PM must accept blame for failure of the voice referendum

PM must accept blame for failure of the voice referendum

The inaction of the Albanese government since the defeat of the voice referendum makes you wonder if the government really wanted the Indigenous voice at all. As Paul Kelly noted at the weekend, the government is not listening to the requests and suggestions of the various levels of Indigenous Australians, so one has to conclude that Anthony Albanese’s heart is not in it (“Indigenous voice legacy: hope, division, paralysis”, 14/10). I think that is a sure sign that Labor would not listen to the submissions of Indigenous Australians, with or without a voice. What is really required by a proactive government is first to listen, then to assess and finally to act. There is no point in a voice of any kind unless the government listens, and the current Labor government is just not listening.

David Wilkins, Pyrmont, NSW

The voice referendum has come and gone and, according to one of its chief advocates, Megan Davis, it was always going to be a disaster as the polls began to change. She implies that the No campaign was full of lies and “misinformation”. It seems the Yes group believed its cause was just and right, so any opposition was obviously racist, ignorant or immoral. The Yes case was supported by big business, the churches and “millions” of donors. Why did the people reject it? The inference that the No case was a right-wing racist rabble was always there. No doubt the Yes case would have demanded the No case be silenced. Unfortun­ately for them the press and politicians will be exempt so the disinformation, misinformation and lies will continue unabated. When you indicate to the electorate they are stupid, you will lose. Now is the time to just get on doing something that works.

Alasdair Cameron, Woodend, Vic

The voice referendum was actually a big win all around. For the Yes camp, it reinforced our recognition of our fellow Australians who descended from those who lived here before 1788, and strengthened our commitment to those of them who suffer disadvantage. For the No camp, it settled the proposal that our Constitution should not to be tinkered with to give one group among many of us greater and separate parliamentary representation. Let’s face the future together in the spirit of our common humanity, enjoying our rights and honouring our obligations to each other, the law and our country.

Bert Hoebee, Waramanga, ACT

Blind justice

It was instructive to read Nick Cater’s excellent article on the need for judges to be “trauma informed” and then Jacinta Nampijinpa Price’s equally excellent contribution on the Albanese government’s response to the voice referendum defeat (“Blind justice can’t bow to ‘inherited trauma’ ”; “Post voice, PM still failing to follow through on his vow”, 14/10).

The Judicial Commission of NSW considers that to be trauma informed is to consider “the pervasive intergenerational effects of settler colonialism” and how the legacy of trauma and dispossession is interconnected with Indigenous disadvantage. As Cater writes, this is nonsense, as a sense of disadvantage cannot be genetically inherited. However, an attitude of being a victim can be passed down through the generations, and that the Judicial Commission seeks to encourage this view, that Indigenous Australians have no agency for improving their own lives but are forever handicapped by what happened centuries ago, is likely to be completely counter-productive.

It is this belief that Australians so definitely rejected a year ago when they voted against the voice and that is what Nampijinpa Price articulated so clearly in her campaign and what people responded to. And in her article she highlights how Anthony Albanese, despite saying he would respect the wishes of the Australian people, has not only done nothing to stop the voice and treaty-like negotiations in every state but, worse, has not focused on practical solutions that would address Indigenous disadvantage.

Nicholas Ingram, Richmond, Vic

Housing shortfall

While the Business Council of Australia wants state governments to intervene in local government to promote housing supply by taking over the planning powers of laggard councils, this is not a sufficient answer to the housing shortage (“Free up land to lift housing stock”, 14/10).

In NSW, housing supply has many obstacles. Slow councils are a small part of the problem, though the slowest are on public view through a dashboard of council performance provided by the Office of Local Government.

Due to the rapidly rising cost of materials and labour, many builders are finding the going too tough and are being forced out of business, unable to complete fixed price contracts. In turn, this has hurt many buyers who have paid deposits or more on projects that cannot be completed.

Builder shortage is one of the major obstacles to increasing housing supply.

Michael Neustein, Bondi, NSW