Major parties have no solution to the housing crisis

The problem about housing is that prices are too high. Increasing supply is not the answer as new houses will be sold at the current price. Neither major party is offering solutions (“Albanese and Dutton’s signature policies risk inflaming housing crisis,” April 14). Apart from a housing crash, which will occur on the current trajectory, the government needs to enter the marketplace by building government housing and renting at reasonable rates. This will eventually bring rents down and force property investors to lower rents and perhaps sell some properties, increasing supply to first home buyers. Capital gains discounts need to be removed and negative gearing ended. This would mean an investor pays tax on his income but no tax on his investment if it is running at a loss. Finally, an audit of property ownership is needed and restrictions placed on the number of investment properties owned. Barry O’Connell, Old Toongabbie

Don’t be fooled by the tax deductibility policy peddled by Peter Dutton (“Dutton promises tax-deductible mortgage interest repayments”, April 13). Although income tested, it overlooks those first home buyers who are also are small business operators, who will also benefit from the juicy $20,000 free lunch deduction proposal, effectively lifting their income threshold. And for employees, the other Coalition policy gives them a greater incentive to raid their super nest egg for a deposit, undermining their long-term savings for a short-term gain. Read the fine print before you vote. Michael Blissenden, Dural

The prime minister’s policy for first home buyers is a winner. Much better to be paying off your mortgage than renting and paying off another property investor’s mortgage for them. It’s also time to relegate McMansions to the past. We just don’t have the resources to extend sprawling urban infrastructure. The government needs to create more parks and green space to compensate for high rise and terraces. Those who want more space can move out of the city. Carole Hayes, Newtown

Here’s a housing policy that will work. Just build houses. Don’t push up prices by providing tax deductions or create complicated assistance for deposits or co-ownership. Don’t rely on “the market” to build houses for those who can’t afford to rent; the market won’t do that because there’s no profit in it. Just build houses and apartments that are government-owned and directed to those in most need. Steven Lee, Faulconbridge

Abolish all tax breaks for investment properties (or at least after the first). This will reduce demand, which is essential for bringing prices down, especially rents, and will increase supply. Such a policy will never be implemented under the Coalition or Labor – too much personal interest in the tax breaks. Only the Greens and independents care enough to change the status quo. Peter Koller, Bellevue Hill

Fantastic announcement by Peter Dutton. To give first home buyers the leg-up offered to those negatively gearing an investment property appears to be generous, but what is this fiercely protected investment strategy really costing the country? Again, the “haves” will be offered an inside run. Go, those good things. Peter Willis, Orange

Shane Wright writes that Sunday’s election campaign announcements jettisoned good economic policy for votes (“The moment Albanese and Dutton both jumped the shark”, April 14). Allowing a tax deduction for mortgage interest payments is also contrary to the ATO’s stated policy that deductions must be directly related to earning income and not a “private expense”. The cost of childcare is treated as a private expense by the ATO, yet Dutton will allow mortgage interest payments to be deducted. Is this another thought bubble, or changing tax policy by stealth? Judith Campbell, Drummoyne

Dennis Bluth’s letter had me googling to find an answer to his conundrum: how can the federal government enable first home buyers to pay only 5 per cent deposit? The answer is that under Labor, the federal government gets to play the bank of mum and dad, sort of. Evidently, under Labor, the federal government will guarantee such loans, thus negating the requirement for the borrower to take out the onerous lenders mortgage insurance. This may help, but my view is that without an increase in supply, the price of homes will merely increase as more buyers enter the market. Rodney Crute, Hunters Hill

Gittins nails it again

The government and the opposition are using trinkets to distract us from, rather than solve, the bigger issues, but is it our own fault (“They treat us like mugs”, April 14)? Are we a disengaged, cynical electorate with the concentration of a gnat? Populist extravagant slogans abound, but the climate is still deteriorating, we’re giving our natural gas away for a song and the rich are getting richer. Ross Gittins may well be right that only a minority government will deliver the compromise and apparently controversial measures we so desperately need. Otherwise, I doubt anything will ever change. Josie McSkimming, Coogee

Ross Gittins’ take on the 2025 electioneering is spot-on. Choosing a party to vote for is like trying to figure out which health insurance plan or electricity provider works for you; it’s a jumble of sales pitches and short-term giveaways. A campaign designed by spin merchants that appeals to a voter’s minuscule attention span and the lowest common denominator. It’s hard not to believe they just make it up as they go along. Simon Pitts, Riverview

Ross Gittins says Peter Dutton has shown himself to be unfit for prime minister because he broke with tradition and risked “scaring the horses” by recklessly talking up a recession. I agree, but there are many other reasons why he is unfit for leadership. His enthusiastic support of George Pell, walking out on the apology to First Nations people, voting against same-sex equality, his rejection of climate science, his thought-bubble on nuclear power plants and support of fossil fuels against the evidence are just some of the other reasons. The Liberal Party also needs some self-reflection on why they thought a lurch to the right and adoption of MAGA-like policies was the change Australia needs. We are already a great and successful nation. I’m happy with our country’s direction. What I don’t want is MAGA chaos. Andrew Searles, Anna Bay

Gittins hits the nail on the head in his dissection of political campaigns and makes a good case that voters are indeed “mugs” – until the last paragraphs. The fact that he finds hope in the trend for voting against both major parties is encouraging. It should be noted that Julia Gillard’s successful hung parliament involved Labor, not the Coalition, which threw every dirty trick in the book at Gillard, eventually leading to her fall. Many of the reforms Gittins hopes for are championed by most independents and used to be important to Labor until the Shorten campaign was railroaded. These reforms have always been anathema to the Coalition. Mary Billing, Allambie Heights

The latest election promises by our prime minister and the opposition lacks substance and sincerity. Contrary to what their minders may think, most Australians want a person who is prepared to make the hard decisions for the betterment of the country and not themselves. I would rather vote for a leader who would support our remote communities, our regional communities, their businesses, communications and medical care. I would rather vote for a leader who would place a tax on sugar and limit the number of investment properties to two per household. I would prefer to vote for a leader who was prepared to place a penalty tax on international companies who use their parent company to avoid paying their fair dues. I would vote for a leader who would only allow Australian citizens to purchase residential properties in Australia. Peter Haggarty, Cranebrook

Maybe it was chance, but the image of Peter Dutton clasping hands, eyes locked with Scott Morrison, Tony Abbott looking on, could not have contrasted more with that of Anthony Albanese holding Julia Gillard’s hand aloft in a victory-like salute. It’s not hard to guess which one would have resonated more with women (“Is Dutton’s tone the right one for women?” April 14). But as Ross Gittins separately notes, neither party is talking about the biggest issues such as climate change, a reason many are looking to the Greens and independents. Gittins reminds us that it was minority government in 2010 that passed much legislation, including carbon pricing. Our climate has changed for the worse and politicians who care are needed more than ever. Australian voters must maintain the rage and keep climate up there as a voting priority. Ray Peck, Hawthorn (Vic)

The only point I’d add to Gittins’ excellent analysis of politics past and present is that in the olden days, hecklers were part and parcel of political meetings, very often interjecting with amusing or ribald comments, and one of the measures of the politician on the stage was their response. Wit was highly prized. Today, hecklers are summarily tossed out of meetings by security or party heavies. Boo! Rob Wills, Brisbane (Qld)

Thank you, Ross Gittins, for reminding us that if we want to tackle the big issues, climate change, health, education and cost of living, we’ll have to pay for it by changing the tax system to a more equitable way of raising the necessary funds. Josephine Piper, Miranda

Design for disaster

In 30 years of residential building litigation, I have seen the deterioration in building standards in NSW, coupled at times with fraud (“Get your tradie qualification without sitting a test”, April 13). Ignoring codes and standards, underquoting then overcharging are widespread practices. Defective bathrooms, balconies and roof gardens are endemic. The Herald’s revelation that tailor-made building qualifications are being sold out of a tailor’s store in Haymarket didn’t shock me, but it should shock our politicians. Both Albanese and Dutton must first clean up the industry before the market can be flooded with new construction. Premier Chris Minns also needs to redesign his grand plan to cut red tape and relax building codes, to avoid swamping the market with cheap, badly built high-rises. Their failure will create an entire new generation of class-action litigants. So blatant will be the politicians’ failure in their duty of care that our courts may permit class actions, beyond merely the developers and their contractors, to also join the politicians who caused the debacle and people’s losses. Howard Charles, Glebe

Dutton bashing

Correspondent Peter Robinson describes the “unabashed bollocking” that Peter Dutton apparently receives in the pages of your paper (Letters, April 14). Yet immediately above his words are two letters that calmly and factually point out the paucity of reasons to vote for Dutton, and the multitude of reasons not to. It read like the plain truth. Is your correspondent suggesting the Herald go easy on Dutton merely to prolong some sense of a contest? Personally, I think the newspaper has better things to do. Lloyd Swanton, Wentworth Falls

One thing that puts a lot of people off voting for Peter Dutton is the perception that he has a “nasty” streak. He is certainly trying to come across as the helpful policeman, but he just couldn’t resist breaking out with a jibe at Jim Chalmers’ 2004 PhD, referring to him as “the so-called Dr Chalmers”. You could almost feel his speechwriters grimacing. As we all did. Maureen Partridge, Baulkham Hills

Clive Palmer’s latest reiteration of his political party, the Trumpet of Patriots, may be copying most of Trump’s policies, but you can’t fault their confidence. According to their publicity, Suellen Wrightson is going to be the next prime minister. That would mean they would have to win enough seats to form government in their own right, and that ain’t going to happen. The election result will most likely be a minority Labor government that will have work with the Greens, teals and other independents. Though that is not a best-case scenario, it would be far better than having Trump’s Australian lackeys forming government. There is no doubt there are Australians who like Trump and his redneck policies, but hopefully not enough to elect any ToP’s wannabe hopefuls into parliament. Alan Leitch, Austins Ferry

Time to grow up

Stuart Rollo’s article advocates that with the Trump administration laying waste to the international order, Australia must now chart a more independent course (“Whoever wins the election must put Australia first”, April 14). This raises the question of whether now is the time for us to step up, grow up and finally become a republic. Jim Pollitt, Wahroonga

Trains can’t wait

Some peak hour services on the M1 metro line are already running at capacity, with a very cosy ratio of four people standing per square metre (“Trains are packed on these Sydney metro stops”, April 14). With additional housing on Sydney’s north-west outskirts and a growing proliferation of high-rise apartments around railway stations, it does not take an Einstein to work out that more carriages should be ordered sooner rather than later. Why wait until the Bankstown extension opens? That will have no effect on patronage from the north, and given the state government’s recent record on the supply of new interurban and country rolling stock, many of us are likely to be pushing up daisies before any new metro trains are picking up passengers. Doug Walker, Baulkham Hills

Formula for success

The “vicious cycle” of underachievement in maths is surely the fact that one in five teachers are worried about teaching it (“The formula for avoiding a national maths crisis”, April 14). The concern is, why are teachers feeling this way? It could be the outdated practices of games and manipulatives without clear purpose, it might be the lack of understanding of curriculum expectations, or it could be that some teachers need to do a little more work. The only way to become more confident is to engage with subject areas in a meaningful way. Energy is needed. Prepared, scripted lessons are not the answer. Students (and teachers if necessary) need to learn the skills and understandings explicitly and efficiently, practise them, repeat, review and build. It’s teaching 101. Lisa Williams, Dulwich Hill

Good old days?

I agree with Judy Nicolas, and not only did we have less in the “old days” we also made better use of stuff, and repurposed and recycled it more efficiently (Letters, April 14). I don’t think there was any waste involved in my grandmother’s home economics. Food scraps were fed to the chooks or dug into the garden. Jars were washed and reused as food storage containers or for bottling fruit and jam. Paper and cardboard was reused for wrapping, packing and storage, or burnt and the ash spread under the trees. Tins held nails and other small items in the shed, or were converted to all manner of tools and utensils. Plastic, if there was any, could be put to any number of uses. We could learn a great deal about self-sufficiency, sustainability and innovation from older generations. Meredith Williams, Baulkham Hills

While I confirm everything Richard Glover and Judy Nicholas (Letters, April 14) said about the privations of growing up in the ’40s, ‘50s and ’60s, it is important to remember that most of us, or our parents, were struggling to pay off modest three-bedroom homes on quarter acre blocks. This is something our children and grandchildren can only dream of. Jim Richardson, Croydon

Like Judy Nicholas, I too enjoyed going to the drive-in. However, my father could not afford the entrance fee so we sat in the family car parked outside the wire fence watching the screen – without sound. And we were not the only family doing that. Brian O’Donnell, Burradoo

• 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.