Once complaints about the Senate were pretty basic: Senators were droning on to an audience of only a few of their peers, some of whom would be nodding off at times perhaps reflecting the strains of a house of review, or Senators were voting on party lines and not exercising individual judgment. Some Senators even dared question the value of the arcane encyclopedia of rules under which the chamber operates, much to the mystification of many Senators. However, as if these problems were not bad enough, now we have the fearful spectre of babies cooing and gurgling in the august chamber. The smallest unit of human life a baby is intruding into parliamentary life. In response, Peter Meredith (Letters, June 23) asks, what is our Senate coming to? But I thought our democratic system of government was based on government of the people, by the people, for the people.
And a cursory examination of this statement, and of the problems above I've noted above, reveals a common factor people. Of course, if we don't want the problem of having people in the Senate, we could replace Senators with large photographs of themselves in the seats they once occupied.
Senators could then vote electronically from the comfort of their offices, ending the need for time-wasting divisions and re-counts, and email their speeches to their colleagues to be read at their leisure.
Senators' babies could crawl around the floor of their offices happily and not suffer rejection by pompous asses.
Oh yes, and the bill for running the Senate would be reduced.
I'll vote to keep the people and their babies in the chamber thanks.
Terry Craig, Holt
Easy to oppose
Perhaps one of the main problems with the two party system we have in modern politics is that there is a tendency to define yourself by your opponent. Both Labor and Liberal find it easy to say what they oppose, that is, whatever the other party has done or is doing, but very difficult to tell voters what it is they actually stand for.
When Penny Wong is faced with tough questions about whether the Emissions Trading Scheme is just a subsidy to polluters, whether it will work or what impact it will have on jobs, the response is generally along the lines of the Opposition couldn't/wouldn't do any better rather than defending the policy according to its (supposed) merits.
But perhaps I have used an unfair example, picking on a minister considered so incompetent that she needs a parliamentary secretary to help her with the rather small policy area she looted from Peter Garrett.
Perhaps the Prime Minister would do better, being the leader of the party and therefore expected to have a cohesive position, but no.
Kevin Rudd generally, when issues of policy or scandals come up, compares the situation to either the response of the Howard Government or the incompetence of the Opposition.
Whether it is the economy, the environment or simply staffers flying first class, the merits of the decision and reasoning behind it are ignored in favour of partisan grandstanding.
I am beginning to wonder whether the two parties even know what their policy is, or why they are supporting it, or anything beyond how to make cheap shots at the other side of the house.
Joshua Smith, Gordon
Lake being trashed
Lake Berley (once Lake Burley Griffin) certainly attracts the big fish wanting themselves or their committee to catch the big one with yet a new memorial or edifice by the Lake. Bit by bit the natural beauty of the Lake is being abused up by yet another ''good idea''.
It's a bit like the 45-year-old family home that gradually accumulates the bibs and bobs of Aunt Maude's last sculpture class, the children's last art class and then their wedding photos crammed against the grandkid's last school drawings. Let's not forget the fridge magnets and your overseas trophies.
Eventually the emotional weight and clutter of all this memorabilia becomes overwhelming and either you or the kids clear it all out or kindly send it ''straight to the Pool Room''.
Unfortunately my grandkids won't inherit the clear vistas of the Lake's beauty that I have enjoyed before it was weighed down by repetitive war memorials and bridges gifted to us by a series of civic fathers for our own good.
Maybe Canberra needs to build its own Pool Room where these bright ideas can be stored and viewed occasionally. Even the War Memorial and Art Gallery have their store rooms.
We don't need every good cause displayed at once in and around the Lake.
Please show some restraint and imagination and put it somewhere else.
Don't destroy the heritage of the Lake and its natural surroundings.
Leave something for our kids!
Stewart Homan, Kambah
Email a friend