InDaily InDaily

Support independent Journalism Donate Subscribe
Support independent journalism

Reader contributions

Your views: on Libs, Centrelink, ICAC and Reds

Reader contributions

Today, readers comment on a controversial Liberal Party gathering, Centrelink coronavirus payments, ICAC v SA Health and Adelaide United.

Print article

Commenting on the story: Birmingham declares war on “pathetic factional cronies” as stoush over Liberal gathering explodes

Yet another example of why the Australian people have very little trust in our politicians.

In South Australia presently the rule for everyone is 100 people maximum for weddings and funerals and no more than 10 visitors to our private homes.

Yet the Liberal Party expect to have between 300-600 participants for this inside meeting. Why can’t it be done electronically?

Seems the Liberals but also, too many politicians in general, continue to lack integrity on which the Australian people can build their trust.

This is unacceptable and does not set any example of right from wrong which the politicians expect everyone else to abide by. 

How can we trust you and the decisions you make? – Colleen Roberts

Commenting on the story: Slashing Centrelink payment will increase poverty, hurt economy: SACOSS

I’m on Disability Support Pension and working part-time.

I’m permitted to earn $178 per fortnight before the $0.50 reduction comes in. That’s $89 a week, or less than one three-hour shift.

The government has done nothing to support DSP recipients, other than the two stimulus payments. That leaves DSP recipients worse off than JobSeeker recipients, who now get more money and can work more hours before it affects their payments.

Our cost of living is continually rising but DSP, Aged and Carer recipients have been kicked to the gutter and left to starve by the government. – Rhonda Maclean

Commenting on the story: ICAC reveals ‘high-level criminal investigations’ into SA Health

I’m perplexed by the apparent about-face by Commissioner Bruce Lander regarding his evidence to a parliamentary select committee this week on his investigations in SA Health. 

Mr Lander is reported to have said that he had seen “no discernible improvement” in SA Health’s alleged corruption enabling culture since he published his report Troubling Ambiguity late last year.

My confusion stems from his evidence to the Crime and Public Integrity Policy Committee on 28 May where he said that it was “not unreasonable for SA Health to address the pandemic before it addresses my report”. He told MP’s then that the full interagency response to his report would probably take “at least until the end of this year” to complete.

Questioned by CPIPC about progress on the issues he had raised, Mr Lander said: “It’s getting better because I know that there have been a number of steps taken in local health networks which address some of the matters I raised in my report”. 

As someone who takes in interest in the Commissioner’s public statements, I find these two views contradictory. Either the problems identified in Troubling Ambiguity are being addressed reasonably by government or they are not.

These are serious matters. I trust the reported statement this week was not the correct one. Kym Davey

Commenting on the story: Why the Reds are way ahead of the game

Spiro made some good points there.

Of course all of this is possible due to the departure of the most divisive coach Adelaide has ever had in Gerjan Verbeek. What a relief!

Mr Karanikos-Mimis of course was an avid admirer of Verbeek. Seems now to be very quiet on this issue. Perhaps he, like all of us, are glad United have a local coach, along with so many local players who are doing so well.

Unfortunately as soon as these young ones mature they will be snapped up elsewhere, but at the very least lets get good money for them and not give them away to the eastern states like we have done in the past. – Rob Scott

Want to comment?

Send us an email, making it clear which story you’re commenting on and including your full name (required for publication) and phone number (only for verification purposes). Please put “Reader views” in the subject.

We’ll publish the best comments in a regular “Reader Views” post. Your comments can be brief, or we can accept up to 350 words, or thereabouts.

 

Make a comment View comment guidelines

Help our journalists uncover the facts

In times like these InDaily provides valuable, local independent journalism in South Australia. As a news organisation it offers an alternative to The Advertiser, a different voice and a closer look at what is happening in our city and state for free. Any contribution to help fund our work is appreciated. Please click below to donate to InDaily.

Donate here
Powered by PressPatron

More Reader contributions stories

Loading next article