Wells’ expenses show how the big stage costs money

What a mean-spirited, small-minded mob of whingers we are. The government introduces a world-leading, widely admired piece of legislation on social media access for teens, and all that correspondents and the media can think about is the cost of Communications Minister Anika Wells’ trip to New York to present it in person to a summit keen to hear about it (“The optics on these $94,000 flights are terrible, but the timing is even worse”, December 4). The world is looking at us, people. We can’t have politicians representing Australia arriving jet-lagged and tired after a long flight because we would pay only for economy tickets. The dinner may have cost $70,000, but this was New York, and the guests were important people. What do you suggest? Find a spare room somewhere and order a few take-away pizzas and a couple of slabs of beer? Representing Australia on the world stage costs money – money well spent if it helps other countries introduce similar legislation to protect their teens. Chris Edye, Pymble

It was dispiriting to read today of the apparent disregard for public purse expenditure on travel (“Wells’ $190K NY trip smacks of arrogance”, December 4). This galling behaviour of our elected and appointed government servants, along with the prime minister’s lousy record on freedom of information, seems only to be checked by our independent politicians, led by Senator Pocock and the commendable efforts of the Herald’s investigative journalists. We need more crossbench warriors in Canberra, and big tech should be made to pay local news outlets for the stories they publish, which will allow further investigations into the dark recesses of parliament. Bruce Hall, Avalon

Wells’ spending on the New York trip was justified. Owing to the global chaos caused by Donald Trump’s behaviour, each independent country needs to come forward and help guide the world according to their own expertise. Australia’s contribution is climate change action and the teen social media ban. Well done. Judy Nicholas, Kambah (ACT)

Rob Harris does not identify the fundamental difference between a minister travelling to address a significant international forum on official business and his other examples of a political scandal – a ministerial telephone card given to a family member for personal use, and a helicopter ride to a private function (“The optics on these $94,000 flights are terrible, but the timing is even worse”, December 4). These two incidents were rightly seen as scandals, with considerable consequences. But to call Wells’ itemised expenses some sort of scandal is unwarranted. Whether the minister should have travelled was a decision of the government. Are we saying it would only have been worthwhile if the airfares were half the price? It is disappointing that official travel costs incurred by a minister are now seen as some sort of scandal. Brenda Kilgore, Red Hill (ACT)

One wonders why Wells thought it was necessary to fly to the UN to spruik the benefits of Australia’s teen social media ban. It appears to be an exercise in grandstanding that has come seriously unstuck. Action on social media is hardly a matter of world peace. What Australia does in this matter is Australia’s business. Let other countries look after themselves. Ian Adair, Hunters Hill

My partner and I have just returned from a six-week holiday traversing South America and Central America. The cost, which included decent hotels, daily sightseeing tours, three meals a day, airfares to Santiago from Sydney and return, and 12 international flights was $22,000. We’d be more than happy to share our budget travel tips with the communications minister and Creative Australia and Future Fund bureaucrats – and we promise that we won’t hit them up for our motel stay and fuel. Peter Mahoney, Oatley

Very deep trough

I am grateful for senators such as David Pocock in laying bare the cavalier attitude of top executives when they have taxpayers’ money to spend (“Future Fund under fire for business class hotel research trip and Disneyland visit”, December 4). Why is the Future Fund even involved in training programs? I always believed that this was an investment fund for the purpose of paying public servants’ superannuation liabilities. I find it difficult to understand why so much has been spent on travel, let alone to Disneyland. As to why an executive assistant would fly business class to inspect hotel rooms is even more puzzling, when we have an embassy in the country that would already have well- established local contacts. It sounds like the Future Fund has become another very deep trough to be dipped into. Elizabeth Darton, Lane Cove West

Life goes on after ban

If there was ever any doubt about the pernicious influence of social media on young people and their sad addiction to various platforms, you only have to look at their reactions to the coming ban (“Australia’s social media lockout begins as teens face digital exile”, December 4). Shock, horror, apocalypse now! Terror at withdrawal effects, cries that this is the end of life as they know it. There’s even a constitutional challenge. It’s all beyond belief. Of course kids will still be able to communicate with each other – there’s this old-fashioned concept called conversation. Face to face. And if that’s too hard, they can still email, text or FaceTime each other. We much-maligned Baby Boomers breezed through life without being instantly, constantly online to each other. The phone was attached to the wall in the hall, so we regularly left home without it and somehow, against the odds, we all survived. So get a grip, kids – talk to each other, take up a hobby or play a sport. It might be fun. Merona Martin, Meroo Meadow

Hegseth’s fog

US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth’s “fog of war” justification for the killing of two survivors of the attack on the alleged drug boat is a convenient subterfuge, and not a clever one (“‘Fog of war’ might excuse an admiral, but it won’t let Hegseth off the hook”, December 4). Firstly, the US is not at war with Venezuela (at least not yet), and secondly, it is illegal under international law to fire on survivors of a shipwreck. There seems to be no moral compass guiding Hegseth here. Citing “the fog of war”, and pinning the blame on Admiral Mitch Bradley, is more about creating the fog of a cover-up for illegal and inhumane action. Leo Sorbello, Leichhardt

Michael Koziol writes of the sinking of an alleged narcotics boat by the US in the Caribbean and then killing of the survivors. There was a similar instance in World War II when a German U-boat sank a Greek ship, the Peleus, and then surfaced and killed most of the survivors. In 1945 the captain was tried by the allies, found guilty of war crimes and executed. Peter Hegseth, the US Secretary of War, justifies the US action as “fog of war”. More likely in an ethical desert. John Crowe, Cherrybrook

The recent attacks on alleged drug-smuggling boats by the US government, activities not approved by Congress in the first place, and then the follow-up killing of the survivors is unconscionable. Even if a war had been declared, this would be a war crime. Trump is a criminal and his vacuous yes-men have reduced the current leadership of the US to a criminal cartel. Australia should immediately withdraw intelligence sharing with this broken state, lest we become complicit in their illegal activities. Michael Macken, Wentworth Falls

Putin’s cruel intentions

Putin’s comment that European leaders “have no peaceful agenda, they are on the side of war” beggars belief (“Putin warns of war with Europe”, December 4). A clearer statement of the Russian warmonger’s real intent is his statement that Russia was ready to keep on fighting “until the last Ukrainian dies”. Putin has no intention of ending the war any time soon and has played Donald Trump and his negotiators masterfully. In the most recent meeting, Putin’s adviser claimed the talks were useful but there was “still a lot of work to be done”. Meanwhile, missiles and drones continue taking the lives of innocent Ukrainians. America, Europe and allied countries, including Australia, need to take a stand, impose the heaviest of sanctions on Russia, and bring this illegal war to an end. Michael Healy, Raworth

Bring brides home

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke, please just do it, bring them home (“Australia leaves the fate of its ISIS brides to the American army”, December 4). Save the Children is not some radical pro-ISIS organisation. Bring the Australian ex-brides and their children home, then assess if any of them are still a risk and protect their children from radicalisation. Whatever errors of judgment led the women to Syria and ISIS, our neglect in leaving them there is appalling. Australia has a responsibility to repair, protect and educate its own citizens. Rhyan Andrews, Faulconbridge

Nicknames bite back

The trouble with calling other people names is that they have a habit of coming back to bite you. Donald Trump can scarcely ever speak of his predecessor without calling him crooked Joe Biden or sleepy Joe Biden. There is a mountain of evidence to show how nefarious are Trump’s own financial dealings and now he goes to sleep in the middle of a cabinet meeting. Someone we especially remember at Christmas once wisely admonished us not to look at the speck in our brother’s eye while ignoring the log in our own. Bernard Moylan, Bronte

Money well spent

Whenever NSW builds new, significant infrastructure we get the usual bleating from opposition politicians talking about major cost blowouts and significant delays, claims given plenty of oxygen by the media. I recall the light rail in Sydney CBD was going to be a white elephant, and significantly over budget. Well, look at it now: probably one of the most popular and efficient means of transport in the city. I don’t really care if the metro line to the new airport is a year early, or a year late, or costs a billion more – I’m just glad that it will be there (“What Sydney Metro actually knew about delays to new airport rail line”, December 4). It’s vital infrastructure that will serve Sydney for decades. On the subject, where is the acknowledgement that the CBD light rail, and the other new infrastructure already built, has in fact made Sydney a much better place to live? Grahame Marks, Manly

Veto demolition

The nation is flat-out trying to meet demand for extra housing, but we are not doing too well and the price of building materials is going up. In competition with new builds is the large number of existing houses, still perfectly habitable, being purchased then demolished to be replaced by a house twice the size. These houses are competing for both materials and labour, which doesn’t help the situation. Perhaps buyers of existing homes should not be allowed to demolish them for three years after purchase. This would shift dynamics of the market, hopefully decrease ceaseless increase in residential home prices and allow most residential building to concentrate on increasing the housing stock. Properties would still sell, but maybe to a different market. Clare Perry, North Epping

Tax gas properly

A report published by the Jubilee Australia Research Centre says that despite having no gas reserves themselves, Japan and Korea have built their own gas export industries (“Labor set to make major intervention to keep gas in Australia”, December 4) by importing gas from Australia. In recent years, of the 39 million tonnes of gas from Australian export projects for Japanese buyers, almost 30 per cent was sold to third countries. To make matters worse, six out of the 10 Australian LNG facilities do not pay royalties. It is well past time that Australia not only had a gas reservation scheme, but ensured that our exporters paid a fair price for selling our resources. Peter Nash, Fairlight

Qantas interference

Transport Minister Catherine King’s statement that the EU’s compensation system won’t suit Australia because our airline industry is smaller follows her refusal to allow Qatar Airways extra flights into Australia (“Australia too small to penalise airlines with fines, says minister”, December 3). It is obvious that Qantas has long had undue influence on government policy, resulting in higher airfares. Tony Simons, Balmain

Devilish choice

I cannot understand why taxpayers have to finance a sporting venue costing a reported $1 billion when there is a housing shortage in Tasmania (“Devils, stadium to get the green light from parliament”, December 4). Surely the money would be better spent on new housing, preferably low-cost housing for the many people currently unable to afford a home of their own? Warren Scanlon, Ballina

Protection fail

The failure by corporations to take all the steps necessary to protect tunnel workers is beyond reprehensible (“Landmark silicosis ruling as tunnel worker gets $2.4m”, December 4). It symbolises utter contempt for the workers involved. If these companies were aware of the dangers, surely this is a case of criminal negligence. It also represents a huge failure of government. Why were these corporations not forced to adequately protect their workforce? Alan Morris, Eastlakes

A tick for AI

While AI may be disturbing to some and hilarious to others, it is completely honest (Letters, December 4). When I asked it if it was infallible, it quickly answered “no” as it was “prone to generate false information … and can make mistakes”. Mary Carde, Parrearra (Qld)

An idea that clicks

If today’s kids want to think they’re riding motorbikes, might I suggest a safer and cheaper alternative to a fat-tyred e-bike (“We need to rethink the use of e-bikes, especially by children”, December 3)? When we were kids, a piece of cardboard pegged to a bike frame that stuck into the spokes made a very passable motor noise – all powered by imagination. Robert Hickey, Green Point

• 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.