Share and care across common school playgrounds and classrooms adds up

Margery Evans of Independent Schools NSW, misses the point (“Data proves private schools aren’t full of rich kids”, May 10). The debate is not about whether every child who attends a private school is a “rich kid”; it is about asking whether Australia is comfortable with an increasingly divided education system. Jane Caro is right to raise these concerns. The fact is Australia has one of the most socially segregated education systems in the OECD. School choice, fuelled by decades of inequitable government funding to private schools, is continuing to create a system where families with greater resources and social capital cluster together, while public schools are left to do more with less. No amount of spin from the private school sector can erase this uncomfortable truth. Alice Leung, Homebush

Call me old school, but the bestest way to create a community that’s egalitarian, empathetic and ethical is to take away the privacy screens in the education system. Share and care across common school playgrounds and classrooms. All kids would then be richer for the experience. An “all for one and one for all” Australian education philosophy. That’ll learn them. Steve Dillon, Thirroul

Religion-based schools – Christian, Muslim or Jewish – contribute to rising discrimination. The best way for people to not develop prejudice is mixing with other children of varied religions and cultural backgrounds early in life and that would be best done in public schools. Graeme Finn, Campsie

Why did Catholic schools start up in Australia? So that children of convicts, the poor and the disadvantaged could receive an education. Those children were not educated along with the richer, more acceptable members of society. Most systemic Catholic schools today are not rich and still cater for poor and disadvantaged students. They are not rich, private schools. Colleen Northam, Taree

Data driven democratic decline

What a sad day it is for democracy, when the government allows anyone, let alone powerful companies to escape scrutiny (“Judgment lets technology giants ignore data centre investigation”, May 10). Premier Chris Minns should hang his head in shame. He is there to represent us, the people of NSW. The irony of allowing large American multinationals, with an eye only on profit, to treat this country’s democracy with such disdain, is not lost on anyone. Even those communities who don’t see and hear large, noisy and polluting data centres in their backyards will be affected. The cost of power and water, increasingly scarce resources, will increase steadily, as it is redirected to these hungry monstrosities. Minns should rethink his position, or he will find that democracy starts and finishes at the ballot box, not in the boardroom. No one should be afraid of scrutiny. It keeps us honest. Elizabeth Darton, Lane Cove

Best infrastructure is solar power

Jason South’s picture (“Chalmers doubles down on housing with $2 billion for roads and pipes”, smh.com.au, May 10) shows a sea of grey-roofed houses in some developing housing estate. It therefore seems likely that all those houses would require air-conditioning to make them liveable in our increasingly warming climate. The drain on power supplies can only be imagined. Solar panels are strikingly absent, implying that extra costs would be needed by prospective home owners. Why is it not possible to have light/lighter shades of roof tiles which would be heat reflective rather than heat absorbing? Keith Sutton, Hornsby

In the nose of the beholder

Indeed (“China can’t get enough of the world’s stinkiest fruit. But can we handle it?” , May 10), it is about acquired taste, as like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so flavour is in the nose of enthusiastic durian consumers. Steve Ngeow, Chatswood

How to be a leader

Fitz never shrugs off the big questions (“Five Minutes with Fitz: The key to survival of democracy”, May 10). In five minutes, he elicits from Jacinda Arden her key requirements of a leader for the survival of democracy: Collaborative leadership, empathy and kindness. A little more of each, please. These requirements are obvious in many leaders, but difficult enough to detect in political leaders. What a breath of fresh air Ardern was for New Zealand and the world. Her three essentials would make a big difference if they were compulsory for all aspiring political leaders and the lack of them in many leaders explains many of the issues the world currently faces. Geoff Nilon, Mascot

Techies wearing trackies

I understand if some find the tech bros who wear baseball caps to meetings offensive (“Some of the things the devil wears have never gone out of high fashion”, May 10), but the previous conservative office attire of wearing fancy suits was showing hierarchy in society. It was an “us and them” mentality, and techies broke that. I remember a friend working in one of the banks as a programmer back in the 1980s, who was shocked when a young lad from the US was sent as a boss for the department and was wearing just smart casuals when they were all wearing suits (very impractical). He was casually talking to them without making a deal. They had no clue how to deal with this young manager, but that was the start of smart casuals in many industries – not yet in CBD – banks and insurance companies. The problem for the old wealthy is that they can’t stomach how young techies become richer than them in a relatively short period of time, when they had to work with the government to influence their policies and lobby for decades to acquire more wealth. It is funny. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Governments are sucking up to techies for favourable coverage of their policies. Governments want their money for elections – now that hasn’t gone out of fashion. Mukul Desai, Hunters Hill