![]() Andrew Barnes, RingwoodĪ small hope On the morning of October 15, should the referendum fail to achieve the requirements for constitutional change, there will be a significant number of people who voted No who will not be happy so much as feeling relieved. The Voice will create an apartheid in Australia it won’t. Same-sex marriage was going to destroy society as we knew it it didn’t. GST was going to kill the economy it didn’t. The super guarantee was going to bankrupt business it didn’t. Scare campaigns After the Mabo/native title agreement, we were going to lose our backyards we didn’t. Bill Pimm, MentoneĪ fairytale wedding requires two partners In likening the Uluru statement and Voice to parliament to a marriage proposal and wedding ceremony respectively, your correspondent (Letters, 6/9) forgot one very important step: what if she says no? There will be no fairytale wedding if one partner doesn’t want to go ahead with it, and that appears to be what the Australian public is saying right now. A fact-checking forum would provide information to be considered when voters are making their decision. The concerns would be addressed by a properly qualified panel (not politicians). However, perhaps in addition to this, there needs to be a fact-checking forum conducted by a credible organisation that lists the questions being raised in the community – some bordering on the fanciful, others thoughtful. John Whelen, Box Hill SouthĪ fact-checking forum would help voters I endorse your correspondent’s (Letters, 5/9) suggestion that the Minister for Indigenous Australians Linda Burney and the opposition spokesperson Jacinta Nampijinpa Price engage in a debate to assist in better understanding the essential issues of the Voice. It is clear to me that those who vote Yes actually do hope to achieve something that is inherently good and, dare I say, virtuous, not personally, but socially and culturally at the core of our national identity. Hope is a supremely important personal and social virtue, so easily dismissed by the cynics among us. I can see what Peter Dutton and those who will vote No want, it is more or less clear what their aim is and what they wish for, but I can’t see what they are hoping for other than to embarrass Labor and leading Yes voters, and simply to win. The importance of hope Increasingly tucked away in letters and articles on the referendum is the word “hope”. However, a narrow win for the Yes case could leave the nation divided over constitutional reform in a way it has never experienced. If the No case prevails in 2023, a similar response is likely. On 36 occasions, most recently in the 1999 republic referendum, the nation accepted the result and moved on. Australia is familiar with unsuccessful referendums. The 91 per cent support achieved in 1967 is a pipe dream. It is very unlikely similar results can be achieved in 2023. The average national vote in favour of the eight successful referendums was 73.5 per cent. ![]() The state result in the eighth was five in favour, one opposed. ![]() Of the eight successful referendums since 1901, seven received the support of all six states. Such a result would take Australia into uncharted political territory. ![]() The uncharted territory of a narrow Yes win It seems the best the Yes case in the Voice referendum can now achieve is a narrow victory. Only then will there be some hope of progress. This cycle of intergenerational disadvantage, rooted in disrespect and lack of consultation, is a prime example of why we must enshrine a permanent and representative Voice for our First Nations peoples in the Constitution, protected from the usual political chicanery. There are now some new initiatives allowing care in extended family, maintaining connection to culture and family, which offer real hope but which are underused. The underlying problem driving much of this is a lack of consultation with and respect for the affected communities. This perpetuates a repeating cycle of intergenerational disadvantage. The lack of choices available has been incredibly destructive – for years it was either care in a damaged extended family of origin or care under the department which had so damaged the previous generation. Many were from First Nations families who were in crisis. I am now old enough to have had the depressing experience of having to remove the children of the children whom I removed from families earlier in my career. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published. No attachments, please include your letter in the body of the email. To submit a letter to The Age, email Please include your home address and telephone number.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |