Letters to the Editor

November 16, 2007
Issue 

Palestine

For a self-proclaimed committed leftist, Philip Mendes (Write On, GLW#730) displays a remarkable right-wing capacity for slander and muddying the waters of debate. Presumably, the leftist Mendes does not supported the Frech colonialists in Algeria, Apartheid South Africa or racist Rhodesia. Why > then, this Israeli exceptionalism? Israel is a colonial, apartheid state.

Individuals and parties on both sides have different and often complex motivations and interests. Let Mendes show us where and how the Socialist Alliance or GLW have supported the ideologies of Hamas or Hezbollah before indulging in specious mud-slinging. Or, for that matter, how does support for the Palestinian struggle against colonisation and ethnic-cleansing imply supporting the politics of some Palestinian groups.

The heart of the issue in Palestine is stark — colonisation and displacement. It is for leftists to choose to support or oppose colonisation and apartheid, regardless of the virtues of individuals on either side of the struggle. For every honest Israel Shahak, there are a dozen well-paid political and academic hacks rationalising Israeli policies and demonising Palestinians — just as for every Islamic fanatic, there are a hundred Palestinians merely trying to survive as best as they can under the Zionist heel.

Mendes is welcome to argue and try to prove that Israel is not a colonial-project state dating to Theodor Herzl, who sought to collaborate with anti-Semites and racists such as Tsarist interior minister Vlaycehsav Phelve and the German or British imperialists.

Narendra Mohan Kommalapati

Kew East, Vic

Greens

Like most election campaigns before it, this one has been dominated by the major parties, perpetuating the idea that there are only two options on election day. Isn't it time we released ourselves from the ALP/Coalition stronghold and let them know that their policies are not good enough for a just and environmentally sustainable future for this country?

Every time there's an election, the Greens are vilified by one group or another. In the NSW state election in March, it was the Shooters' Party, with posters and ads calling us "The Extreme Greens". In more than one previous election, the Exclusive Brethren have done similar things nationwide.

This time, Family First's Senator Steve Fielding has tried to put people off voting Green by saying how scary it would be if we held the balance of power in the Senate. Balance of power only works if there is another large group which is voting the same way. The Greens on their own cannot control the destiny of this country.

I would ask people to look at the record of the Greens on issues that are vital to our future and make up their own minds. We have worked for action on climate change for more than a decade. We have consistently opposed the Iraq war and exposed scandals and cruelty in immigration detention centres.

We have worked for openness and accountability in government, including refusing corporate donations and trying to ban them altogether. We have established parliamentary enquiries into Australia's water and energy security.

We have worked to end the immoral and destructive practice of woodchipping our native forests. We have campaigned consistently to keep public assets in public hands and showed that the sale of Snowy Hydro was illegal, which then caused the federal government to step in and stop it.

We have been a voice in parliament for Indigenous Australians on issues like better health and lowering incarceration rates, and believe in saying sorry. We have spoken up for more funding for public education and spoken out against Work Choices.

I believe that most Australians are with us when it comes to social justice, environmental sustainability, democracy; and peace, non-violence and disarmament. Without the Greens, it will be the future that is scary.

Catherine Moore

Greens councillor

Palerang, NSW

Senate election

In the Senate election, voters have the option to vote "above the line" or "under the line". If they vote above the line (one mark only) most people have no idea of where there their preferences go because this is determined during various horse-trading sessions among the parties at the time of nominating or even earlier. The horse trading is not transparent and is subject to the most amazing deals some of them quite unexpected some quite unprincipled. A record of the outcome appears on the internet and is also available at every polling booth if voters want to check on it. However, most voters don't bother about that.

The alternative is to vote under the line that means, in NSW this time, filling in 79 squares correctly representing candidates in 25 parties and for independents. Only about 4% of voters bother to do this, often make mistakes with the numbering and have to do it again or spoil their vote.

Frankly, this is a ridiculous system. A massive improvement would be to adopt the Dutch proportional electoral system, whereby all parties produce a list of candidates, printed on one sheet, and the voter has to place one mark indicating simultaneously the party of his or her preference as well as a particular preferred candidate. Seats are allocated to a party in proportion to the times the quota has been achieved. This is completely transparent, highly democratic, no backdoor deals and very convenient to the voter.

Perhaps we should follow the Dutch also in another way. They abolished compulsory voting four decades ago

Klaas Woldring

Pearl Beach, NSW

Otways

In spite of huge public outrage and floods all over the place, Victoria's Colac Otway Shire is planning 537 houses on the floodplains of Apollo Bay. It will double the size of the town. The developer-councillor who represents us says adventures like Great Ocean Green are normal in local government and the minister should sack councillors Hart, Higgins and Crook, who walked out because of the insurance implications.

Victoria is unlikely to protect them. It is committed to woodchipping the Otways, pumping water over ridges and blasting open Port Phillip Bay to increase the containers trucking up and down the Hume highway. What about our national environmental laws? The Howard/Rudd machine is more likely to go to war against them than speak up for a few protected birds or creatures that might be in the way.

A healthy tourist industry in such a wildly beautiful spot should be our pride and joy. Besides wasted energy and environmental abuse, it's funny how more housing creates less community here. Rates are skyrocketing, infrastructure is dodgy and our permanent population has stagnated since 1940. Health workers and students often commute across the state and pensioners pack up and leave. As Barb Henriksen observes, empty mansions make us resemble tombstone territory.

These "brave hearts" need support and we should vote carefully.

Yvonne Francis

Apollo Bay, Vic

Tax deductions

Will John Howard stoop to any level to retain power? Tax deductibility in any form only allows the rich (who pay higher taxes) to get richer while the poor (who pay no tax) get no benefit. As for grandparents getting a tax deduction for helping their kids buy a house — that's fine for doctors like me, but how can my pensioner patients ever find that kind of money for their kids? Howard is determined to rule for the rich and bugger the rest.

Colin Hughes

Swan View, WA

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.