Albanese needs bipartisan support for an Indigenous voice to parliament

Troy Bramston’s article, “Voice vote: Albanese won’t wait” (27/6), raises serious issues. Anthony Albanese needs to be very careful about what he is proposing and prepared to do. The Prime Minister’s own words confirm that he is willing to almost impose the Uluru Statement from the Heart on the federal parliament and our political system.

However, Labor needs to bear in mind it received only 32 per cent of primary votes. One-third is not a majority.

We have also just elected more Indigenous Australians to our parliament under our current system. These members of parliament can speak for their Indigenous Australians. The Uluru statement is not going to address the family and social problems in Aboriginal communities.

The PM and Labor need to build unity, not division, and address important issues for our Indigenous Australians.

Adrian Devlin, Fairy Meadow, NSW

As Anthony Albanese states, there is support in the community for an Indigenous voice to parliament. Very few people would dispute the right and the appropriateness of Aborigines having an opportunity to advise the government on matters that concern them. However, there are two issues that I believe should be clarified before any move to a referendum.

First, there has been very little good argument as to why such a voice should be enshrined in the Constitution. Once in the Constitution, a voice would be almost impossible to disband, even if it became dysfunctional or taken over by activists. Albanese says it would be subject to legislation, but if enshrined in the Constitution the voice would surely trump the parliament. This leads on to the second issue, that until there is a clear idea of how a voice would be structured and elected and exactly what powers it would have, surely it is premature to push for a referendum.

Nicholas Ingram, Melbourne

Changing the climate

Chris Mitchell makes a very good point that until all the external system costs such as storage, grid expansion and operational lifetimes are factored into the costs of renewables, then the public will never have a “like-for-like comparison between the costs of different generation technologies” (“Self-interested sprinklers skew energy debate”, 27/6).

For example, building high-effici­ency, low-emissions coal-fired plants and/or nuclear plants on retired coal plant sites obviating the necessity for new transmission lines and would save the public $20bn just to start with.

What is needed is a top-down study by a suitably qualified, nonpartisan expert panel to show which energy mix delivers the nation the lowest long-term average power costs under the requisite of guaranteed reliable, 24/7 supply, taking into account a range of CO2 pricing scenarios but devoid of all subsidies. The public deserves full transparency and honesty to ascertain whether we’re being ripped off.

Ron Hobba, Camberwell, Vic

Pensioner power

Perhaps if we did as our cousins across the Tasman do and allow pensioners to work without all the restrictions under our current system, we would save money and provide great advantages for those who are still able to work (“Plan for over-65s to ease job crisis”, 27/6). Some pensioners will be out of poverty, and think of the mental health benefits.

Many go on the pension because they cannot work, are unfit or very unwell. But if the New Zealand example works here, where they find only one in four pensioners works, what a difference it will make to Australia.

We need the skills and abilities in the workforce of these retirees as well as their presence to take up the slack in unemployment. Good luck to them, I say.

Julie Tadman, Wamuran, Qld

As a tertiary-educated professional now retired from a major industry, I witnessed many decades of ageism cultivated as a deliberate policy by companies that couldn’t wait to push older workers out of the door. Now, under duress, they are attempting to attract us back. Personally, I would rather die in a ditch than return to be patronised by employers who even now refuse to see the value in the experience and life skills of older workers, seeing us only as “old codgers” trying to earn a few dollars to supplement the pension. No thanks; I would rather spend my time unpaid at my local Men’s Shed creating and sustaining something of real community value.

Lester Durbin, York, WA

Warning signs

Albo is perhaps mindful that when in the early days of becoming PM, Kevin07’s popularity numbers soared. It was only when Rudd came home for a bit, with fewer takeoff announcements, that we were able to see the man for what he really was.

Deja vu?

John Dorman, Toowoomba, Qld