Why do we continue to undervalue the role of General Sir John Monash?
I refer to Professor Peter Stanley’s piece in the Advertiser last Thursday (“Why should we remember the great war”, Opinion, November 8) specifically with respect to Sir John Monash.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Professor Stanley states, “I’ve been critical of for example the unjustified boosting of Monash”.
The many “books and documentaries making his case” do make compelling reading. Authors such as; Perry, Kieza, Fitzsimons, Searle, Greste etc. (even Monash himself), all unerringly corroborate each other with the same overall story, which appears to stack up against all the available evidence. But if these authors are guilty of overstatement why have they done so?
Furthermore why did Britain, Belgium, France and the USA all err by awarding him very high honours when Australia did nothing?
For the past 100 years we as a nation have continued to undervalue the role this civil engineer played when he answered the call just like so many of the diggers who served under him answered the call. Why?
I have searched for evidence, but am yet to uncover anything of substance to support the case that these authors have overstated his role (except of course if one takes assertions, such as one person winning the war, quite literally!). If anyone does have this evidence I would very much appreciate having access to it.
Lindsay Clay, Bendigo
No idea of cost of surviving in old age
I read with amazement the article in the Australian Financial Review on the Grattan Institute Report and recommendations which claim Pensioners have enough to live on.
The report recommends in part:
That the age pension assets test should be changed to include the value of a home above some threshold, such as $500,000. That changes the rules again and is the thin edge of the wedge.
That Seniors and Pensioners Tax Offset should be wound back so it is only available to pensioners, and so those who do not qualify for a “ full” aged pension pay some income tax. Forgetting that these pensioners have paid taxes all their working lives and could not claim super deductions on tax years ago. Invested some part of their income on retirement to rise above the poverty line of the aged pension.
That the Medicare Levy should also be imposed on seniors at the level where they are liable to pay some income tax.
These people who live in an ivory tower have the audacity to write a report which affects Seniors and Pensioners and wants also to limit the Super Contribution to keep us all in low income streams. How can these so called professionals make these reports and create issues which affect Aged Pensioners without even consulting those affected?
Do they consider the costs of Permanent Residential Care for a loved one with Dementia? No! It appears they get paid very well to come up with thought-bubbles without consulting the superannuation industry or seniors organisations. They have no idea of the costs of living and surviving in old age. Especially when ill health hits you or your partner. They are just another pressure group only interested in their own agenda.
Bill Collier, Golden Square
Letters must carry the name, full address and telephone number of the author. The writer’s name and suburb/town will be published. We reserve the right to edit letters. Letters which are deemed inappropriate will not be published.Send letters to Bendigo Advertiser, PO Box 61, Bendigo 3552 or at bendigoadvertiser.com.au
Have you signed up to the Bendigo Advertiser's daily newsletter and breaking news emails? You can register below and make sure you are up to date with everything that's happening in central Victoria.
