A negative hearing on negative gearing plans for change

Sometimes I despair of the Australian electorate (“Broken promises hit Labor’s primary vote”, May 18). I gritted my teeth through the 11 years of John Howard as PM. His legacy included broken promises (no GST ever), he dog-whistled on immigration, fought culture wars and gave us the policies that led to our current housing crisis. I fumed during nine years of the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison fiasco. Their legacy included more dog-whistling on immigration, more culture wars, flat out denial on climate action, robo-debt and an unaffordable AUKUS bill. Now, after the electorate clamoured for action on the housing crisis, voters want to punish Anthony Albanese for taking action, and turn to Angus Taylor, who promises nothing but more of the same ineptitude and born-to-rule attitude of previous Coalition governments: more culture wars, regressive steps on climate change, and dog-whistling on immigration. When will the electorate learn from history? Neil Ormerod, Kingsgrove

If Labor is to be punished for embracing brave policy, then we as a nation will be condemned to be governed by the bland. There has long been a call for decisive, bold action – now with change within our reach we fear its consequence. It seems that when it comes to taking action, we are the ones who can’t change our negative gearing. Janet Argall, Hurlstone Park

The post-budget news – of the slump in Labor’s primary vote, the rise in Taylor’s popularity and increased support for One Nation – leaves me trying to avoid despair by reminding myself that democracy may not be perfect, but it’s better than the alternatives. Prue Nelson, Cremorne Point

Auction clearance rates were down to 50 per cent last weekend, from about 60 per cent over the past 52 weeks. I hope this will result in more people owning their own home, instead of paying rent to people who own several. A promising start for a broken promise. Mike Keene, Mollymook Beach

For months, people have been urging Albo to “do something” about the brick wall facing young people and the housing market. So now that his government has acted, the usual suspects – people owning more than one negatively geared property, those minimising their taxable wealth and developers – are crying foul. “Broken promises,” they wail, mere days after the budget. I say it’s high time that our children and grandchildren received a fair go from their lucky country. Mark Paskal, Austinmer

Rather than feeling the pain of breaking promises, I think a lot of voters will have increased respect for this government for having the courage to change tax policy on this important issue. The housing affordability issue needs to be tackled on various fronts. The first thing is to stop the tax system from distorting demand, by limiting negative gearing to newly built homes, and by cutting the capital gains discount.
The second step, and probably the most important, is for the government to link immigration to the capacity of the Australian construction Industry. I watched my son and his wife desperately trying to buy an apartment in Epping three weeks ago, and at this auction there were 15 bidders – 13 of whom were investors. The Liberal Party argument that this change will reduce the supply of housing stock for the rental market is absolute bollocks. If my son could buy an apartment, it would free up his existing rental apartment for someone else. Also, the tax policy will not apply to new housing.
The tax changes in the budget carve out a massive, deliberate advantage for new housing supply, making brand-new builds the most tax-advantaged property asset class in Australia. Ian Muir, Chatswood

Tread carefully

Angus Taylor should tread carefully (“Taylor vows to rewrite sex laws after trans discrimination ruling”, May 18). Whatever the initial intent, the British feminists who pushed for a hard line on “single-sex spaces” have effectively legitimised harassment of gender non-conforming girls and women daring to use public spaces. Several Women’s Institute branches have voted to dissolve themselves rather than be forced to police which of their members are “biological women”. Gender-nonconforming people may be excluded from single-sex toilets based on appearance, but simultaneously be banned from using the other toilets. Samantha Chung, Kensington

I was horrified to read that Angus Taylor wants to enshrine a definition of biological sex after a recent court ruling. This reeks of US President Donald Trump’s laws regarding the biological sex of Americans and the issues relating to that. We don’t need that sort of bigotry in this country. We don’t need the BS concerning non-Australian citizens being excluded from Centrelink payments either. For once, Angus Taylor, you should do something for the people – and I don’t mean those wealthy people who make huge donations to the Liberal Party. Though I did not benefit from last week’s budget directly, I think it was a good budget. Susan Dean, Ashfield

After reports that former NSW Liberal senator Hollie Hughes and former Liberal vice president Teena McQueen have defected to One Nation, the response from Angus Taylor was: “Oh, it’s their choice.” No acknowledgment of their extensive contribution to the party over many years, even if they did not always agree with party policy, as well as the tens of thousands of hours in meetings, dealing with telephone and written communications at all hours, and all the things politicians do for their party. Taylor just dismisses them. So the next people to leave cannot expect any gratitude at all. Bill Johnstone, Blackheath

What will happen when Hughes and McQueen get in the room with Pauline Hanson and patron Gina Rinehart to plot Australia’s march towards a more Trumpian approach to democracy? Taylor himself could end up defecting in the next 18 months, the way he is talking. Thus, a word of advice for moderate Liberals. It’s time to defect and move to the crossbenches as independents, and give yourself a chance of retaining your seat at the next federal election. At least you will be out of that putrid mud that the opposition is flailing about in. Wendy Atkins, Cooks Hill

Yet another black hole in a policy from Angus Taylor. A man who never lets the facts get in the way of his story. His immigration policy: one migrant per completed house. What happens if the migrants come in couples, families of four or family reunions? It would reduce the number of houses needed by probably half, or he could double his immigration numbers. Maybe maths has never been a strong point for Angus. Alan Nicholas, Sandringham

Lifting the load

Sean Kelly nails it (“Fate of Albanese and Chalmers now tied to a mammoth task”, May 18). Labor has tried to arrest the inequality that has emerged from 30-plus years of greed. Yes, greed; it is all about building wealth from asset growth, without lifting a finger. And of course, people doing this love it and want it to continue. How selfish are we not to recognise the needs of the whole community. Shame on that small number who want the good times to continue. Michael Blissenden, Dural

Oval farce teaches harsh lesson

Another day, another government project falls over (“Saga over $20m oval drags on”, May 18), the apparent root cause being the same as all the others. Everything outsourced, contracted or otherwise privatised to a plethora of companies, compounded by what seems to be a cavalier approach to holistic oversight of the project. The consequence is delay, cost blowout, litigation, denial, unsatisfied voters and finger pointing. However, we never seem to have a shortage of anodyne platitudes from the stakeholders responsible for the calamity. Meanwhile, torrents of money are being spent as a result of this feeble strategy that appears to mean everything takes much longer and costs more and is slower. It’s the exact opposite of what privatisation etc is supposed to deliver. Bernard Stever, Richmond

The knock-on effect of this is that a footpath planned for our street in 2024 has now been revised to a review of a footpath in 2030 to 2031. Having lived here for 50 years, I can only hope I am still alive in another five years’ time to see if we get a footpath then. No doubt there will be another Norman Griffiths before 2030. Jan Naughton, Wahroonga

Waiving and drowning

It was with wry amusement that I read of the emerging ‘no meters’ campaign for beachfront parking in the Randwick area (Letters, May 18). This is a reprise of a similar anti-beachfront meters campaign in Mosman 15 years ago, which I was on the other side of. The sheer vitriol of that protest movement was astonishing, with untruths and misinformation peddled freely. There are costs associated with maintaining beachfront amenities, and many of those costs are caused by visitors from outside the council area. Someone has to pay. Randwick Council, like Mosman, is proposing generous beachfront parking concessions to locals, which ought to assuage their worries. Since paid parking was introduced for Balmoral Beach, council has been able to greatly improve the amenity of the area, with better toilet facilities, Esplanade upgrades, new lighting and frequent beach cleaning. The opposition soon melted away – within a couple of years it was hard to find anyone who would admit to opposing the meters. Alan Phillips, Mosman

Nice summer’s day – why not a trip to the beach? First, the tolls: that’s $25 each way. Petrol: 100km at say eight litres/100km, add $16. So we face paying $66 just to get there and back, while it’s a five-minute walk for you, or a five-minute drive. And now you want to charge for parking, taking the cost to more than $100 – just to take the kids to the beach. Thank you, Randwick Council. Those beaches might be in your area, but they are owned by all of us. You are the custodians, not the proprietors. The more you push poorer people out of the east, the more unfair it becomes, especially for those whose work takes them to central Sydney. Tradies, teachers, nurses, cleaners, waiters – all the people who make your area nice to live in, they all pay in tolls, in parking fees, in train fares, in two- or three-hour commutes. I know we can’t stop the nicer areas becoming the residential preserve of the rich, but don’t put up barriers to the enjoyment of Sydney’s beaches by those pushed out west by housing pressures. Stein Boddington, St Clair

Petulant leadership

Your correspondent (Letters, May 18) reckons Bruce Hales’ order for the Exclusive Brethren to get rid of all pets is “cruel and unthinking”. Bruce obviously couldn’t care less – especially about those who rely on assistance dogs and companion animals to help them live. Does he think they are not relying on their divine being for help or healing? Anyway, many of these “dirty” animals will be off-loaded onto the obviously “dirty” members of society who shun this sect – with good reason. The photo, though, tells a story: just look how interested the men are in listening to Hales – some appear to have nodded off, and the looks on their faces show that whatever Hales is saying isn’t enthusing them. David Gordon, Cranebrook

Looking at the photo of the Exclusive Brethren on yesterday’s letters page, most, if not all, of the pale, male and stale members could well do with taking a dog for a brisk walk and lose some excess weight. John Swanton, Coogee

I shudder with horror to hear the Exclusive Brethren have ordered its members to rid themselves of all pets. NO! NO! NO! Bea Hodgson, Gerringong

God, give us strength

Your correspondent’s recollection (Letters, May 18) that he can’t remember a Herald editorial ending with the words “God help us” may well be true. Yet there was a time in this masthead’s 195-year history where editorials invoked the role of God in guiding and defining humankind. Methodist cleric the Reverend Dr Sir Alan Walker is said to have penned many of the Herald’s Easter and Christmas editorials. Former Governor-General William Hayden once described Walker as the “conscience of the nation”. Perhaps it is time for our nation’s and the world’s moral compass to be reset, and the God who was our help in ages past can ignite a spirit of unity. Allan Gibson, Cherrybrook

The first rule of flight club

Alcohol, which could also be mixed with drugs; a fear of flying; a confined space with a lot of people closely packed in (“Passenger taken off flight after claim of biting”, May 18). What could possibly go wrong? It’s difficult to predict a stranger’s behaviour when they are intoxicated. It therefore behoves an individual to take responsibility for their drinking and/or drug taking before a flight. The airlines have a responsible service of alcohol policy so that anyone who boards a flight obviously intoxicated should be refused any more alcohol during the flight. And, before takeoff, any such passenger should be advised that they won’t be served alcohol; if that is a problem, then they are escorted off the flight. Zero tolerance. Lisa Clarke, Watsons Bay

You can’t teach good taste

Poor, great Delta (“Goodrem ‘stoked’ by fourth in nailbiter as Bulgaria prevails”, May 18). Not tasteless, garish or cacophonously overproduced enough. Peter Fleming, Northmead

• 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.