Out­raged by AAT rul­ing

Herald Sun - - YOUR SAY -

I AM out­raged at the lat­est de­ci­sion by the Ad­min­is­tra­tive Ap­peals Tri­bunal.

I do not want “MAH” to stay in Aus­tralia (“Tri­bunal says crim can stay”, HS, Mar 14). He has racked up al­most 30 of­fences since he has been here, and is on wel­fare as well. What a leech this man is.

Where is the peo­ple power to stop the AAT from do­ing this to fairminded Aus­tralians?

The of­fend­ers we do not know gen­er­ate enough fear, but to have MAH in so­ci­ety is an of­fence to me.

Come on, fair-minded Aus­tralians, take a stance on the AAT — be­fore you be­come a vic­tim.

Pa­tri­cia Cor­rea, Trar­al­gon

Un­elected rulers

THE vot­ers of Aus­tralia elected their rep­re­sen­ta­tives to gov­ern this na­tion ex­pect­ing that a pri­mary aim would be to pro­tect the cit­i­zens.

This power has been usurped by the AAT, which is un­elected and po­lit­i­cally driven. Its mem­bers seem to be try­ing to poke Peter Dut­ton’s depart­ment in the eye with each more egre­gious de­ci­sion over­turn­ing the min­is­ter’s at­tempts to get rid of crim­i­nals.

It is im­per­a­tive that this club of self-ap­pointed rulers be brought to heel as they are deny­ing Aus­tralian vot­ers the right to a safe en­vi­ron­ment.

Maybe leg­is­la­tion that re­stricts the gam­bit of their de­ci­sions where any sec­ond at­tempt to re­move the crim­i­nal, by the depart­ment, should be fi­nal and not able to be ap­pealed.

We must get the govern­ment back in charge of our im­mi­gra­tion pol­icy, as we elected it to do.

A. McWil­liam, Waranga Shores

Shut down tri­bunal

HOW many times can the AAT over­turn de­por­ta­tion de­ci­sions made by Peter Dut­ton?

As re­ported in the Her­ald Sun, the AAT has over­turned more than 80 de­por­ta­tion or­ders in the past eight years. These in­cluded mur­der­ers, rapists, pae­dophiles, armed rob­bers and drug deal­ers. It’s time the AAT was dis­banded. Law­less­ness in our state is out of con­trol. Bail is be­ing given too of­ten, and sen­tences rarely fit the crime. How do our po­lice cope with this?

They risk their lives to try to en­sure our safety, only to see the per­pe­tra­tors out on the street.

Pa­tri­cia Loy, Bon­beach

Give it a new name

IN view of the AAT’s over­turn­ing of a de­por­ta­tion or­der against mul­ti­ple-of­fender MAH, and its ap­palling record of 80 sim­i­lar cases, per­haps it is time to re­name it the Anti-Aus­tralia Tri­bunal?

Arthur Comer, Se­bastopol

Park­ing ban non­sense

THE park­ing ban at the MCG ( HS, Mar 14) is surely one of the most sim­plis­tic smoke­screens ever un­veiled to the pay­ing pub­lic in the name of civil safety, on par with the ridicu­lous or­bital bar­rier cage that was in­stalled sev­eral years ago.

Here’s the rub: if your heart is so dark­ened and set upon caus­ing hu­man suf­fer­ing, then a lack of cars at Yarra Park is not go­ing to get in your way. There are thou­sands of cit­i­zens amass­ing in queues at Rich­mond train sta­tion and at the en­trance gates to the ground.

We are con­sis­tently told that the prospect of ter­ror­ism will not af­fect our free­dom or ac­cepted way of life, and yet, another con­ve­nience has now been swiftly eroded.

An al­ter­nate sug­ges­tion: how about the AAT ac­tu­ally does its job and de­port those peo­ple who plan to cause wan­ton may­hem in the first place?

Peter Water­house, Craigieburn

Threat isn’t con­fined

SO the MCG is go­ing to ban cars from park­ing on its grounds due to se­cu­rity and ter­ror­ist risks. When will this mad­ness stop?

Who is pro­tect­ing me on a train, tram or a bus? Who is pro­tect­ing me in a shop­ping cen­tre, in a movie the­atre or any other shop or carpark?

Let’s ban all cars im­me­di­ately and we can all get around on bi­cy­cles. Af­ter all, those pesky ter­ror­ists were never go­ing to change our way of life.

V. Guz­zardi, Gowan­brae

Su­per mis­take, Bill

SO Bill Shorten thinks he can give re­tirees and pen­sion­ers short shrift.

What an ab­so­lute dis­grace for La­bor to wipe off an im­por­tant part of their in­come.

We all know what La­bor thinks of self-man­aged su­per funds, and this is part of its strat­egy to de­ter peo­ple and rec­om­mend union su­per funds.

Re­mem­ber, Mr Shorten, we vote at the bal­lot box, and so do our sons and daugh­ters.

John Wil­liamson, South­bank

Devil in the de­tail

DOES Bill Shorten have a po­lit­i­cal death wish? Many older Aus­tralians have small hold­ings of shares, and the div­i­dends are cal­cu­lated for pen­sion pay­ments.

If im­pu­ta­tion cred­its are abol­ished, many, many pen­sions will have to be in­creased. Have those rises been cal­cu­lated?

Ju­dith Swan­ton, Echuca

Def­i­ni­tion of bad idea

BILL Shorten speaks with a forked tongue. He claims his new div­i­dend im­pu­ta­tion pol­icy means af­fected peo­ple “will not be pay­ing any ad­di­tional tax”.

But their af­ter-tax in­come will drop and the dif­fer­ence will stay with the govern­ment. Sounds like a tax to me. Get a new dic­tionary, Bill.

Henry Wool­ley, Keilor East

Take the blink­ers off

AUS­TRALIANS are like naughty chil­dren who look for any ex­cuse or de­flec­tion of ac­count­abil­ity to avoid tack­ling the hard tasks set for them by their par­ents.

In the past, we have ex­celled to sup­ply riches from the ground to give us a world-lead­ing econ­omy. Ar­guably, not much ad­vanced in­tel­li­gence was needed to suc­ceed but we all felt good.

The fu­ture will en­tail Aus­tralia chang­ing its vi­sion in a rad­i­cal way; we will need to be­come gen­er­a­tors and driv­ers of new tech­nol­ogy and life­style sys­tems to sell to the world.

We are the largest con­sumer of tech­nol­ogy per head, which means that ev­ery Aus­tralian sends $5000 to $10,000 out of the coun­try ev­ery two to three years to a tech multi­na­tional, usu­ally en­rich­ing the US or China, and us­ing our saved wealth to pay for it.

If we con­tinue diminishing our saved wealth, we will bring to fruition the prophecy of former Sin­ga­porean prime min­is­ter Lee Kuan Yew that Aus­tralia risked be­com­ing the “cheap white trash of Asia”.

There­fore Aus­tralia, when the fi­nan­cial sit­u­a­tion is dour, don’t lose fo­cus with is­sues like dual cit­i­zen­ship. They are much lower pri­or­i­ties.

Roger Wolfe, Bal­wyn

Cut­ting-edge times

HOW ridicu­lous to sack a vi­ceprin­ci­pal for cut­ting a stu­dent’s hair.

When I was at Men­tone Gram­mar 40 years ago, we had an ex-war­rant of­fi­cer from the army em­ployed full­time for stu­dent dis­ci­pline.

If your hair was too long, he or­dered you up to the school bar­ber. Yes, we had a ded­i­cated on-site school bar­ber.

Trin­ity Gram­mar, bring back Brownie and get a school bar­ber!

An­drew Whit­ney, Hamp­ton Park

Cut it out, teacher

A TEACHER should fol­low the rules for their stu­dents.

But it is not right to cut peo­ple’s hair. Only hair­dressers and bar­bers have the right to do it. Not teach­ers.

A note should have been sent home with Trin­ity Gram­mar stu­dents ex­plain­ing the sit­u­a­tion about hair and cut­ting it for school pho­tos.

What is the school’s pol­icy on the use of phones and other elec­tronic de­vices?

Luca Gian­nessi, 16, Nu­nawad­ing

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.