‘Don’t know? Vote No’ translates into Yes for this reader

Irrationality among the No campaigners

What irrationality and disgrace is being portrayed by certain alleged Indigenous leaders encouraging their own people to vote No against their own human ethnic interests. What is the incentive for the small number of alleged leaders to promote the No campaign with the white colonial conservatives? Could the alleged leaders be hoping to escalate their colonial conservatism status for future prominent political positions?

Indigenous leaders who consider failure of the referendum will enable prospects of initiating more aggressive ideals, such as a treaty and Indigenous sovereignty strategies, are dreaming.

Graham McPherson, Mandurah, WA

Giving it a try may be a bridge too far

A number of polls have asked voters why they are intending to vote Yes or No in the Voice referendum. It is interesting that these polls show that a considerable number of Yes voters have made their choice on the basis of “let’s give the Voice a try”.

I can understand people wanting to give it a go on the basis that it might deliver benefits for very disadvantaged remote Indigenous communities.

However ,to make the Voice a permanent feature of Australian political life in the hope that it might achieve good results may be seen by some voters as a step too far.

I think the question of permanence is exercising the minds of many undecided voters, and it is therefore crucial that the minister for Indigenous Australians, Linda Burney, debates this issue with her opposition counterpart, Jacinta Price.

Adrian Hassett, Vermont, Vic

The inverse effect of advertising

The news story “Albanese, Labor, Voice support slips” (September 25) was illuminating. The political maxim “whoever has the gold makes the rules” appears not to apply to the Yes campaign.

Its extensive advertising, paid for, mostly from money that was donated by hubristic Australian corporations, without seeking their shareholders’ consent, is curiously having an inverse effect, with support for the No vote actually increasing.

Dennis Walker, North Melbourne, Vic

Follow the example of Turbans 4 Australia

One reason for the faltering Voice campaign (“Voice support falls as frustration and familiarity rise”, September 25) is that First Nations groups and activists are largely inward-looking and inactive in the broader community life of Australia.

A classic example is that over 200 groups meeting in Canberra this week to discuss preparedness for the upcoming fire season. So far as I can tell, there is no prominent First Nations group represented. Yet First Nations people make much of their connection with their country and its sensitive management. Who better to take a prominent role in the Canberra meeting?

Turbans 4 Australia, a Sikh-led charity organisation, is prominent in many natural disasters. Their founder, Amar Singh, was named Australia’s Local Hero in the 2023 Australian of the Year Awards.

Passive victimhood won’t win any votes for First Nations people. Emulating Turbans 4 Australia would garner much support.

Bob Muirhead, Port Melbourne, Vic

Consider the disinformation, and think again

With the Voice campaign in its final weeks, one of the notable features has been the rise in misinformation and disinformation, which doesn’t augur well for the next federal election.

Voters may be surprised to learn that one of the main organisers of street marches in support of the No vote was reportedly Simeon Boikov, an Australian nutter who has taken refuge in a Russian diplomatic compound in Sydney to escape the law.

It would be surprising if Vladimir Putin allowed him the freedom to do this unless it served his purpose, which is always to discredit the West.

People intending to vote No might be advised to pause a moment to consider who their supporters are.

Gary Barnes, Mosman, NSW

How will saying No make things better?

Ask yourself, how will voting No make things better? Will it reduce the waste that everybody is worried about? Will it reduce deaths in custody? Will it ensure better health outcomes? Will it reduce morbidity among First Nations?

Leading No campaigners cannot, and/or won’t, answer these questions.
The Voice is a proposed constitutional framework in which these questions may be answered. Vote Yes on October 14 and make things better.

Jon Jovanovic, Lenah Valley, Tas

Renewables reliance doesn’t stack up

The AFR/Freshwater Strategy poll showing strengthening support for nuclear energy in Australia (September 26) reflects international trends. Many new supporters are young people disinclined to believe myths about nuclear and question Australia’s renewables-only strategy.

The reasons are obvious. Not a single jurisdiction anywhere in the world is able to power its grid by relying predominantly on wind, solar and storage. Also, the environmental degradation renewables cause is now apparent. The damage being done by Snowy 2.0 illustrates the point.

Finally, there’s the question of economics. Kerry Schott suggests Australia might need 20 pumped hydro plants like Snowy 2.0. Their cost, added to the cost of building vast new additional transmission infrastructure and generating assets, makes it difficult to see how a renewables-only strategy would be quick to implement, or result in cheap power prices.

Relying solely on renewables does not stack up. That’s why virtually every other country aiming to achieve net zero intends to use or import nuclear power.

Wally McColl, Roseville, NSW

Does Vanessa Hudson escape all blame over Qantas?

Like many of your readers, I have nothing but praise for the campaign by Rear Window to publicise the operational and governance failures at Qantas, and especially the unforgivable attempts “to steal $500 million from customers via irredeemable COVID-19 travel credits” (September 26) and charging people for bookings on already cancelled flights.

Messrs Joyce and Goyder have rightly been held responsible for most of these shortcomings, but surely Qantas’ CFO cannot avoid blame? Or does Rear Window have hard evidence that Vanessa Hudson advised her two superiors against their policies of “screw the customers for a quid”?

George McGregor, Malvern, Vic

Hard yakka and the housing dilemma

The one element of the housing issue that seems to totally escape the politicians’ attention is that very few young people leaving school these days aspire to becoming a concreter, bricklayer or most other “hard yakka” jobs.

The rising cost of construction reflects the first rule of economics: demand and supply of scarce resources.

Bernie Sweeney, Glen Waverley, Vic