The Daily Advertiser letters: Nothing to fear and everything to gain at Voice to Parliament referendum

The Uluru Statement from the Heart is the culmination of extensive dialogues that were held with and by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities across Australia and the Torres Strait.

One of the Uluru dialogue leaders, Sally Scales (a Pitjantjatjara woman from Pipalyatjara in the APY Lands in remote South Australia) spoke on the recent Q&A session of the message of love and hope that accompanied the formation of the Uluru Statement from the Heart. She said that it is an invitation to the broader Australian people to walk alongside them in finding better ways to address the disadvantage within their communities.

I'm voting yes to honor and accept that invitation of love and hope!

I'm voting yes so that at the decision making levels in government, the policy settings and funding of Indigenous programs can be well informed from community when addressing their unique issues.

I'm voting yes so that the money that's invested in closing the gap is spent wisely, with accountability and with effectiveness that makes a difference. Everyone agrees the status quo is not working.

I'm voting yes so that I can be a proud Australian knowing that we are trying to achieve reconciliation with our First Nations people as so many previously Colonised nations have done, to acknowledge the truth of our combined history, and for all Australia to benefit from the richness and wisdom that is offered by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures.

I'm voting yes in the Anzac spirit of "leave no one behind". We cannot say we are honoring that spirit while we continue to accept the disproportionate disadvantage within our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

If you are thinking of voting no I understand you have your considered reasons. However I respectfully ask you to join me in voting YES!! The world certainly needs more love and hope right now!

What a strange little wrap-around it was ("Your Voice referendum explainer", October 11). Taking a Yes-campaign slogan of "If you don't know, FIND OUT" as a promise of revelatory content, the four pages were remarkable for the dearth of stuff that anyone actually needed to "find out". A visual homage to a 1950s 'Look and Learn' it had the added lure of presenting nothing to learn.

One of the only "facts" presented was startling mis- (or dis?) information. One section defined the Voice as "a group ... elected by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people." Nowhere, in any document is the word "elected" (or any conjugation of the verb) used. Labor's Working Party report uses "selected" and "appointed".

I have not heard any Yes-advocate ever refer to any 'election' of Voice members. For starters, there is no electoral roll of Aboriginal and Islander people so no way to conduct voting. The AEC is not allowed to authorise a variety of local organisations to open booths run according to their own whimsies. It would be exorbitantly expensive and take years to set up a viable, legal election process.

In short, the word "elected" in your "Find out explainer" is a lie; the new chamber in our democratic constitution would be undemocratically chosen and would not represent all "First Nations" anyway: with 25 members it would comprise less than 10 percent of the 300 "traditional owner groups" (if that's what 'nations' are) numbered by Warren Mundine. We lost the comics section for this?

As a GP trainee, the inequalities faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is most apparent to me when comparing health outcomes.

The infant mortality rate of newborn Indigenous Australians is nearly twice as high as for non-Indigenous Australians; their life expectancy is lower; the rates of smoking are twice that of non-Indigenous Australians; the rates of heart disease and kidney disease is higher, and an Indigenous person is twice as likely to suicide compared to a non-Indigenous Australian. As a nation we must consider why.

In medicine, it is useful to consider the social determinants of health. To explain further, consider a wheel with spokes. In the centre is you and the outside tread is your day-to-day function and your health. The spokes are what help connect you as an individual to your function. They are factors like education, government policies, housing, access to food and water as well as income.

We can assess the health of these spokes by how well one is functioning. Even considering the health disparity on its own, the spokes of many Indigenous Australians are in disrepair. However, decades of government policy, designed in a top-down approach have failed to improve outcomes. It is in addressing these spokes, where the Voice has a chance to work. It is made by Aboriginal people for Aboriginal people. It will be made up of Aboriginal people who instinctively understand the cultural and environmental needs of their people. It is the same model as a Parents and Carers Committees at school: it is non-binding, and it is only advisory but we know that this model delivers tailored services to our children.

A lot of work is required to improve these spokes and this is where the focus of the Voice will be from day one. The priority of the Voice will not be your land but in trying to reverse the tragic mortality rate of Indigenous children. Having this understanding of why Aboriginal people need a voice is imperative to understanding the potential of what can be gained by the Voice. Vote Yes in the Voice referendum.

Now we have the leader of the opposition in Federal Parliament declaring this vote for or against the Voice to Parliament is the most important thing we will 'ever' have to vote for and suggests we vote negatively!

Go figure! If I'm voting most importantly 'ever' I want to be positive. Vote 'yes' and feel assured you've done the right thing.

Seriously Joe McGirr, you encourage me via an email to Vote 'Yes' to a constitutional change that is about to go ahead without a constitutional convention.

A serious lack of details as to how this change could affect the delicate balance of a document meant to protect all Australians.

No serious public debate. Doesn't this ring alarm bells for you Joe? Could you please tell me which constitutional lawyers you consulted before making your decision to encourage your constituents to vote yes? Is enshrining a race-based advisory body in the constitution really the best way to go?

What if it is set up in a biased way that hamstrings the constitutional protections in place for all Australians? Once it is done it can't be undone!

Just thought the readers might be interested to know that I didn't get a reply to an email I sent Dr McGirr that included the above questions.

I went into Joe's office today, October 10, to ask why. The receptionist told me they reply to everything and then went out back to check, upon returning she confirmed that Joe didn't reply. So, so, disappointing!

I have done the research that Brian Pomeroy suggested, ("We already have many voices", Letters October 10) and I have found that members of PM's Indigenous Advisory Council may be Indigenous or non-Indigenous. The so-called Treaties Council is the Prime Minister and all the Premiers and Chief Ministers! The staff of the National Indigenous Australians Association is, curiously, only 22 per cent Indigenous.

Of course, we know members of Parliament come and go, generally representing political parties, and whole electorates, not small sections of their electorate.

The Central Land Council are not guaranteed access to Parliament. They could in theory be disbanded. They are only responsible for the southern half of the NT.

We need a real Voice for all our Indigenous people, composed of those most qualified to advise on Indigenous matters; Indigenous people themselves, expertly representing their various communities. The best way available today to get this is to vote "Yes".

In this last week before voting, the barrage of opinion for and against The Voice can be overwhelming, leaving us uncertain about how to vote.

Some of us are concerned that Aboriginal peoples don't want The Voice - and yet poll after poll highlights that the majority, indeed 80 per cent, do. It's the minority who are apparently grabbing our attention. Others are concerned about the legal ramifications of a Yes vote.

Legally it seems the view is strongly supportive, with nine of Australia's foremost judges writing an open letter to all Australians stating that they supported The Voice. The letter tells us "the proposed Voice will both enrich our democracy and increase the likelihood of governments making correct decisions about matters that affect Indigenous peoples". It goes on to say "If successful, the referendum on the Voice will not diminish the influence of anyone"... and that "it will not, in our opinion, divide our nation".

This confirmation that a Yes vote is supported by 8 out of 10 Indigenous Australians and that our Judiciary consider a Yes vote will be good for all, provide me with great confidence that writing Yes on my ballot is a move in the right direction for all Australians.

Do you have something to get off your chest?

Send your letters to the editor to letters@dailyadvertiser.com.au, or simply click here to submit your letter.

You can also leave your comments directly on articles published on our website, dailyadvertiser.com.au. Simply scroll to the bottom of the story and let us know your thoughts on the issues of the day.