Letters to the editor | Central Western Daily letters to August 5, 2023

My initial intuitive reaction to the Voice was Yes - the proposal seems such a positive step towards giving Indigenous people a say in policy which affects them.

I've come to realise that some Australians' intuitive reaction is more of anxiety, uncertainty or fear - a perfectly natural reaction in the face of so many contradictory views and even falsehoods.

In a referendum, if in doubt one ticks the No box - of course you do.

I've read that the No vote is gaining traction, particularly in the country.

It seemed to me that if given reassurance on some of the main uncertainties, many Aussies would feel more comfortable ticking Yes.

Why does the Constitution need to be amended? Because otherwise successive governments could abolish the Voice. The only way to amend the Constitution is to hold a referendum.

What about details? If the referendum passes then there will be a process of consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and the broader public to design the Voice.

The question the referendum asks is very straightforward and simple: do we enable our First Nations peoples to have a say in policies or not?

Does the Voice give too much power to the First Nations people?

The Voice can only make representations to Parliament. It will not have over-riding power. Parliament still has the power to make laws related to the Voice, rejecting or approving proposals.

What about disagreements between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders regarding a Yes or No vote?

It is absolutely natural and to be expected that individuals, whatever their background, may have different views.

What about giving a Voice to our multicultural communities?

Australia's diverse ethnic and multicultural communities themselves are pointing out that migrants have been given more of a fair go in Australia than our Indigenous community.

Australia has embraced multicultural communities and encouraged them to maintain strong ties with the traditions of their homeland. A Voice would in no way disadvantage them.

What about a Treaty instead? To be clear: if you vote No to the Voice you are not voting Yes to a Treaty.

A Treaty could well follow down the track but it is not the focus of this referendum. This referendum is all about the Voice - for the first time giving our First Nations people the ability to suggest policies which could have a positive impact on their lives.

Come on, Aussies, come on. Let's have the courage to show compassion and empathy. We've nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Just as well the Snowy Mountains Scheme of the 1950s did not undertake the same approach to its various construction projects as it would still be unfinished.

I understand a "slow lane" is part of the highway upgrade - slow in all respects.

The late Peter Andren was an independent politician with, in my opinion, integrity. Andrew Gee was only able to become an independent politician due to many, many years of National Party support. There is no comparison between the two men.

Having recently spent a short time at Orange Base and Sydney's RPA hospitals, it was good to see the number of trainee nurses at both hospitals.

When I spoke with them, they seemed very satisfied with both the TAFE Nursing Courses and the "hands-on" training that they received from experienced nurses in those two hospitals.

From my own observations, that certainly seemed to be very true.

After some of the negative news about some hospitals, it was refreshing and reassuring to see good news in action.

Let's hope it continues well into the future.

WHAT DO YOU THINK? We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say. Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on the Central Western Daily website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. Sign up for a subscription here.