Credit:Illustration: Matt Golding

To submit a letter to The Age, email [email protected]. Please include your home address and telephone number. No attachments, please include your letter in the body of the email.

Sexual assault
US political philosopher and statesman Benjamin Franklin is credited with arguing that “it is better 100 guilty persons should escape than one innocent person should suffer”. Speaking generally, when it comes to sexual offences, our legal system delivers that outcome in spades.

The odds are stacked against any victim where it is their word against that of the offender. The odds of a successful prosecution fall if the victim is a child. The odds plummet further when the victim has any form of psychological impairment. The Centre of Innovative Justice has concluded the chance of successfully prosecuting sexual assault cases is less than one in a 100.

The experience of participating in the legal system is harrowing and slow for most survivors. First, imagine the most embarrassing or degrading sexual experience you have had. Now imagine having to tell a room full of strangers about it. Unsurprisingly, with the odds stacked against them, most victims of sexual assault choose not to seek legal remedy.

So Steve Boland’s legal principles (“Don’t judge legal system for this sorry saga”, The Age, 6/12) that are “the cornerstone of civilised society” float on a sea of human misery. The solution is reforms to better protect vulnerable people, deter offenders and prevent sexual abuse. The courtroom, while necessary, will always be a poor substitute for prevention.
Mark Zirnsak, Senior Social Justice Advocate, Synod of Victoria and Tasmania, Uniting Church in Australia

Legal system not a vehicle
The legal system is designed to achieve justice in individual cases. It is not a vehicle for making major social change. As Steve Boland suggests, too many commentators have used the case as a way to advance their own interests and objectives.

People are entitled to push for change in the way allegations of sexual assault are dealt with, but to think that major reform can result from a single case is unrealistic and unreasonable.
Rod Wise, Surrey Hills

No justice in media trials
Congratulations to Steve Boland for his excellent article regarding a sorry saga in our legal system. Justice is achieved in a fair manner when it is handled through the courts not through media exposure and political comment and support.
Christine Baker, Rosanna

Context is needed
In among all of his arguments about what was wrong with the Lehrmann trial, Steve Boland made no acknowledgement about the terrible ratio of sexual assaults committed, to sexual assailants convicted and jailed. As a general comment, too many women and children in this country see no justice for the sexual crimes committed against them.

When so many of us are crying out about the desperate need for that to change, it feels cold and heartless to be met with an article that concentrates on this specific trial and the legal problems with it, without acknowledging the broader context of these tiny conviction rates and the terrible toll the legal system takes for very little return.
Claire Gee, Greensborough

Expert opinion
Sadly we live in an era where everybody’s opinion on everything can be expressed free of charge on social media and the like. This has resulted in a blizzard of commentary from a huge range of individuals, mostly hopelessly uninformed. Expert opinions would be lost in the “white noise” and so, mostly, experts just don’t bother pointlessly shouting into the ether with the rest.

It was with this in mind that I was delighted to read the opinion piece by Steve Boland on the Lehrmann trial. Clearly this was written by a well-qualified and experienced expert.
Daniel Player, Riverside, Tasmania

THE FORUM

Moment calls for courage
The Albanese government appears to be in a quandary in finding a solution to the rising gas and electricity prices (“Albanese feels the heat to ease gas and electricity bill shocks”, 6/12). The solution simply requires courage. The energy producers have taken advantage of the global conditions and despite suffering few actual cost increases are charging what they can get away with at Australian consumers’ expense.

The government must show some fortitude putting the producers, and petulant states, in their place and demand that adequate energy supplies at realistic and affordable prices are made available for the Australian market. The resources belong to Australia, if the producers don’t like it they can walk away.
Ross Hudson, Mount Martha

Their time almost up
It amazes me that the coal and gas industry continues to rely on their unfounded and inappropriate excuse that controlling prices on the supply of coal and gas to the Australian market will damage future investment in the industry. Have they not realised that their time as an energy supplier globally is limited.

And as for the claims that business will not see Australia as a safe place to invest, I think that old myth has long since broken when one looks at where and how companies have taken extraordinary investment risk in countries with far less stable democracies than Australia.
Nathan Feld, Glen Iris

No reason to delay
“A meeting between federal and state leaders to strike a deal on power prices has been delayed after Prime Minister Anthony Albanese came down with COVID late on Monday” (“PM’s COVID diagnosis delays crisis talks”, 6/12). This is called bad management. Our government should be able to manage Australia even if the PM has COVID. If Albanese has planned this meeting without knowledge sharing with senior ministers, then he is incompetent.
There should be a team of more than one responsible minister to carry on negotiations on any matter at any time. If you can’t trust your ministers, Albo, why should we?
Adrian Tabor, Point Lonsdale

Source solar
With the current debate relating to efforts to curb rising gas and coal price rises there has been precious little attention given to discussion of the paltry feed-in tariff paid to those of us with solar panels.

In light of coal price rises, especially since much of our electricity here in Victoria comes from coal burning, the minimal prices paid for solar surely make this source deserving of a higher reward.
Dave Rabl, Ocean Grove

Unprecedented times
I’m partly sympathetic to Jess Irvine’s call to wind back criticisms of Dr Philip Lowe (Comment, 6/12). They were unprecedented times and both the federal government and Reserve Bank went all in with stimulus and support measures. However, as the governor’s best weapon is jawboning and given the then explicit forward guidance, better communication was needed to show that the inflationary environment had pivoted and so would the path of interest rates.

On balance he was not the only central banker to miss inflation moving from transitory to stubborn and few could have predicted the impact of a drawn-out conflict in Ukraine.
Michael Ilyine, Highton

Too young
I feel that those politicians and columnists agitating for a lowering of the voting age (“Voices of the future deserve right to vote at 16”, 6/12) are not considering the fact that to be informed enough to vote in elections, one needs to have more life experience than a 16-year-old could possibly have.
Often people that young are passionate about issues, but are inclined towards wishful thinking rather than reality.
David Mitchell, Moe

Right and wrong
Judith Bessant is correct to argue for a lowering of the voting age (Comment, 6/12). But the argument for it should not depend on convincing the public of the competence of those under the age of 18. Incompetence, framed as an inability to understand political issues or to make a considered vote, has been the traditional means of excluding voters since the origins of voting.
Slaves, men who did not own land, people of colour and women have all had this argument levelled against their inclusion as voters. “Too stupid to vote” has been the argument of exclusion for every single move to widen the right to vote.

There is however a deeper principle at play. In Australia we jail children at 10-years-old (“Push to raise age of criminal responsibility”, 6/12). If the state decides a 10-year-old has the moral capacity to decide right and wrong, logic suggests that child will also have the moral capacity to choose between political alternatives. The age of criminal culpability should be the same as the age of political responsibility for the state that can decide your freedom.
Julia Thornton, Surrey Hills

Slippery slope
First we lower the voting age to 16 to ensure we aren’t discriminating against those between 16 and 18. Do we then reduce it to 14 so we don’t discriminate against 14- and 15-year-olds? And if 16-year-olds get the vote, will they also demand the right to drive cars, be served alcohol in licensed premises, and get married?
Daniel Cole, Essendon

Policy buried by Whitlam
George Brandis claims that Harold Holt is responsible for the “demolition of the White Australia policy” and not Whitlam, a line the Liberal Party has pushed for years (Comment, 5/12). John Howard, for example, claimed it in 1995, as did Liberal MP Tim Wilson in 2018. The Liberal Party base their claims on the policy changes in March 1966 that made provision for the entry of “certain well-qualified non-Europeans”.

The Australian immigration system only became non-discriminatory in 1973 under Whitlam. I joined the the immigration department in February 1969, three years after Howard and others say the Liberal Party “abolished” the White Australia policy. I worked in “the Non Europeans” section, which included an investigations team that was responsible for locating “non European illegal entrants”.

The White Australia policy was alive and well until it was buried by Whitlam and Grassby in 1973. Laurie Duncan, Carlton

Liberal credit deserved
Strictly speaking, your correspondent was right in claiming that “Australia’s involvement in Vietnam only ceased when Whitlam came to power” (Letters, 6/12); however, he overstates Whitlam’s role and understates those of John Gorton and William McMahon. Gorton initially reduced Australia’s involvement (by one battalion), and then McMahon announced in August 1971 the withdrawal of all troops. What the Whitlam government did was to withdraw the few remaining military advisers.
Dennis Dodd, Wangaratta

Unjust penalty
Is no one else in our ″⁣liberal democracy″⁣ extremely worried that in our neighbouring state (and Victoria has these laws too) a young woman’s life will be blighted by a prison sentence for causing ″⁣inconvenience″⁣ to commuters (″⁣NSW premier welcomes jail for climate protester who blocked Sydney Harbour Bridge″⁣, 5/12). The premier is ″⁣pleased″⁣ that she’s gone to jail prior to an appeal. Remember, inconvenienced people, you would not have a vote without people taking a stand for your rights.
Jackie Sherwood, Urangan, Qld

An inconvenient truth
US punk band the Dead Kennedys released an album in 1987 called Give Me Convenience or Give Me Death, thereby prefiguring Dominic Perrottet by 35 years. What’s it like being that predictable, Perrottet? If you think protests are inconvenient, what are your feelings about global warming?
Ben Debney, Lake Gardens

Correct analogy
If your correspondents used a more accurate analogy to voting in the Voice referendum than buying a house or signing a blank cheque (Letters, 6/12), say, paying back a debt or restoration of one’s rightful position, perhaps then it would be easier to accept the realities of First Nations people dispossession, and attempts at ethnic cleaning and ethically rightful constitutional recognition.
Henry Herzog, St Kilda East

Why silence them?
Do the opponents of the Voice to parliament imagine for one moment that Indigenous people are not also desperate for the gaps to be closed in practical terms? What the proponents of the referendum realise is that the Voice will constitutionally require parliament to listen to Indigenous people for solutions to their problems in ways that have never been enshrined before. Who are we to deny them that voice?
Nick Toovey, Beaumaris

A step too far
Your correspondent (Letters, 6/12) supports the Voice by citing the precedent of Whitlam’s adviser on women, Elizabeth Reid. This world-first role led to long-overdue reforms to improve the lot of Australian women. But this was achieved without altering the Constitution. There is a long-overdue and fundamental need to recognise First Nations people in our Constitution. However the Voice is a separate issue: why the rush to put it into the Constitution?
Joan Reilly, Surrey Hills

Claims overstated
I suggest readers of your front page story (“Mums tell of abuse during childbirth”, 6/12) who fall for these tales of woe read This is Going to Hurt by Adam Kay. And maybe empathise with overworked and sometimes abused midwifery staff.

Are we suggesting the approach should be “Is it OK with you if I perform some life-saving intervention?” Decisions have to be made sometimes in split seconds.
Lesley Black, Frankston

And another thing

Credit:Illustration: Matt Golding

State politics
Reviewing the picture of the new Victorian cabinet, I recognised four faces. Checking the names, that increased to five! How did the rest of you go with the people who run our state?
Tom Stafford, Wheelers Hill

Fabulous to see over half of Dan’s new cabinet are women.
Robin Jensen, Castlemaine

So, we now have a state cabinet consisting of 14 women and nine men. Where is the gender balance in that?
James Kennedy, Keysborough

State Liberal leadership aspirant Brad Battin’s stunningly incisive critique of the Liberals’ recent campaign: “Sometimes we may have sat on the fence.”
It’s hard to imagine a less decisive, more “fence sitting” statement. Looks like there will be plenty of room for him.
Russell Polson, Elsternwick

Furthermore
So often we hear it said that the weather in Melbourne is so chilly, so it is great to hear about the warmth of its people (“Melbourne friendliest city? That is spot on”, 6/12).
John Groom, Bentleigh

If Scott Morrison leaves parliament to spend time with his long-suffering family will he claim six pensions?
John Cameron, Torquay

Paul McNamee says Novak Djokovic will bring gravitas to the Australian Open. Is gravitas a new name for profit?
John Cain, McCrae

Prince Harry says: “There’s a hierarchy of the family.” Who would have thought?
Tony Lenten, Glen Waverley

It was Arthur Phillip, not James Cook, who “raised” the British flag on January 26, 1788 (Letters, 6/12). Cook, who never entered Port Jackson, let alone landed there, was killed nine years earlier in the Hawaiian Islands.
Dennis Dodd, Wangaratta

Finally
With COVID numbers surging, all I want for Christmas is a fifth vaccine. Come on ATAGI. Don’t be a Scrooge.
Louise Oldfield, Glenlyon

Michael Bachelard sends an exclusive newsletter to subscribers each week. Sign up to receive his Note from the Editor.

Most Viewed in National

From our partners

Source: Read Full Article