Letters and short takes Monday January 16 2023

Firstly, the good people of Waratah did not have Elton John booming out 138 decibels within five metres of their front door for eight to ten hours a day for three days. That's a noise level previously considered dangerous by the NSW Chief Medical Officer, Dr Kerry Chant. Nor, I understand it, was it necessary for the "good people of Waratah" to wear both earmuffs and earplugs for eight hours per day in an attempt to avoid any damage to their hearing.

To the best of my knowledge Elton John didn't throw car parts at their houses, breaking the legs of some people who then required hospitalisation, as once happened at a previous Newcastle race. Nor did Elton John fill their streets with choking carcinogens like burnt rubber and unburnt racing fuel while he performed.

Finally, to the best of my knowledge the construction of Elton's massive stage did not require the use of eight tonne vibration rollers both night and day for six weeks, which they feared may crack their homes while spewing diesel fumes into the air.

I have also not heard of any business having to close because their customers could not enter Waratah or surrounding suburbs for nine weeks. I hope you find this explanation clear enough.

TONY Morley, ("Rocking the suburbs", Letters, 12/1): there is a massive difference between the sound of music icon Elton John ('An unforgettable night', Herald 9/1) and the deafening sound of 30 plus petrol heads tearing up streets and road rules. Had Elton's massive sound system faced east and not west, perhaps Waratah residents would've just heard more from Mr Morley.

LET'S not solve one problem by creating another. The problem of fossil fuels' greenhouse gas has been rightly addressed by a so-called renewable energy transition, but you can't plant an old battery or solar panels in the ground and a new one grows thanks to air, rain and sunshine. It's quite the reverse, with them turning into toxic sludge and leaching into water and food chains if not handled properly.

The Australian Clean Energy Council report 2022 doesn't mention recycling and Australia has no policy for renewable waste. At present 17 per cent of our solar panels and two per cent of our lithium batteries are recycled. The world-wide recycling of lithium batteries is only nine per cent.

Unlike the nuclear industry, which has held hazardous waste in temporary storage until they can't ignore it any longer (like now), I believe major suppliers of electric vehicles have committed hazardous lithium battery waste to third parties who largely use landfill as a solution. With the transition to electric vehicles and utility battery storage, I think Australia needs a policy on recycling these hazardous wastes and support for local industries to develop recycling capabilities. The responsibility also comes back to us, the voters, that we may have to entertain high energy costs for quite some time. This may be our legacy to our children and grandchildren to provide a cleaner planet.

A mobile phone battery can pollute three standard swimming pools of water, and if abandoned on the land, can pollute a square kilometre for about 50 years. As you would expect, the pollution caused by larger electric vehicle and grid back-up batteries is far greater.

The Newcastle Herald recently published a photo of the prime minister, accompanied by two of his ministers, at a public address with three flags in the background; the Australian flag, the Indigenous flag and one whose significance I am unsure of. The Indigenous flag took the centre position.

My question is, why should what I consider a flag of protest against white settlement take centre stage when it represents three per cent of the population?

Why can't just one flag be presented to represent everyone rather than a divisive flag that causes confusion and unrest? When is Australia going to grow up and become one nation with one flag? Other nations have achieved this objective after multiple invasions of people with multiple cultures, religions and, yes, spendign time represented under different flags.

I reckon the 21st century should be a new beginning for every Australian regardless of the past; united under one flag, one set of rules and a united future as a single nation without being racist.

Maybe a new flag is needed to come to an agreement and get rid of a flag of controversy that creates division within, and confusion for new settlers about to arrive in Australia. Aren't we all Australians?

AUSTRALIA has lost more mammal species to extinction than any other continent.

Southern and central Australian greater gliders were officially listed as endangered in July 2022. The other greater glider species, Northern, is listed as vulnerable. All efforts possible must be made to ensure that this wonderful animal is not added to the very long list of Australian animals that are now extinct.

Greater gliders are largely unknown compared to koalas. They are nocturnal, can glide up to 100 metres through their forest habitat, and eat eucalyptus leaves and buds. They are the most interesting animals.

Because of severe loss of habitat, greater glider numbers have plummeted resulting from extensive land clearing and logging. Also unstable climatic conditions caused by human induced climate change has added greatly to the demise of the unfortunate animal because of ever increasing forest fires.

Federal Environment and Water Minister, Tanya Plibersek, has indicated a strong commitment to halting the long existing extinction crisis in Australia and it is hoped that her efforts can lead to legislative protection needed to ensure the survival of greater gliders.

BOOK sales for Harry's book have gone through the roof, swelling Harry and Meghan's already bulging pockets. They have compared his book sales to Harry Potter sales. I reckon the difference is one points a wand, the other the finger. For people wanting to opt out of royal duties and not being in the media limelight, they certainly have done the opposite. I believe they should be stopped from using any royal titles and not receive any taxpayer-funded royalties to supplement their already sizeable bank account balance. By all means live in America in peace and isolation, but especially now you can afford it, get a life.

When I retired from Newcastle Steelworks in 2000 I managed a trip around Australia going anticlockwise, Newcastle to Newcastle. A diesel 4x4 for just over 40,000 kilometres, as close to the coast as possible. It was literally the trip of a lifetime and gives me great memories of this land and its people. Now, when will that be possible for the average person with an electric car or even a hybrid? If I lived back in the UK it's no problem, but here's a different story.

I HAVE recently been seriously ill and down in the dumps. However, my spirits were raised and I was even able to raise a laugh watching the Sky News expose of the ABC. Sky News which has no qualms being a rabid right wing Murdoch mouthpiece doing an expose of Aunty is a bit like Donald Trump stating that he wants to bring America together. Thanks Sky News, your hypocrisy has improved my mood.

OPPOSITION Leader Peter Dutton, accuses the Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of treating Australians like mugs over the Voice debate, ("PM treating Austrlians 'like mugs'", Herald 9/1). Well it's good to see you are commenting on something you know a lot about, Mr Dutton. You and your mob of galahs treated all of us like mugs for 12 years. Hurts to be leader of a mob of spiteful, resentful nobodies does it?

DARYL Frost, in my neck of the woods sensible people are blue necks. I could be a blue tongue lizard, I know the better half thinks I'm a thrill neck lizard without the frills, being in the minority as a heterosexual male after all.

SO Tony Morley, ("Rocking the suburbs", Letters 12/1, compares the Elton John concert with Supercars. Seriously?

I THINK John Cooper, ("Marriage, Voice aren't the same", Letters, 13/1), is quite wrong in asserting that if the Voice to Parliament goes pear shaped it will require another referendum to fix it. The proposed Constitutional amendment is to only give Parliament the power to legislate for the Voice. The amendment provides no detail as to how the Voice will work. It is up to Parliament to set up the Voice and how it will operate. This means that Parliament, at any time, can legislate to change or fix the Voice, or even abolish it altogether. There is a very good argument that Parliament is already endowed with enough powers to legislate it without the proposed referendum. The government refuses to provide any details on how it sees the Voice working. The reports on the Voice set out ideas and proposals but these are yet to be endorsed or adopted. The Voice will be an act of Parliament and will not be enshrined in our Constitution.