC/DC. I fear this is less “OK boomer” nostalgia than a massive redistribution of wealth where a fair go is no longer our birthright. If we value national identity over grievance-based extremism, then “to get stuff done with efficiency, precision and skill”, as Baird puts it, we could do worse than borrow from the happiest country in the world, Finland, or more organically, from what once grew in our own backyard. Peter Farmer, Northbridge
Tax correctors
Your correspondent (Letters, April 4) is right, “politicians think the tax that workers pay to the government belongs to the government”. And nowhere were the tragic effects of this clearer than in the Coalition’s disastrous and illegal Robo-debt scheme. Kerrie Wehbe, Blacktown
Your correspondent claims “ordinary, hard-working Australians resent big government” because politicians think the tax yield belongs to the government. And why should the government get taxes? Hospitals, schools, TAFE, law enforcement, firefighters, car registration and road maintenance cost nothing, do they? Al Svirskis, Mount Druitt
The government makes no sacrifice when it forgoes revenue. The taxpayer ultimately pays for this boon, in reduced services or higher national debt. John Christie, Oatley
I think your correspondent has it wrong. It’s the people who object to paying a fair tax who think that tax then belongs to the government, rather than giving the government a means to return it to the taxpayer in the form of necessary services such as health, education, welfare, defence etc. Ken Ryan, Clovelly
Digital era daunting for seniors
Digital exclusion of seniors is a real issue (“Keyboard Worriers”, April 4). Online resources have limited value for seniors who struggle to connect. The gold standard is face-to-face, one-on-one support. Your otherwise excellent article but failed to mention another community resource, computer clubs for seniors, where volunteers provide affordable, friendly support. I volunteer at Computer Pals for Seniors The Hills in Castle Hill NSW. Volunteering as a digital mentor is very rewarding when you see someone learn a new skill that helps them to maintain their independence in an increasingly online world. Deborah Martin, Toongabbie
Lack of computer literacy for the “elderly” hit close to home for me, but for a different reason. My industry, pharmacy, was a very early adopter of PCs – I was computerised even before the advent of Windows, at least 35 years ago I suspect. I even did a DOS course at the local Tech. So I can, at 75, manage all the “difficult” tasks mentioned, preferably on my PC. Regardless of what I try to do, even on the big screen, I am compelled to use apps, Satan’s spawn sent to make my life a misery. Call NRMA road service? Charge my EV? Renew my rego? Check a Medicare refund? Log on to internet banking on my PC? “Please save time waiting and confirm it is you by opening the app and clicking Yes.” My peers and I hate doing almost anything on a smartphone. The writing is too small, my fingers are too big, whatever I type is changed by “autocorrect” into something else, and by the time I pinch text out so that I can read it the rest of the information has vanished off the screen. Yet we are constantly forced to do so. A few days ago at Bunnings I asked for the receipt to be sent to me by text, and the very sweet assistant couldn’t understand why I didn’t just “get it off the app”. I’ll pass on that, thanks. Ian Morris, Strathfield
What a great discussion. I am in my 60s and have no problem using computers, phone or Internet, with a preference for big girl’s pants, ie, full-size keyboard. A few school teachers of my vintage rejected computers as a threat. Our employers pushed us to keep adapting, but these teachers seemed to be left behind. My ageing parents struggled terribly with technology, and it was a serious burden when dealing with the health system. Most current system communication, banking for example, seems mostly AI, which is very prescriptive and circuitous. I believe corporations and government departments need be reined in to limit the robo-treatment of vulnerable people. Sue Dellit, Austinmer
Weigh the odds
The constant comparison between gambling and cigarette advertising (Letters, April 4) is a red herring. Cigarette companies spent decades lying and hiding the evidence that cigarettes kill. They were promoted as fashionable and health-giving. Still today, young people take up smoking and vaping for social cachet. Yet every puff is toxic and damaging to multiple organs. Where do the gambling companies lie and hide evidence? Many people gamble sensibly and derive much pleasure and no damage from it. There is simply no comparison to smoking, which is always seriously damaging. And then we have many seriously rich people who have made their wealth from gambling. Whoever got cool and healthy by smoking packets a day? How about people accepting some individual responsibility and stopping blaming everyone else – the media, the sporting bodies, the gambling companies, the government – for their own actions? Richard Abram, Bexley
Some letters, disappointingly, deride the new gambling ad restrictions, which are a step to build on. Many people, and apparently Tim Costello among them, claim they don’t go anywhere far enough and want an outright ban now. Those with memories long enough will recall the restrictions on alcohol advertising during sports games and later restrictions on smoking ads. These were only the beginning and, especially with smoking, gradually led to far more extensive bans, all for community benefit. An outright ban from the start would lead to confrontation with the gambling lobby, which is influential and well financed, and this could result in no bans at all. Let’s just take it step by step. Brian Collins, Cronulla
At ease, EVs
I’ve been driving my small hybrid vehicle for 10 years, and, yes, it’s designed for maximum efficiency in the urban environment (Letters, April 4). It is 100 per cent reliable, calm and quiet to drive, and averages 3.6 L/100km. Following the recommendation of the International Energy Agency, lately I’ve been trying to keep to 10km/h below the speed limit, to optimise EV mode and reduce petrol consumption. From the behaviour of most other drivers I observe, you’d think they hadn’t heard of this simple approach to fuel economy, or that the steep rise in the price of petrol didn’t bother them at all. Tailgating, swerving and whizzing on by, most seem not to care at all about conserving fuel. Meredith Williams, Baulkham Hills
I can advise your correspondent searching for EV chargers when travelling south through the Central Coast that he needs only to take the Pacific Highway exit at Ourimbah and recharge at BP Wyoming. Three chargers, there for about a year now, are in use daily. Dave Horsfall, North Gosford
Timely suggestion
When daylight saving starts again in October, why don’t we just put the clocks forward 30 minutes and make that the year round Eastern Standard Time. Even Queensland might agree to that. It would save a lot of money and confusion. Ron Field, Bermagui
Lunar living
The Artemis II astronauts have sent back stunning images of the Earth (“Artemis II astronauts rocket towards the moon”, April 4), reminding us how beautiful but also how finite and fragile is our planet. As Bette Midler sang in her 1990s song, From a distance, it is almost possible to forget, when viewing from such a perspective, the ravages of war, famine, disharmony and exploitation. It is once again time for the voice of hope, the voice of peace, the voice of every inhabitant to be heard. Philip Cooney, Wentworth Falls
So that is why there is a woman on board Artemis II, to clean the windows and fix the plumbing. That figures, doesn’t it? Kath Maher, Lidcombe
- 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.
