Anzac Day is too important to be hijacked by politics

My husband is a Vietnam veteran and on a military disability pension. For the first time ever he decided to attend the harbour sunset tribute on Thursday evening. It was a big step for him. While we appreciated the sentiment of the ceremony, we were both shocked at the political nature of the event. We thought it was disgraceful to have three former Liberal prime ministers (Howard, Abbott and Morrison), one of whom sent troops to Iraq in 2003, in the front row. We also realise that Gina Rinehart, who was also there, gives great support to veterans, and financially to this event, but it seems she comes with political baggage, too. We were shocked and disappointed, and I doubt that we will attend again. Sherie Barton, Ryde

I read that Peter Dutton attended various Anzac Day events commemorating the sacrifice of our veterans. When he was last in government, however, our veterans had to wait up to four years for any action on their claims for assistance for such things as psychological counselling for PTSD. When the Labor government came to power in 2022 it employed public servants who have reduced that waiting time to three months. Dutton’s hypocrisy is breathtaking. Jack Amond, Cabarita

It was absolutely wonderful to see so many schoolchildren and other young people participating in commemorative services on Anzac Day, and they have rightfully been widely commended for their genuine commitment. So, one wonders why these same magnificent young people face unfair criticism when they sometimes take to the streets to express their real concern about important issues such as climate change and sexual harassment? They are then characterised, particularly by right-wing commentators and the conservative media, as naive and foolish, as illegal protesters who should find better things to do with their time. Our younger generations are this country’s greatest “resource”. More power to them. Rob Phillips, North Epping

Dennis Glover’s point is timely and well-made: “lest we forget” should also mean “lest we repeat” (“Lest we forget history. Has a new world war already begun?” April 25). The signs have been around for long enough; the symptoms are familiar and depressingly easy to identify. Increasingly, the world’s 2020s playbook looks like the 1930s. As ever, we are doomed to repeat history’s mistakes unless we learn from them. We need leaders to look beyond placing all their eggs in the defence basket at the expense of development and progress. Democracy must enable us to elect governments whose goals are co-operative and imaginative rather than selfish, greedy and aggressive. Jenifer Nicholls, Windsor (Vic)

Dennis Glover’s questioning of the real meaning of “lest we forget” is especially germane as we prepare for the burial of Pope Francis, who was constantly pleading that we seek forgiveness and reconciliation rather than take up arms. Francis opined recently that World War III had already begun but was being fought “piecemeal”. At his final address, president Dwight D. Eisenhower also warned of the dangers of the military-industrial complex. The arms industry is worth many hundreds of billions of dollars. Is anybody listening, or would we rather forever ritually mourn our dead than do everything humanly possible to make sure it never happens again – a task even more relentlessly gruelling than making war? Bernard Moylan, Bronte

Another year of “lest we forget” and, thanks to all those who have fought so bravely to preserve our way of living, another record year of suicides and untreated PTSD. Brenton McGeachie, Hackett (ACT)

No defence for Rinehart

Having served in the ADF for 21 years, incensed doesn’t fully capture my emotions on reading about Gina Rinehart using an Anzac Eve event to promote her political agenda (“Rinehart uses Anzac Day service to push for enormous increase in defence spending,” April 25). I have no doubt Rinehart’s concern is motivated by self-interest, namely the vast mineral and energy reserves she has accumulated. I realise that we are in the midst of an election campaign; however, Anzac Day is not about defence, it’s a sacred commemoration of the suffering and sacrifice of those who have gone before us. Kevin Hewitson, Smiths Lake

As the daughter of a man who served in World War II, I found it upsetting to see Gina Rinehart displaying her “patriotism” at an Anzac ceremony. Is this not the same woman who was filmed proudly wearing MAGA paraphernalia and celebrating the victory of a man who wants to Make America Great Again at the expense of Australia and our allies? Where does her loyalty lie? Kerrie Shearston, Engadine

Rinehart wants the Australian people to increase defence spending, maybe to protect her wealth portfolio. Imagine if she had a real heart and wanted to use her mega-wealth to help the homeless, the less well-off. Nah, let’s buy 100 fighter jets so Gina’s yacht is safe. And she will probably be at the funeral of Pope Francis. Him, a man of humility and grace; her … sorry, just checking the balance sheet. Barry Ffrench, Cronulla

It wouldn’t coincidentally be the case that Ms Rinehart’s mines, Hancock Prospecting, are expanding their interests in rare earth minerals crucial for defence purposes. Or would it? Frederick Jansohn, Rose Bay

Rinehart wants Australia to spend more on defence. That will require raising billions more in taxes. She famously pays little tax and her philanthropy is modest. So, time for her to kick in big time. Charles Kent, Hunters Hill

The answer to the question you ask remains largely unanswered (“Coalition sets sights on defence splurge. Who pays?” April 25). However, history suggests foreign aid will continue to be the opposition’s source of revenue. Under Coalition governments from 2013 to 2022, Australia dropped from being the 13th-most generous donor among the 31 OECD countries to 28th (based on aid as a percentage of gross national income). Other countries are also slashing their foreign aid: not only the well-publicised demise of USAID, countries such as the UK, Germany, the Netherlands and France are also making large cuts. This is not the time for Australia to abandon the poor and disadvantaged in the developing world. Clay O’Brien, Mosman

Conscription controversy

After reading Tony Wright’s article on wrongful conscription I interrogated the archives and now find that I also was called up back in 1967, despite my birthdate not being selected (“His birthday wasn’t picked. He was conscripted anyway,” April 25) It was only because I was studying and able to join the citizen force for five years that I was able to avoid two years of full-time service. How many others like Peter Curtin and I were wrongly conscripted? No wonder the government kept the dates secret for over 30 years. What bastards. Tim O’Donnell, Newport

Looking for the list of birthdays in the fourth ballot, the National Archives of Australia steered me to the Australian War Memorial, where I downloaded the relevant report. Phew, turns out I missed being called up by one day. I kept my registration and deferment notices as instructed, so will I be called up as an 80 year-old in Trump’s 2066 Pacific War? Dad’s Army will then be Granddad’s Army, eh wot? Roger Cameron, Marrickville

Selfie indulgence

The greatest man in my life was my father, who died 18 months ago. At the viewing of his body, not once did I consider taking a picture of him as he lay there so peacefully. I know my father would rather be remembered for the happy times I spent with him and the values he instilled in me. So, too, would the late Pope Francis. The circus of flashes from waves of mobile phones recording people’s self-indulgent moment with the deceased is in sharp contrast to what this great Pope stood for (“Pope now part of the endless scroll, as phones steal from stillness and silence of grief”, April 25). Revisiting Pope Francis’ values may be a more enlightened way to celebrate him, rather than a selfie. Srdan Knezevic, South Hurstville

Neo-Nazi disgrace

As an ex-serviceman whose father fought fascism in World War II, I demand to know why a “known neo-Nazi” was at liberty to abuse our democracy (“Neo-Nazi arrested as stunts mar Anzac Day dawn services,” April 25). You were good at deporting legal asylum seekers, Mr Dutton. Now let’s hear about your plans to deport neo-Nazis, who really can be said to deserve it. Ian Usman Lewis, Armidale

It was a disgrace interrupting the Welcome to Country at an Anzac ceremony, or anywhere else. However, the Coalition has emboldened these “fringe dwellers” through their opposition to the Voice referendum. The rejection of the referendum allowed some to believe that the majority of the nation were against acknowledgement of First Nations Australians. Political parties need to think about how extremists will interpret their stance on fundamental matters such as acknowledgement of the original inhabitants of our nation. Heather Brown, Engadine

Of course the despicable actions of neo-Nazis at the Shrine of Remembrance should be deplored by all Australians, and by decent people everywhere. But sadly, while many might have thought that Hitler’s evil had finally been consigned to history, the fact is that there are still people in the world who are keeping this dictator’s name, and methods, alive. Efforts to destroy liberal democracy are seen by some as an achievable goal. Derrick Mason, Boorowa

Regarding reports of some individuals booing the Welcome to Country message at this morning’s dawn service (“Welcome to Country booed at Melbourne’s Anzac Day dawn service”, April 25), I noticed almost every comment on the Herald’s website reminded Peter Dutton of the generous war service and sacrifice of Indigenous Australians in past conflicts, and yet how divisive he had been in killing the very modest request from our First Nations People for a Voice to parliament. For this reason, if nothing else, he should be denied his long-held ambition to lead our country. Rob Firth, Red Hill (ACT)

If ever there was a need for intervention it’s for those poor little boys who run around in black dress-ups and go boo at Anzac Day dawn services. They need help. Philip Dowle, Wickham

Power struggle

There would be other seats besides teals that Peter Dutton would now be avoiding, such as the ones where nuclear reactors are proposed (“Dutton is still toxic in the teal world,” April 25). The teals (and Greens) were elected on a wave of nausea caused by the Coalition’s seeming deafness over climate change. Why did the Coalition respond with the nuclear idea? In the words of Matt Canavan, “because it fixes a political issue for us”. Even that fix appears to have backfired. It seems nuclear was an idea whose time has passed. A survey conducted by Griffith and Monash universities shows a majority of Australians do not view nuclear power favourably, and would be concerned if a plant was built near them. As more time has allowed closer scrutiny of the nuclear proposition, more holes appear. That is why nuclear has been all but missing in action in the Coalition’s campaign, and not just in the teal seats. If “history is made by those who show up”, nuclear in Australia is a mere footnote in the Coalition’s agenda. Fiona Colin, Malvern East

Correspondent Alan Marel asks if “the Coalition’s befuddlement stems from incompetence or sheer arrogance” (Letters, April 25). It’s some of the former but a lot of the latter. The arrogance of the Coalition knows no bounds. They are beyond furious that they forgot to listen to the concerns of voters, resulting in many seats being won by independents who actually care for their constituents. The Coalition blames everybody else but refuse to turn the lens inwards. The Liberal Party truly believes it “owns” certain seats, they are theirs, they are born to rule there. The complacence and lack of respect shown to those constituents is, or should be, a reminder to a puzzled Coalition that the mighty have fallen and that they only have themselves and their inbuilt arrogance to blame. Judy Hungerford, Kew (Vic)

In case that the result of the election is a hung parliament, the two major parties have to forget their political differences and seriously consider forming a grand coalition. Providing stability and long-term economic planning should be in the forefront of the Coalition’s and the ALP’s thinking. Allowing the Greens and other minor parties to hold the balance of power carries the risk that decisions are made not in the national interest. A grand coalition, as successfully proven most recently in Germany, is about preserving stability. In these uncertain times, Australia urgently needs a strong government and national unity. Johann-Caspar Rose, Darling Point

Peter Dutton has pledged to scrap Labor’s new vehicle efficiency standards. He also plans to remove a $5000 fringe-benefit subsidy on EV vehicles. Bizarrely, Dutton, as self-proclaimed national security tsar, does not appreciate that dependence on imported transport fuels is a national security risk. Clearly he is out of his depth. Carlo Ursida, Kensington (Vic)

Nowhere to go

There is a push for empty nest Boomers to downsize their homes and make more housing available for younger generations. But where are these supposed smaller dwellings if there is already a housing shortage? Are we all supposed to disappear into a retirement village, that is, if one is available? The number of existing homes is the same regardless of whether Boomers downsize or not. If these smaller dwelling are supposedly available for downsizers, would it not be less of a financial burden for the younger generations to buy these as first homes? Bruce Clydsdale, Bathurst

Mission impossible

What a touching notion Rosemary O’Brien that the solemnity of a Pope’s funeral might gently rewire Donald Trump’s moral circuitry. Redemption is possible, yes—but let’s not confuse miracles with mission impossibles. Not even the incense could fumigate decades of Trump’s ego, spite and spray tan. Nevertheless Rosemary, yours in eternal hope.

Vivien Clark-Ferraino, Duckmaloi

Postscript

The flood of tributes to Pope Francis this week revealed the high regard in which he was held by many Herald readers, religious or not. Self-described agnostic Rose Lysnar said the Pope’s compassion, humility and concern for the poor made him a “truly wonderful advocate” for the Catholic Church.

Doug Hewitt hailed his anti-war stance, his sympathy for refugees and his environmental beliefs, suggesting that political leaders could make the world a better place by taking a page out of the Pope’s book. “Could our own candidates for election on May 3 promise to work towards these principles?” he asked.

The church itself didn’t come out of it so well, though. “Pope Francis should rightly be lauded for his compassion,” wrote Michael Bright, “however, he represented a church whose doctrines are still entrenched in the Middle Ages.”

“An all-male, misogynistic institution that is against birth control, against abortion and against divorce doesn’t reflect the society in which we live,” Rob Wills pointed out.

Not to let sadness get in the way of some Aussie humour, Dave Pyett noted how soon the Pope’s passing came after meeting US Vice President J.D. Vance. “Maybe we could get Vance to visit Putin next,” he quipped.

Staying with religion, Ross Gittins’ “Easter sermon”, in which he admired the principles of Christianity, drew surprising criticism from his usually adoring fans. “I have always admired Ross Gittins and valued his opinions, until today. For him to imply that all people who identify as non-Christians are selfish and self-interested is disappointing,” wrote Barbara Tregear.

Mark d’Arbon spoke for many: “Gittins makes the fundamental error of assuming organised religion engenders altruism and belief in the common good.”

With only a week left before the federal election, political messaging was at fever pitch. On the eve of Anzac Day, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton pledged to spend an extra $21 billion on defence if he became prime minister.

Neville Williams saw the irony. “Friday’s public holiday reminds us that there are no winners in the horror of war. When the major parties start to genuinely talk about matching our military spending with international peace projects, humanity may be progressing. Any political vision worth its salt needs to have at its core a celebration of our common humanity. Give peace a chance,” he wrote.

Pope Francis would have agreed.

Ivan Hemens, letters desk

• 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.