Readers are invited to submit letters to The Guardian.
Letters may be e-mailed to guardian@cpa.org.au.
Letters of 300-400 words are preferred.

Letters to the Editor:

Values and schools

I have watched with interest and frustration the current 
debate on schools and values initiated by PM John Howard and and 
his Health Minister Tony Abbott. It was wonderful to read Tom 
Pearson's article on the cover of The Guardian (28/1/2004) 
which actually addressed the real issues.

My interest comes from the fact that I was a teacher for over a 
decade in both state and private schools in Australia and 
overseas and because I believe education is very crucial in 
promoting the values of social justice, peace, fair play and 
respect for all. I have also been an organiser for the Australian 
Education Union.

In my experience most schools in Australia that I have taught in 
or visited during my education career promote the values I have 
mentioned. Even the very elite school that Tony Abbott attended 
did. I know this because I taught there when he was a student in 
the early 1970s.

What has intrigued me about the debate is that while our PM and 
Health Minister claim that our state schools do not teach values, 
they fail to spell out what values they want to see taught. Could 
this be because so many of their policies are devoid of humanity 
and compassion and that they simply want to promote nationalist 
and elitist pretensions as Tom Pearson identified in his article?

What sort of values lead our federal government to treat asylum 
seekers so shabbily, cheat East Timor, the poorest country in the 
world out of its rightful share of the oil and gas in the Timor 
Sea, provide generous funding to wealthy schools at the expense 
of the poorer ones and try to push Australia into a free trade 
agreement that will impact harshly on many disadvantaged 
Australians?

Sadly, I come to the conclusion that the purpose of this debate 
is about driving a wedge between Australians in the lead-up to a 
federal election and to attack Australians who do promote 
positive humanitarian values as being "do-gooders" or 
"politically correct".

We do need a deep and far-reaching debate about human values in 
Australia at this time, but the one initiated by Howard and 
Abbott is not genuine. The only "values" they seem to be 
promoting is that selfishness, callousness and greed are good.

My plea to all Australians is let us reject the negative values 
that the Howard Government is promoting to show the world that we 
really do value the concept of a fair go and compassion for 
suffering humanity.

Andrew (Andy) Alcock.
Forestville SA

With the start of another year, as we reflect upon the events 
that have passed, we may ask ourselves, what is the purpose of 
our Government?

The Constitution is somewhat vague on this subject; our 
instrument of government contains no clear definition of the role 
it is to perform.

This arrangement may have been acceptable when Australia, at the 
beginning of the 20th century, was still a colonial outpost of 
the British Empire, but here and now in the 21st century, when 
the people of Australia consider themselves as citizens of an 
independent nation, it is deficient in so many ways.

Section 51 of the Constitution, mentions the power "to make laws 
for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth", 
and, while it bestows considerable powers on the Federal 
Government, it in turn, demands no responsibilities of the 
government to the people!

The meaning of "peace" and "order" are clear enough, but "good 
government" is a somewhat subjective term, depending on whether 
you are the government, or being governed, and when we consider 
the manner in which the Government has become injurious to the 
people, then it is time to question its reason for being.

The disciples of Mammon believe that the purpose of the state is 
simply to provide them and their entourage with the opulent 
lifestyle they enjoy. They have constructed elaborate mechanisms 
of government that are utilised by this parasitic organism to 
enable it to feed off its host.

A successful parasite does not kill its host, for it understands 
the principle of the golden goose. Carefully managed it can draw 
sustenance from its host forever, somewhat like the good shepherd 
who tends his flock. He keeps them fed and watered, free of 
disease, and protects them from predators, but he does this only 
so that he might fleece them at regular intervals.

The word commonwealth is a conjunction of two words, common and 
wealth, which in essence means the wealth we share in common. 
This common-wealth comprises the nation, the land, and the 
infrastructure that has been developed in order that modern civil 
society may function.

Infrastructure in particular, is something essential to modern 
society, and includes the water and sewerage, highways, 
electrical power generation, telecommunications, health and 
education, etc. It is something that functions best, when 
publicly owned, and operated for the common good.

When infrastructure is not publicly owned, and utilised to 
generate dividends for a select group of citizens rather than 
provide the services to the whole community, then the quality of 
the services are diminished in order that dividends be paid.

History also records the way in which private ownership of 
infrastructure has been utilised to the detriment of business 
enterprise, to stifle competition and extract a large tribute 
from society.

Those that believe that nothing should be publicly owned have 
corrupted the Houses of the people and passed laws that will 
forever prevent the people from the full enjoyment of their 
common property.

They, that is the agents of the disciples of Mammon, have 
deliberately mismanaged our infrastructure in order that when it 
no longer functions as it should, they can justify selling it to 
those faceless men, those controllers of the giant corporations, 
who will then exploit it for their personal self-interest rather 
than the common good. 

The new year will bring forth a new push for the Republic, as 
there is a Senate inquiry currently in progress. Its terms of 
reference are almost identical to those given to Malcolm Turnbull 
in 1993.

Rather than falling for the establishment's ploy of dividing the 
nation against itself, that is between Monarchists and 
Republicans in order that nothing will change, that is, nothing 
except the title of the office of Governor-General, we should 
focus on the issues that unite us, rather than those that have 
been contrived to divide us, then perhaps together, we may be 
able reform this rotten system of government that we inherited 
from England.

Gary Edwards
Gilgandra, NSW

Here are some questions for Mr Latham and the Labor Party. 
Will a Labor Government:

* Withdraw Australian troops from Iraq or leave them there under 
the command of the most dangerous US President in history?

* Increase the rebate to doctors and restore the universality of 
bulk billing?

* Cancel the subsidies to private health insurance companies?

* Put a stop to any further privatisation of public enterprises 
and public institutions?

* Oppose Australia's involvement in the US Star Wars program?

* Cutback subsidies to private and church schools and 
substantially increase support for public educational 
institutions?

* Abandon mandatory detention and close refugee detention 
centres?

Bruce Gillman
Sydney, NSW