Richardson state funeral sends all the wrong signals

How is Graham Richardson entitled to a state funeral (“No honour in honouring the dishonourable”, November 12)? Kate McClymont has written a fabulous article covering all the faults, scandals and corruptions that he supposedly had a hand in (“Long lunches, Swiss bank accounts and a kangaroo scrotum: My pursuit of Richo”, November 11). If I could be bothered going to the funeral procession, I’d be throwing eggs at the hearse. I am sick of the way this country is going, and the people in it, and the corruption that now surrounds so many parts of our taxpaying lives. Take me back 50 years any day. Rae Masman, Church Point

Thanks for your editorial saying so eloquently what so many of us were already thinking: that giving a state funeral offer to Graham Richardson severely devalues the state funeral – and those who offered it. Kate McClymont’s compelling piece on Richardson’s unseemly habits should really have put the kibosh on his state funeral offer, but since it won’t, I hope your editorial might give the glad-handers some serious second thoughts in future. Susan Anthony, Cammeray

I thought state funerals were offered for distinguished men and women who had made significant contributions for the good of society. Silly me. Bill Windeyer, Longueville

I agree wholeheartedly with the editorial that Graham Richardson’s behaviour renders him undeserving of a state funeral. Anthony Albanese has misread the public mood. Richardson is not a Labor hero, just another crooked pollie who milked his reputation as a political operator working at Sky News – an organisation that has been supportive of the Coalition and vehemently anti-Labor. Think again, Albo. Salvatore Sorbello, Campsie

What if Albo resisted the calls and still threw Richo a state funeral and nobody came? Andrew Cohen, Glebe

On the one hand, esteemed journalist Kate McClymont outlines the long history of unethical and disgraceful behaviour by former ALP politician Graham Richardson. On the other hand, the prime minister has offered the late powerbroker a state funeral, saying: “We have lost a giant of the Labor Party and a remarkable Australian.” McClymont and Albanese can’t both be right. My estimation of the PM has hit rock bottom. John Berry, Cammeray

The only state funeral I would like to attend (and help to pay for) would be one where Kate McClymont delivered the eulogy. Mark Latchford, Seaforth

Anthony Albanese does a disservice to the Labor Party, the Labor Government and the people who actually warrant a state funeral, by offering Graham Richardson a state funeral. Not all of us have short memories and, as documented in Kate McClymont’s article, Richardson’s political machinations, along with decades-long involvement with a variety of shady characters and shady deals, does not depict an honourable man, and definitely not one who did anything for Australia and her people. Colleen Riga, Potts Point

Not my Labor hero. Tony Judge, Woolgoolga

My beautiful wife of 61 years also died this week. She was a registered nurse, never said a bad word about anybody, raised four wonderful children. Devoted her working career to helping the sick. She had no need for a Swiss bank account, never sought favours for sex and never supported corrupt politicians. She always voted Labor and believed it was the party that looked after the needs of the poor, the ill and the useless. She never could afford flash restaurants, and thought little of coal mining leases and amassing fortunes at the expense of others. She knew Peter Baldwin, he stayed at her house after the “bashing” and she attended to some of his wounds. Thus far I have not heard from the prime minister regarding a state funeral for my beloved girl. But I wait by the phone. Brian McKeown, Long Jetty

Means test ex-PMs

With all the living former prime ministers with their snouts in the pension and annual allowances trough (“Taxpayers foot $1.4m bill in expenses for former PMs”, November 12), perhaps we should consider extending prime ministerial terms to, say, six to eight years. At least that would give incumbent governments time and opportunity to more fully develop and implement policy ideas but eventually reduce the numbers living outside the political arena. Those that do leave, or are voted out of office, getting well-paid jobs in the private sector should be subject to a means test to determine what proportion of the public purse they should be given access to. Frederick Jansohn, Rose Bay

It’s great to see former prime minister John Howard sucking so vigorously on the public teat to the tune of around $250,000 in the last financial year. It’s comforting also for taxpayers that this political octogenarian is still out there revising history and explaining why, despite his constant advice, it wasn’t his fault at all that the Liberal Party is still living on struggle street. Rob Asser, Balmain East

Those politicians who have benefited greatly from their parliamentary pensions could take a leaf out of Ted Mack’s example. He chose to serve only two terms to avoid receiving such a bonus. Vicky Marquis, Glebe

Plastic positives

Dr Jonathan Baker’s wonderful article about plastics recycling (“How we’ve been conned into recycling by Big Plastic”, November 12) gives us hope that there is a solution to the seemingly overwhelming problem of plastics pollution. After describing how deviously Big Plastic has conned governments and citizens alike into taking responsibility for recycling or disposing of plastics for decades, Dr Baker states the script must be flipped. In other words, governments must regulate plastics production, with caps on production and responsibility for recycling. Bring it on. Sadly, this won’t happen soon so, meanwhile, we should be aware of buying/using single-use plastic as sparingly as possible. Reusable bags for fruit and veg are common sense. Carry your own preferred beverage in your reusable drink bottle. Avoid buying pre-packaged fruit and veg where possible. If enough of us front up to cash registers with a handful of beans in our reusable bags, extracted from a one-kilogram prepacked bag, retailers will get the message that beans, for example, don’t need plastic protection. Margot Vaccari, Berowra

A big thank you to Jonathan Baker for his revealing piece about the trickery of Big Plastic. I now have no qualms about being too lazy to load up the car boot with so-called recyclable empties, saved for months, just to get a few bucks and a warm feeling. At seven kilometres away, the cost of the petrol I’d use doing it at the nearest collection point would make the paltry reward I’d get even more meagre and quickly dim the smug feeling. So I’ll content myself by never succumbing to the other great marketing con-job: bottled water. What comes out of the tap at only $2.67 for a thousand litres is fine with me. And what few plastic bottles and metal cans do make it to the fridge can continue their cycle of re-use, such as it is, via the yellow bin for others to scavenge elsewhere. Adrian Connelly, Springwood

I would like to see all retailers (especially the supermarkets) issue an ultimatum to their suppliers: If your packaging is not genuinely recyclable, then we will no longer purchase from you. That may well create the chain reaction we are all looking for. Nicholas Beauman, Neutral Bay

Stop point scoring over net zero

No wonder a third of Australians surveyed think we should dump net zero by 2050 (“Third of voters want to scrap net zero target”, November 12) – all we seem to hear from the major parties on this issue is political point-scoring and divisiveness. But if those same Australians were asked whether they want to protect themselves and future generations from the health and economic costs of worsening fires, floods and storms, and keep insurance affordable, most would surely say “Yes, of course”. It’s time for the major parties to stop arguing and start listening – to science, not the fossil fuel lobby – and explain the significantly higher costs if we fail to act, and why cutting emissions quickly is in everyone’s best interests. Suzy Bessell, Cremorne

Which comes first, the political strategy or the opinion poll? It is surely no surprise that many Australians think we won’t reach net zero emissions by 2050. Given the failure for years and years of Liberal-National Party governments – and their continuing desire to undermine constructive strategies to reach net zero now from opposition – any thinking person must be sceptical about our chances of reaching net zero. Let’s hope such polls are treated with the same scepticism. Jill Napier, Phegans Bay

The Coalition continues to argue that the rollout of renewables and the goal of net zero by 2050 will lead to higher energy prices for Australian industry. What it doesn’t mention is the rapid increase in the cost of recovery from the increasing number and intensity of floods, bushfires and droughts resulting from climate change. Add the rapidly increasing cost of insuring properties, not only in disaster areas but on every property owner in Australia. For example, how many tens of thousands of properties in the Sydney/Hawkesbury/Nepean basin, the Blue Mountains and the coastal river valleys are now uninsurable or too expensive to insure? Continuing this policy will lead to net zero votes. Laurie Dicker, Forest Glen

The headlines claim a third of voters want the net zero target scrapped. Before we get carried away, may I point out that this means a strong majority of two thirds wants to keep this goal? Margaret Grove, Concord

Is it worth reporting that a poll showed a third of the country doesn’t want net zero? The same proportion who voted for the Coalition in that “other” poll – and that is why they are in opposition. Simon Hughes, Grafton

Conveniently, the NSW Nationals have come out and adopted the climate-denying and planet-destroying policy of backing coal and gas for power and transport. At the same time, they are opposing virtually every renewable project in the country (even out to sea, where there seem to be very few farmers). Their fairytale logic of linking high cost to renewables only is just that: a fairytale. Energy costs are a complex mess, and the Coalition will make them more expensive. A decent opposition would be fighting for stronger climate action and forcing the government to fast-track approvals and put in place better support for those affected in regional areas. Their willingness to side with the ideological wasteland that is One Nation or MAGA in the US is all you need to know about how the Coalition will treat Australians if it ever gets elected. Kim Morley, Safety Beach

Hitting the skids

Pressured by the Nationals and ultra conservative MPs in its ranks, the Liberal Party is set to dump the net zero target (“Ley leadership to be put to test in crunch talks”, November 12). Any such move by the Liberals will send confusing signals to businesses that Australia is not serious about tackling climate change, and it will starve clean energy initiatives of private sector funding, making us a laggard in tackling climate change. On the other hand, China is motoring ahead with clean energy initiatives. By 2024, it had installed a capacity of 887 gigawatts of solar capacity – close to double Europe’s and America’s put together. In the same period, it generated 1826 terawatt-hours of wind and solar energy. During the same period, Australia produced 102 terawatt-hours of renewable energy. If the Coalition decides to dump the net zero target, it will put a brake on our efforts to take action against climate change. Bipin Johri, Epping

Money and honour

Perhaps Major General Greg Melick should consider whether a Remembrance Day event supposedly in remembrance of the fallen is an appropriate forum for a political attack on the government (“RSL president warns PM of risk of not boosting defence budget”, November 12)? Steve Bright, North Avoca

Home? Run

Nazi Jack Eltis (“Terror team knew about Nazi rally in advance”, November 12) regards Germany as his “motherland” and Europe as “our ancestral lands”. Fine. Will someone please tell him to go back where he came from? Gary Stowe, Springwood

Walk it back

Your Keiraville correspondent (Letters, November 12) who asks if anyone is up for an anti-idiot march has demonstrated that many a true word is said in jest. A peaceful march of ordinary citizens who reject everything that the black-shirted “idiots” of last weekend stand for would be as powerful a message as any hastily confected anti-Nazi legislation. Phil Rodwell, Redfern

Buzzing off

For close to 50 years, our massive wisteria has hummed with the sound of bees foraging in the cascading masses of flowers that herald the arrival of warm weather (Letters, November 12). This year, with flowering now concluded, there is not a sound, not a solitary bee anywhere. Is this the “Silent Spring” Rachel Carson warned us of in 1962? Peter Skinner, Beecroft

I hear your correspondent. I have four jacarandas and usually have a “no bare feet” policy because of all the bees. Not a single bee this year. Where have they gone? It’s very sad. Elizabeth Darton, Lane Cove West

No, no bees, even in my wisteria or lavender. But the other day we saw a snail, and it was cause for celebration. Coral Button, North Epping

• 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.