Private privilege
Not owning a BMW is bearable. But having untreated health problems or missing out on a good education can really disadvantage you.
Private privilege in health and education is more repugnant than in most other areas. This is especially true when it comes courtesy of people's parents.
Why, then, do our major political parties support significant government subsidies for people who have converted their financial advantage into a health care or educational advantage for themselves or their children via private health insurance or elite private education?
If your parents are spending more on sending you to a private school for 35 hours a week (partly to increase your university and lifetime employment and income prospects at the expense of others) than an adult Centrelink client receives to cover all their expenses over 168 hours, why is the state pitching in to help you or your family?
What happened to medical care based on medical need? What happened to educational opportunity based on justice and social utility?
Brent Howard
Rydalmere NSW
NSW electoral laws
Lee Rhiannon (Write on, GLW #425) claims that I misrepresented the NSW Greens' position by stating that they supported the Labor government's amendments to the state laws for registering political parties.
In parliamentary debate on the bill, Rhiannon stated that the Greens "certainly support, as we put forward, the proposal [in the bill] for above-the-line optional preferential voting". This is the proposal that restricts above-the-line voting to parties which can afford to field a ticket of at least 15 upper house candidates. Previously, above-the-line voting was available to all registered parties and groups with two or more candidates.
Rhiannon also indicated opposition to the government's proposal for a party membership requirement of 1000 and a $3500 party registration fee.
Rhiannon's assertion that the Greens "supported all amendments aimed to remove these inequities" is not true.
When Reform the Legal System's Peter Breen moved amendments that the membership requirement for party registration be 500 people instead of 1000, and that the party registration fee be $500 instead of $3500, Greens MLC Ian Cohen moved compromise amendments between Breen's and the government's position, namely that the membership requirement be 750 and the registration fee be $2000. Special minister of state, John Della Bosca, had already stated the government's willingness to accept these foreshadowed amendments from the Greens.
Previously, parties only had to prove a membership of 200 and there was no registration fee.
Once the Greens had agreed with the government on the "need" to restrict access to above-the-line voting, they got caught up in the process of compromising with the government on sections of the bill that they disagreed with.
Sue Boland
Bankstown NSW
Class and movement after S11
The Democratic Socialist Party's top action for S11 activists is May Day 2001. The S11 movement could fight global capital with far greater impact through a united front, orienting to the working class with proposals for struggles against global corporations, for demands for union rights, working conditions, environmental protection, women's and indigenous rights. Workers Liberty suggests Rio Tinto, McDonald's and Nike.
Concrete winnable demands are motivating, unifying and educational. They are more winnable when organising workers with the potential to defeat large corporations. While campaigning together, S11 and union activists can discuss big picture ideas for social change, and develop new ideas.
The conservatism of the union movement is a key reason why the working class has not overthrown capitalism already. Marxists taking this understanding to the S11 movement are contributing to political education and consciousness raising.
The popular "people's movement" is at best mind-dulling, and at times of historic upheavals (South Africa 1980s-'90s, Philippines 1980s, Spain, fascism 1930s) has produced capitalist consolidation or repression. Marxists should make class explicit for the whole movement, not just party members' business.
The Melbourne N11 Conference organised by Earthworks promises a serious forum on our prospects as a movement.
Janet Burstall
Workers Liberty
Curtin ACT
Rorts
It would appear that the federal government led by John Howard is defending minister Reith largely on the grounds that the Labor opposition has itself had members of parliament who have rorted and abused their privileged positions.
So what is to be done? Could each party be made to subscribe to an insurance fund to cover rorting and luxurious dining out costs by party members?
There is no way that tax-paying workers who have their taxes deducted before they get their wages should have their money used to pay off the misuse by minister Reith or son, and I understand it was a misuse or as Howard said he "wouldn't have done it".
I just heard that Reith is going to pay up. That's a standard of honesty apparently forced on the Howard government by outraged public opinion.
Jean Hale
Balmain NSW
Ruddock and racism
Noticing the increasing incidence of racial troubles in the media, one wonders what role our school system plays in the forming of socially responsible citizens?
In an increasingly more multicultural world, Mr Ruddock and his not-so-liberal Liberal Party managed to put Australia on the bottom of the world's refugee list with his slightly veiled "Whites Only" policy.
The suspicion, hate and false insinuations his propaganda machine churns out is a great incentive for young hoodlums to start mini-wars amongst themselves. Leaving the police and public at a loose end.
Josie Leeden
South Perth WA
Labor abandons residents
Port Kembla Copper (PKC) has breached the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (DUAP) Conditions of Consent over 100 times since it began commissioning at the secret start-up and stuff-up on February 4.
Why has DUAP not prosecuted PKC for any of these breaches? Why is DUAP considering another modification to the approval when PKC is blatantly breaching present consent conditions? If PKC cannot comply with present modifications, what makes DUAP think it will comply with this new modification? The handling and storage of tellurium and its compounds is an important matter that needs to be policed.
Neil Shepherd, the director-general of the EPA, told the government that to reopen the copper smelter at Port Kembla was madness (Land and Environment Court 1997). The government did not listen. Had the Carr government not thwarted Helen Hamilton's case in the Land and Environment Court, the truth would have been disclosed that the smelter could not comply.
The Labor politicians are ignoring the plight of the nearby residents who are being stressed and sickened by the fumes and fallout, and by watching their properties again being damaged by acid rain. Life had become unbearable again in Port Kembla.
The unfairness of the situation is that the residents cannot take a class action against the polluters who have made our lives a misery, until somebody is seriously hurt.
Premier Carr forced this smelter upon us. It is now time for him and his government to live up to the promises given and protect the health and well-being of the families in Port Kembla.
David Gilmour, Olive Rodwell, Helen Hamilton
Illawarra Residents Against Toxic Environments Inc.
Wollongong NSW
[Abridged.]