I’ll vote Yes for the Indigenous religion of sustainability

Division over the time frame

If I had to nominate the most important reason for the division between Yes and No opinions, I would say it’s the time frame each is considering.

Yes voters are thinking that the entrenched Indigenous disadvantage has gone on long enough, we have to do something now that breaks this circuit of demoralisation. On the surface, this is a compassionate and understandable response.

No voters have no less desire for the situation to improve, but are thinking longer term – do we really want to single out a group of people, no matter what their circumstances today, for special treatment in the Constitution forever?

They think it is as misguided to treat a group advantageously in the Constitution as it is to treat them disadvantageously – it says you’re not like us, and you will never be like us. If a change is required in the Constitution, surely it must be to expunge it of the bleak notion of racism.

Andrew Smith, Kenmore, Qld

How can we possibly say No?

Every non-Indigenous person who calls themselves Australian is either an immigrant or the progeny of immigrants since Captain James Cook took possession of this continent on behalf of the British Crown in 1770. We are either recently naturalised citizens, or 10th-generation descendants of first and second fleet convicts, or descendants of immigrants in between.

We have all benefited from living on this bountiful continent either under the governance of the British Crown or the Commonwealth of Australia. Neither recognised our Indigenous people as citizens until 1948. Voting rights followed in 1962.

Our Indigenous brethren represent the oldest living culture in the world, having inhabited this continent for at least 65,000 years. How then can we possibly refuse to “alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice”?

How can we, in all conscience, continue to deny them a Voice that “may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples”?

Most importantly, “The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.”

How can we continue to deny them what we have enjoyed – often at their expense, both in lives and lifestyle?

Douglas Ross Robbins, Trevallyn, Tas

Day of reckoning awaits on October 14

With the release of the disability royal commission report, the nation has effectively just granted a deserved voice to the disabled community. One cannot imagine the Coalition or some members of the disability community opposing such a voice. What a sad contrast to the toxic discussion on the Indigenous Voice referendum, with the Coalition and some members of the Indigenous community leading the charge.

Australia is at its finest when we all pull together and listen to minority and disadvantaged voices. October 14 will be the nation’s day of reckoning.

David Nelson, Chapel Hill, Qld

Big four think they are too big to care

The Switkowski report regarding PwC’s tax leaks imbroglio has delivered its findings and the path to enlightened professional conduct has clearly been laid out in relation to governance, accountability and ethical behaviour. Except, this has occurred before and will happen again. PwC, KPMG, Deloitte and EY believe they are too big to care.

In the 1980s, the then big eight accounting firms turned a blind eye to the creative accounting practices of their listed company clients. In the 21st century, Enron (US) and HIH (Australia) collapsed, and the related demise of Arthur Andersen underscored the breakdown of independence between Andersen and its clients. Where were the big four during the GFC in 2008?

Then last year, Ernst & Young (US) was fined $US100 million by the Securities and Exchange Commission for exam cheating by its audit professionals.
The era of “self-regulation”, “co-regulation” and “regulatory capture” should have ended 20 years ago.

It’s past time for the treasurer to apply a fit-for-purpose regulatory framework to the accounting industry.

C.M. Abbott. Leeming, WA

Pezzullo’s record deserves no panegyrics

All the hyperbole about Mike Pezzullo’s fall from grace is annoying. Everything Pezzullo oversaw on Manus Island and Nauru was actually worse than all the insider grandstanding, the attacks on public service neutrality, the enabling of lobbyists, the damage to democracy, the filthy deals. Brutality, restrictive practices, medical neglect, human despair, denial of access to lawyers, bashings, extreme corruption and abuse of youth took place under his watch.

The neutrality of the public service has always been a myth. But brutalising refugees is a very obvious low. The media has been far too gentle on the Home Affairs culture for way too long. The Pezzullo panegyric by Robert Potter (October 2) ignores a horrific record.

Jane Salmon, Killara, NSW

Victoria is unlikely to miss Dan Andrews

Comments about Daniel Andrews and his strengths as Victorian premier appear inflated. As noted in “The Andrews effect” (September 30-October 1), the former premier was astute at assessing the best way to position Labor while engaging existing strengths in the economy, with emphasis on the construction sector and tangible deliveries.

The state’s budget has been exhausted by massive support for the “big build” program to the detriment of more complex and difficult programs of qualitative endeavour such as supporting business advances in the digital economy, positioning the state in resilience against climate change and improving productivity.

The former premier was skilful in exploiting low-hanging fruit while creating the illusion of advancing the economy. An indicator of a vibrant economy is the median salary; yet when benchmarked, the 2021 census demonstrates that Victoria’s median salary is behind the ACT, Northern Territory, Western Australia and NSW. After Andrews’ nearly nine years as premier, Victoria lags on key indicators and its debt is intergenerational.

Liz Burton, Camberwell, Vic

Gap in the Timor narrative

The AFR View (October 2) posits that many Australians are rightly proud of the country’s role in the establishment of an independent East Timor. But coins have two sides. Not noted was Australia’s role in Indonesia’s invasion of the former Portuguese colony.

Hitherto secret Indonesian cabinet documents reveal that Gough Whitlam encouraged Suharto to incorporate Timor to avoid a communist enclave in our region. US, NZ and UK diplomatic cables show that Australia knew of the invasion in advance, the route it would take and who was in command. Jakarta collegiately advised Canberra that the invasion was planned for a Sunday to minimise press coverage.

Australia did ultimately facilitate Timorese independence, but the more relevant question is how the situation developed in the first place – something of which Australia cannot be proud.

Bruce Watson, Kirribilli, NSW