Daily Advertiser letters: Respect key in discussion as the Voice debate continues

I would certainly hope that the Voice would be better listened to than what has been happening for way too long, and with it being enshrined in the Constitution should mean that The Voice cannot be easily ignored or eliminated.

I would hope the Voice can speak to any government department as needed.

To save writing a very long reply, I am suggesting you try the following link from Monash University Law Research Centre: https://www.monash.edu/law/research/centres/castancentre/our-areas-of-work/indigenous/the-northern-territory-intervention/the-northern-territory-intervention-an-evaluation/genocide.

I will emphasise just two points: Based on what proved to be false claims, in 2007, John Howard initiated the "Intervention" in the Northern Territory.

This is just one tiny part of a huge story that has been oft repeated unfortunately in our colonial history. This saga was a disaster, caused great harm and set many communities back years and further entrenched distrust and division, with no benefits to Aboriginal children especially.

In fact, the rate they are being put in out-of-home care, completely away from their cultural ties has greatly increased. In 1997, 20 per cent or children placed in out-of-home (meaning foster care with non-relatives) were Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander children. This became 36 per cent in 2016, which is 10 times than of children from non-Indigenous families! This is predicted to increase threefold by 2023.

It is a very silent, and genocidal, Stolen Generation happening right under our noses and too easily ignored by the majority of us, but I would think is worthy of urgent attention.

In 2004 ATSIC was abolished. The Voice will not be so easily dismissed, government will be forced to listen carefully and honestly that they ever have before.

Kind hearted, generous Australians who value a fair go and justice will find it in their hearts to act with love, trust and optimism that the Voice will over time create the changes that are so needed in many Aboriginal and Torres Strait communities to close so many gaps.

Join us at Riverina for Yes 23.

I have trouble understanding those who say no to the Voice and declare that lack of detail is a bugbear for them.

I simply googled it and found the info I needed on the relevant government websites.

I feel certain that Greg Adamson is capable of doing just that.

Also, he might take the time to actually read Joy Lubawy's letter on the same page as his (DA Letters, August 8).

If he and others understand her words they will vote 'yes' with a good conscience knowing they are doing the right thing.

Also, check out the Canadian version of the Voice while you are at it.

PS. Greg, are you comparing our current PM to Scott Morrison?

What a great story about Uncle Hewitt on his 10-day trip to Europe (72 countries showing their support for the Voice. Although none of them will get the chance to vote).

As reported the eyes of the world were on Australia when we had the referendum in 1967 to make us one nation.

Their were two questions. The first question, referred to as the 'nexus question', was an attempt to alter the balance in the Senate and the House of Representatives.

The second question was to determine whether two references in the Australian Constitution which discriminated against Aboriginal people should be removed.

Over 90 per cent voted in favour to change the discriminating references in the Constitution.

It helped make us one country and all treated equally.

Less than 41 per cent voted 'yes' for the Nexus question.

Now we have another referendum vote coming up later this year and once again their are two questions but only one vote. Only a fool (Albo and Co.) would believe you could ask a question which would probably get a 90 per cent 'yes' but slip another clause in hoping no one will notice.

Or why wouldn't we be asked two questions and write 'yes', 'no' or 'both' on the same piece of paper.

The cost would be the same although cost doesn't seem to be a hindrance to our government.

We now have to decide if we want to have two types of constituents in Australia. I thought we voted on this in 1967.