Noblesse oblige 

Melina Smith writes: Re. “Crikey says: all hail our future king ” (Tuesday). While I’m not a devout monarchist, I respect our tradition and English heritage. The great benefits of a monarchy is that it’s above politics, and the Queen’s significant charitable work has helped many disadvantaged people in the UK over many years.

Our own political class has become nasty and self-serving, especially with asylum seekers.

Privileged families have a lot of opportunities, but if children are raised well, like this young couple seem to be, can do a lot for the common good and social issues.

The pragmatism of politics and a brutal solution

Scott Mackinnon writes: Re. “An elegant solution” (Tuesday). Thanks to Les Heimann’s straightforward insight on how well PM Kevin Rudd has dovetailed an electorate’s majority desires to his and Labor’s gain. To add: it’s a crystallised show of how pragmatic a political leader must be. I wouldn’t be in politics; I respect PM Rudd for his tenacity, but I couldn’t live with having to make such decisions. That may be why I’m a bit apathetic, but I do keep reading and taking care of my lot. Thanks Crikey!

Orm Grace writes: A brutal solution? Most Australians I know are compassionate, not brutal. But what if the “brutal solution” does not stop the boats? It has not so far.

If we send hungry, destitute refugees to PNG where there is no future for them they may swim to Thursday Island — it’s not far!

The truth of cigarette advertising

Gavin Greenoak writes: Re. “Lies, damned lies and the tobacco packaging debate” (Tuesday). Plain packaging! I think not. I’ve one in front of me that says in very bold lettering: “SMOKING CAUSES BLINDNESS”, accompanied by an equally revolting image.  In the ancient “spade-speak” this is simply a lie, an untruth, a falsehood, about which there should be no equivocation. But I live in a society where the end justifies the means, yes? Blindness indeed!