Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Readers Write: You tell us your views and your comments

By Readers Write - posted Monday, 27 September 2004


Readers Write.

Judged by your feedback the community is very concerned and divided over politics and morality. Here are a selection of your views. It is great to see a lively discussion happening through our feedback facility. If you have a point to make or an opinion to share, email us at submissions@onlineopinion.com.au and we will publish as many as we can.

Advertisement

Alex Deane’s The Tampa refugees: John Howard was right provoked outrage from Marilyn Shepherd: “To claim that Howard was right is grotesque...”

Julie Thomas (Qld.) admits to a certain dichotomy: “The argument that people on the Tampa were not refugees may be right and the denial of asylum to these people may have been the best policy but Howard was not right. He was wrong and immoral and it was unnecessary and dishonourable to use the methods he did to achieve this end.”



Advertisement
In the climate of the election campaign, writing from the Sunshine Coast in Queensland, Tom Hampstead takes issue with Andrew Leigh (In the climate of the election campaign, writing from the Sunshine Coast in Queensland, Tom Hampstead takes issue with Andrew Leigh (Matched on Mojo, powers to persuade) and says he: “Can’t understand why Howard is widely thought of as lying”.

He goes on: “Certainly he has changed his mind and certainly at times been stubborn. In some texts (sic) this is cited as positive characteristics for a leader to have. What’s so important about this topic anyway? Is it just that it is a central plank in Labor’s attack on him.”



Tom also tells Irene Khan (Is Australia reneging on its tradition of support for human rights?) to: “Get a life”.



Alex Whisson (WA) bemoans the absence of an appeal to the common good. He writes: “One of the striking features of the current election campaign is the absence of appeal to a concern for general welfare and community health, the common good. Associated with this is an absence of discussion of the rightness or fairness of government policies. Thus we have endless discussions of the relative venal inducements to vote for this or that party. The principle of access to education for all children, irrespective of the success, good fortune or hard times of their parents is muddied by the venal aspects of whether this or that social group will gain more from Liberal or Labor policy. Taxation, unemployment relief and health are discussed in a similar "what's in it for me" context.

"There are many people who would willingly pay a little more tax if they were confident that it would be spent to help the needy. The war against Iraq, now stated to be illegal by the UN and clearly resulting in immense suffering by the Iraqi people, has been evaluated in terms of whether it makes Australia safer or less safe, not whether it is evil or criminal. The question of the wrongness of invading a sovereign state and killing its people is evidently considered not worth discussing. Many conversations and comments by a wide range of people strongly suggest to me that Australians still do have a sense of fairness, decency and respect for truthfulness which is now totally ignored by politicians and by the media, but is no less real for that”.



Ian Sinclair (NSW) takes a slightly more cynical view: “...I participated in one of your phone forums the other evening and it struck me that the fact that you had people from different voting backgrounds but with similar Howard-opinions took all of us nowhere. My only conclusion was that many thinking people were critical of the morality of the government whereas I know (and declare in the most elitist way) that the majority cares only for their wallets. Furthermore democracy (as we know it) has sent us this problem as a proverbial cross to bear. Who is sufficiently altruistic to vote against your own interests? I cite a letter in the Sydney Morning Herald on Thursday September 16, 2004, where a person wrote that she supported the reduction of funding to the elite schools despite the fact that her son attended one. She wrote that she thought the society might be a better one if the public schools were better. That is the crux of the issue”.



No such moral dilemma for William Wallace (NSW) who sent no less than nine separate links to the Not Happy John website, even extending to http://www.expage.com/limericks04a if you have a yen for the lure of the limerick!



The health issue continues to resonate, particularly for Philip Herringer (SA) who writes in reply to Tanveer Ahmed’s Creating new medical schools in new universities won’t cure doctor shortages: “The real reason for the scarcity of doctors in Australia is too hot for all exponents to handle. Whilst one can sit at home and study from a book most of what is required to become a lawyer or teacher or social worker as well as other mainly humanities categories, medicine requires practical training in theory and practice. Laboratories are requited for anatomical expertise and pathology. Patients are required for examination and operation. The former requires university facilities, the latter hospital. Hospitals cannot be built just to train future doctors who are going to be part timers. It is akin to building a Sydney Harbour bridge for cyclists.

"But what is happening to day is that the greater percentage of medical students are female.  Those who marry (or partner) get attached to fellow medical practitioners and then choose to work part time. Those females who enter such a lifestyle situation usually choose a person of equal or higher socio economic status, most often from the legal and financial professions. Not too many marry teachers or bricklayers. They can therefore afford either not to work or to work part time. In times gone by, few graduates were women, most doctors married nurses, and the household income was provided by the male partner. So 90 per cent plus of medical graduates went into general practice or specialist practice. Further, they were content to raise families in the country. Today's female graduates, even if they wish to work full time and are married, are hardly likely to “drag” their professional husbands or partners to the country.

"So the shortage is created by the numbers of female graduates in the first instance and secondly by those who do not wish to go to the country. The same is happening with dentists, pharmacists and veterinary surgeons. In the case of the last mentioned, the majority of females do not wish to do large animal practice, which is rural based except for race horses, and we have a dearth of veterinary practices in the suburbs. To make a living, they create situations for clients to bring their small animals to them....a sort of hypochondriac owner situation fostered by the veterinarian.

"I don't have the solution....unless it is a drastic one in the case of doctors. As the taxpayers pay for the facilities used to educate and train doctors, some form of national registration which issues certificates for practice....compulsory hours of practice in a year, month, week. Compulsory rural practice for a period. There are rules and regulations about the number and location of pharmacies in a city so similar measures for medical practitioners is not draconian. Just yesterday in Gawler South Australia, I saw a very new suburban area, which sits opposite a relatively new and 'up market' Anglican school. Right opposite the school gates, an orthodontist has set up rooms with a sign that even Mosstrooper would baulk at (many years ago in Melbourne there was a steeple chaser that was a champion.....hence the term “that would stop Mosstrooper”).....and we know the zillions orthodontists make out of children. Of course he wouldn't be at that location if it were a poor State school. So just a few thoughts!!!!”



Pauline Hanson continues to have enthusiastic defenders. Ken Parish takes Graham Young to task for The Professionals on Ambit Gambit: “So your argument is that people shouldn't donate to Pauline Hanson because she's going to get public funding anyway if she gets more than four per cent of the vote? But of course the same is true of the Liberal Party. I'm awaiting with great anticipation your post advocating that people should refrain from making donations to the Libs. Should I hold my breath, do you think?”



Finally, according to John Kitsoupoulos: “Greece did a great job, and had a great performance at the Olympics.”

So there, Richard Cashman!! (Athens 2004: the no show Games).

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

Article edited by Betsy Fysh.
If you'd like to be a volunteer editor too, click here.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Reader Write is compilation of short contributions and Letters to the Editor on On Line Opinion's feature topic.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Readers Write
Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy