On TV recently Malcolm Turnbull was telling viewers his government does not, does not, tolerate violence against women. This was following the rape and murder of a woman in a park in Melbourne.
The following night, again on TV, we saw the same Malcolm Turnbull berating, castigating and yelling at Labor's Tanya Plibersek, because our leader had an opinion different to that of Ms Plibersek. Very sad.
Sadder still, was our local member, Michael McCormack, sitting behind Turnbull encouraging him and joining in the tirades. Michael, you are meant to be a leader, not a follower – please show some respect towards women.
Peter Dolden, Wagga
A woman’s right to choose
The modern woman of today’s Australia is free to choose an education, free to choose with whom to build a family, free to vote and have a voice about the society she was born into, free to do a lot of things.
She is not free, however, from unsolicited advice, not even free enough from our own woman on woman destructiveness. Instead of building each other up as women, we tend to tear each other down.
We are not free from violence, not free enough to be able to walk home alone, in the dark, without a care as to whom should pass by, sitting next to on the train, working alongside.
The most recent atrocious crime against Eurydice Dixon brings to light something long ignored, and something we all want to change, but are struggling to still: Violence against women.
We are told that we, as women, should be careful about where we walk, at what time, be aware of our surroundings. What else are we do to for ourselves? We are not legally allowed to carry weapons, not legally allowed to have pepper spray. How are we to fight back, when statistically most of us lack the physical strength to match a man. How are we to defend ourselves against someone intent to do us harm?
The latest suggestion about talking to our sons about the harsh topic of violence against women, is only a partial solution to a growing problem. It may help in the next generation, but not now. Suggesting we have to change our own behaviours and habits to protect ourselves is unfair and unjust.
Em Byatt, Holbrook
Labor’s ‘theft plan’
I can forgive the federal opposition for many things, but not stealing money from infants. Under our tax system, shareholders receive franking credits to account for company tax paid and to avoid double taxation. These credits can be used to offset tax owed by the shareholder. For people who pay no tax, such as children earning $416 or less, excess franking credits are paid out as cash refunds. Labor plans to steal those refunds.
An example makes this clearer. Fred and Joan, pensioner grandparents withdraw $5000 from savings to buy shares in the name of one-year-old grandson Jack. They figure that 18 years of investment earnings will help costs when he wants to go to uni. Jack’s parents make all the decisions but as Jack is the beneficial owner of the shares his TFN is quoted. All dividend income from the shares is deposited into a bank account in Jack's name and dividends and franking credits are reinvested for Jack. Labor’s proposal would take around $100 in the first year. Compounding over the next 18 years will rob Jack of well over $3000.