Voting conservative a last resort for this voter

It’s time to act, not mourn

No, the referendum was not successful, but the conversation for reconciliation has begun. Yes, we have a PM who was willing to risk losing a referendum to deliver what he promised. Yes, the Australian people still want to move forward. It is not a time for mourning the loss but a time for all of us to come together and take action.

Gemma Gock, Rodd Point, NSW

Yet another blow to First Nations

I can’t help but think that something wrong and bad happened last Saturday. That democracy was not served, as lies and disinformation won the day. Our First Nations people yet again received a slap in the face, as Australians turned their backs on them, as we always do. This is a terrible outcome for our First Nations people, as we have refused to do the simple thing that they asked of us. It is also a wake-up call that well-deployed lies and disinformation can very effectively destroy us as a nation. Where was the decisive cut-through from our media, to protect the truth? They were flaying around in a confused muddle, either impotent in the face of the lies or totally captured by them.

Kay Binnie, Paddington, NSW

Lawyers called out by a fellow barrister

Bravo, Louise Clegg (“Lawyers turned yes into no”, October 19). Sixty-one per cent of Australians could not make sense of the Voice, but only a barrister can call out fellow barristers.

Greg Cameron, Wamboin, NSW

Lawyer-bashing is a pointless distraction

The abject failure of the Yes case to garner more than 40 per cent support from the Australian public is certainly worthy of analysis. But Louise Clegg’s article, laying the blame at the feet of former judges and academic lawyers, is very strange. She asserts that former High Court justices (who were the final arbiters of the meaning of clauses in our Constitution) and law school professors (who teach the meaning of those clauses) all failed to understand that the Voice was egregiously race-based and offended the principle of equality of citizenship.

Clegg then claims that the legal professional bodies that supported the Voice also failed miserably, because they did not “validate and encourage dissent and debate”.

The success of the No case does not mean that the arguments for Yes were wrong. The fact that every one of the previously successful eight referendums had bipartisan support is a far more credible explanation for the result. In the context of Indigenous affairs, lawyer-bashing is a useless distraction from the real issue of finding a way to close the gap.

Derek Norquay, Pelican Waters, Qld

A couple of urban myths upended

The Voice referendum results upended two urban myths. The first was that the latte-sipping inner-city elites don’t understand what Aboriginal people in remote communities want, only regional voters do. However, it seems many remote Aboriginal communities across northern Australia voted Yes, the same as the inner cities. Turns out the two sets of voters were aligned, not the regional voters. Second, people argue that the federal capital should be in Sydney or Melbourne, closer to “real Australians”. The referendum vote in Canberra and inner cities across Australia was similar. The location of the capital, then, seems immaterial.

The referendum is only a single case, but the voting figures show at least two of our urban myths need rethinking.

Peter Layton, Kangaroo Point, Qld

Directors should repay the shareholders

It is now time for the directors of all companies that took money from shareholders to give it to the Yes campaign to admit they were on the wrong side of history and make reparations in full to the rightful owners of those companies. During the AGM season, boards could repay this money from their directors’ fees.

David Ford, South Perth, WA

My country revisited

With apologies to Dorothea Mackellar
I love a timid country
A land of scare campaigns,
Where mindless bogan slogans
Just overtake our brains,
The stunted short horizons
Of those who will not see,
Who presented with alternatives
Think only: me, me, me.

E.S. O’Loughlin, Prospect, SA

At my pub, there’s a different take on tax

John Kehoe, by saying retirees paying minimal tax no longer passes the pub test (October 19), merely reminds us that different generations go to different pubs. At my pub, it’s generally agreed that everyone should pay their fair share of tax and contribute to supporting those in genuine need. But, also at my pub, we agree that those in retirement or transitioning to retirement fall into so many categories that an economist can’t possibly understand the complexities or emotion attached to such broad assertions.

Yes, I have already paid my fair share of tax in 45 years of working, but why should I now be penalised because someone invented a super and tax system that didn’t look beyond a four-year political term? Why should I be penalised when the system allows the very rich, as well as large corporates, to pay minimal tax?

Lastly, Mr Kehoe, I am sorry that I am going to live longer than my parents did, but I’ll never be a burden on the healthcare system, as my small tax-free income from super allows me to fully fund my life and health. Tax me more and I might drop to the asset level to get the age pension and become a burden on society.

David Rossiter, Manly, NSW

Retirees’ wealth should indeed be put to work

John Kehoe is right. Our taxation system is warped and in urgent need of repair. Retirees are milking the system. Retirees had the best of times. Cheap housing, secure employment, tax-free capital gains and ludicrous super tax concessions created intergenerational inequity. Retirees’ accumulated wealth needs to be put to work rather than be passed on through inheritance.

There is debate about how to do this. I do not think the ANU economists have the formula right – but they are moving in the right direction. The superannuation lobby and the federal treasurer are major hindrances to vital reforms.

Graeme Troy, Wagstaffe, NSW

Birthday salute to an architect’s artistry

The 50th birthday of the Sydney Opera House offers an opportunity to once again admire what architect Jorn Utzon referred to as a sculpture, setting out to realise a dream which the engineers said was impossible.

He never beheld his crowning achievement. Yet artistry is its own reward, and there is great virtue tackling projects whose conclusion we may never see.

David d’Lima, Sturt, SA