Don't let yet another statesman be lost without progress towards racial justice

Don't let yet another First Nations statesman be lost without significant progress towards racial justice in our country. Yunupingu and his peers offered us a gift in the Uluru Statement from the Heart. Let us walk with them towards Voice,Treaty, Truth.

I am currently reading Charles Dickens' Little Dorrit, and so was at first amused by today's article about Senator Reynolds' frustration with the bureaucracy.

It is like Dickens' description of the Circumlocution Office (any government department) and the way in which its bureaucrats practice the science of "HOW NOT TO DO IT" (how not to do anything) in order to prevent Arthur Clennam from finding out why Mr Dorrit has been in Debtors Prison for over 20 years. Not only will they not answer questions, one character indignantly says: "... you mustn't come into the place saying you want to know, you know".

Little Dorrit was first published in 1857. Dickens' attack on "the Whole Science of Government" was apparently part of his disgust at the obstructions being placed in the way of administrative reform. I seems not much has changed.

Some opponents of the Voice seem to have forgotten the fundamental value of "giving people a fair go".

The Constitution provides the Parliament may make laws in relation to "the people of any race for whom it is deemed necessary to make special laws". Some special laws were welcome such as the establishment years ago of means test free education grants schemes for Indigenous Australians, whereas similar schemes for non-Indigenous are means tested, but other laws weren't, such as the recent imposition of a cashless welfare debit card on Indigenous Australians.

The Uluru Statement calls for "the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution" to enable members of that race to respond to laws which single them out for specific treatment. Surely that is fair?

It does not seem sufficient to require members of that race to respond through their local MPs or by making representations to the appropriate minister when those people may be members of the party in government which has imposed the policy.

If Section 51 of the Constitution allowed the making of special laws in relation to say "people of certain religions" or "people of certain ethnic backgrounds" rather than "race", would opponents think it fair not to give them a voice for response directly to the Parliament?

To dispel thoughts that Bradley Perrett's piece wasn't an April Fools Day lark the header told us "Nuclear subs for NZ? It's not a joke" (April 1). But the very suggestion that nuclear-free New Zealand should "pony up", to use his phrase, and join Australia's grossly overpriced and strategically dubious maritime adventure is so ridiculous that it barely merits discussion, let alone serious consideration.

The photo of the NZ Foreign Minister meeting a senior Chinese official says it all. Here is a country that places more weight on correct and productive bilateral relations than a policy aimed at projecting power far from its shores at the behest of the supplier of those costly weapons.

To suggest it "would be about right" for NZ to acquire a pair of nuclear powered subs at a cost of billions makes no sense at any level and would only drag our neighbour into a Pacific arms race that we should hope to be avoiding not abetting.

Bravo to the voters of Aston for delivering such a resounding "no" on the weekend to the politics of negativity being pushed by Peter Dutton and his LNP coalition.

It is now my fervent wish that the voters of Australia similarly reject the Opposition Leader's cynical and crass politicisation of the upcoming referendum and support the constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and give them the Voice to Parliament that they are seeking and deserve.

It is now time for all of us to accept the gracious invitation, so eloquently expressed in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, to walk with First Nations peoples in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.

Regarding your Mark Kenny feature on John Kerin in The Canberra Times of April 2. One notable feature of Kerin, which Mark did not mention, was his embrace of the concept of sustainable development, following the landmark report by former Norwegian PM Brundtland, in the late 1980s early 1990s.

Unlike environment minister Richardson and his department, and I saw it happen at middle management in the environment department, it was, I believe, much more Kerin and Hawke who initiated the ecological sustainable development process, a world first and the associated Resource Assessment Commission. Vale John, who I knew for many years.

Matt Eggleston (Letters, April 3) repeats Warran Mundine's furphy that those most loudly promoting the Voice come from an elite whose organisations have already failed to deliver improvements.

In fact, the Voice arises from the most comprehensive consultations with First Nations Australians ever conducted. Starting over 10 years ago and culminating in 13 regional dialogues throughout the whole of Australia, from which 17 representatives of each region then attended the National Constitutional Convention at Uluru.

The highest priority independently identified by each of the 13 regions was for a Voice to Parliament in the constitution. The second highest priority for most regions was for an agreement/treaty making process and the third priority was for truth-telling. At the convention a small number of regional delegates walked out, because it didn't make negotiating a treaty the first priority, but more than 80 per cent or regional representatives continued to support a Voice as their region's first priority.

The strongest concern of all regions was that non-First Nations Australians never listen to what First Nations people say. Nearly always sound reports supported by local First Nations communities are twisted by governments and others to suit a non-Indigenous agenda. The intervention was an example. Why can't the rest of us, just for once, do what First Nations Australians clearly want: a formally recognised Voice, which hopefully we will not ignore?

It was good to see Alex Crowe's article in the Sunday Canberra Times on the need for a full environmental assessment of the proposed use of Lake Burley Griffin by seaplanes.

This assessment would of course need to cover potential impacts on the listed threatened migratory Latham's Snipe for which Jerrabomberra Wetlands is key summer habitat, as well as potential impacts on nesting Silver Gulls on Spinnaker Island and other birdlife.

Readers may have noted the reference to Canberra Birds as the local birding organisation. This is simply the newer and easier-to-use name of the well-known Canberra Ornithologists Group.

Richard Johnston ("McMansions syndrome", Letters, April 3) accurately describes what has and will continue to be the generally average to poor outcomes from allowing dual occupancy. Redevelopment is resulting in over-building that hurts our environment and home buyers having little choice but to overextend themselves financially because big houses maximise developers' profits.

The current Chief Minister's vision of 100 to 150 square metre affordable homes will remain just a dream unless the rules require or incentivise that outcome.

A 700 square metre block could easily be redeveloped into three 150 square metre homes with 250 square metres of open space to be shared or divided between the homes. This outcome could be mandated or encouraged for example by introducing lower rates on these properties because they put less demand on public services like storm water and deliver environmental benefits.

This is not rocket science. But we are unlikely to see it unless we elect several independents to the Assembly who meaningfully consult and put Canberrans' well-being first.

Thousands of years ago writing was done in the form of hieroglyphs. Then it became more complicated. Now we use emojis, the new hieroglyphs. Proof that we are actually devolving. As a species.

Paris can ban them; why can't we?

When the Looney Left was a threat to our long-standing Sensible Centre, I voted Liberal. Now, decades later, the Radical Right seems to me to be just as disruptive and dangerous, so I vote Labor. Many Aston voters obviously think the same way.

Ever since the ACT government stopped street sweeping around median strips, traffic dividers and the centres of roundabouts, about seven years ago, I have watched the buildup of soil in the kerbs. Eventually weeds started growing and some reached about a metre high around Civic. Fortunately the government realised something had to be done and recently the weeds have been sprayed. The kerbs are still full of soil. Why treat the effect rather than the cause?

The late Yunupingu was an authentic Aboriginal man, and he had a voice to prime ministers.

The Liberal Party lost its way under Tony Abbott, who promoted the opposition's role as one of total negativity. A responsible and sensible opposition's role is to object by offering suggestions for improvement to proposed legislation rather than total negativity. Perhaps Mr Dutton and his team, who have obviously lost all electoral confidence, should reconsider their approach to the role of opposition.

From refusing to meet with kangaroo activists in 2021, to choosing not to engage with constituents who "email too much" regarding the kangaroo cull, it seems minister Vassarotti will avoid scrutiny over the annual kangaroo killing program at all costs. If the ACT government is so certain that its kangaroo cull is justified then it should not avoid the concerns of the Canberra community who have issues with the cull. After all we pay your salary.

The Russian Ambassador, Alexey Pavlovsky, has made the absurd claim that AUKUS is a grave risk to stability in the Asia-Pacific region. This is ridiculous as the only area of instability at the moment is in Europe with Russia having invaded peaceful Ukraine.

If it's possible for a government to win a seat from the opposition in a by-election for the first time in more than 100 years, it may also be possible to buck the trend in which referenda proposals that lack bipartisan support don't get up. I'm optimistic enough to maintain a hope that the same desire for social justice and fair mindedness among the voters that have rejected the Liberal model will prevail when the Voice referendum is put to the people.

Letters to the editor should be kept to 250 or fewer words. To the Point letters should not exceed 50 words. Reference to The Canberra Times reports should include a date and page number. Provide a phone number and address (only your suburb will be published). Responsibility for election comment is taken by John-Paul Moloney of 121 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra. Published by Federal Capital Press of Australia Pty Ltd.