Why our Indigenous peoples need their 'voice'

Aboriginal people have been the occupants of this land for over 60,000 years. All other commonwealth countries have treaties with their Indigenous people. I have seen Aboriginal people included in official documents as immigrants. We need a treaty.

In the eyes of most Australians, our history started from the arrival of the First Fleet. A true history would start with a comprehensive telling that includes Aboriginal history. This should not be dispatched as "the black armband" view, as was promoted by John Howard and friends.

The arrival of the First Fleet resulted in horrific conflicts. More than 300 massacres occurred andmany hundreds of Aboriginal people died. In 1788, it was estimated that 750,000 Aboriginal people lived here. One hundred years later, there were 117,000. Some had died of imported diseases but many were killed. We need Aboriginal people to have a voice so that the truth will come out.

Anne Hollingshead, Camberwell

Serious objections to constitutional change

There are three insuperable arguments against any amendment to the constitution favouring our Indigenous peoples. It is inequitable to non-indigenous Australians (the great majority of us). Secondly, by eroding national unity, it threatens national security. (Think of the growing threats of expansionist China and aggressive Islamic fundamentalism in Indonesia.) Thirdly, it will cause internal instability through divisiveness based on ethnic difference. The genuine arguments supporting Indigenous welfare can be satisfied without changing the constitution.

Nigel Jackson, Belgrave

The right to speak on relevant legislation

Daniel Wild from the Institute of Public Affairs says, "proposals to insert race into our nation's founding document are radical, illiberal and a violation of all principals of racial inequality" (The Age, 12/7). This would be so except that First Nations people are mentioned specifically in the constitution. All they are asking is to be included in discussion of any legislation which may impact directly on them.

Helen Pereira, Heidelberg Heights

Amendment doomed without bipartisanship

Our founding fathers made the constitution difficult to change. For a proposal to be successful, Section 128 requires a national majority "yes" vote and a majority "yes" vote in a majority of states. This double hurdle is the main reason for the failure of 36 out of the 44 proposals for change put to Australians since 1901. The eight successful proposals had support across the political divide. Unless a bipartisan pathway can be found, the proposed First Nations Voice amendment to the constitution is doomed.

Tony Devereux, Nunawading

So some 'voices' are acceptable, Prime Minister?

Scott Morrison believes that if Indigenous people have a "voice" in Parliament, it will create an unacceptable "third chamber". However, he has no problem with a Christian "voice" doing the same.

Peter Fairway, Wallington

THE FORUM

Such cruel treatment

I was shocked and saddened to read in Ken Wyatt's article (Comment, 11/7) that Neville Bonner, the first Indigenous federal parliamentarian, was isolated in his time in Canberra. He was never invited "for a coffee and a chat". No doubt in his time there he heard many fine words of oratory, but words are cheap.

David Fry, Moonee Ponds

Serena broke 'holy rule'

Serena Williams' attempt to defend her angry outburst against an umpire's decision is breathtaking in its conceit and does the women's movement no favours. Ditto for Natalie Reilly's commentary (Comment, 12/7). Accepting the umpire's decision is surely the first and most holy rule of competitive sport. Spectators regularly express their disgust at male players, such as Nick Kyrgios, who breach this rule.

No claim that Williams was "standing up" against sexism can excuse her. For Reilly to suggest that this is somehow equivalent to Julie Bishop "lifting the lid on bullying within her party" offends feminists like myself.

Patrice McCarthy, Bendigo

Very mixed messages

It is interesting to note the largely condemnatory treatment of "unfair" group punishment in schools (The Age, 11/7) with the almost universal support, including your editorial (The Age, 29/6), for the ban on mobile phones in state schools.

This ban was proposed to reduce cyber bullying and classroom distractions. Surely this is the same principle (punishing the majority for the acts of the minority) but it seems to be viewed differently. Little wonder that students, parents and teachers are confused and conflicted.

Peter Starford, Williamstown

Our obligation to help

If we do not like keeping the entire class in over lunch because a few students are disruptive, can we also condemn the confinement of refugees when all they did was ask us for help? Six years is too long to wait for this government to decide how it can further evade its responsibilities.

We should be making a determined effort to relocate the refugees. Bring them here or work harder to find places for them in the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Scandinavia or Switzerland. They should not be forced to live any more time in detention.

Ellen O'Gallagher, Castlemaine

Human safety first

The view of the RSPCA's Tegan McPherson – that "banning breeds is not the solution" (Opinion, 12/7) – is no consolation for the grieving families of fatal dog attacks. Four victims have died in Australia this year from horrific attacks by American Staffordshires. The same breed has inflicted numerous other victims with grievous wounds.

However, McPherson seems to be prioritising animal rights over the proven risks posed by a particular dog breed to humans.

While little puppies can be cute, grown dogs from breeds prone to bad temperament are a threat. We ban guns in Australia. We have laws that discourage the domestication of wild animals as pets. We cannot turn a blind eye here. Humans have the right to be protected.

Joe Lederman, Frankston

Each dog is different

Thank you, Tegan McPherson.We have had border collies over the past 30 years and each one has been different. When we shifted from Echuca to Warrnambool last year, our nine-year-old, Nelson, found it very stressful. We noticed this and tried to work with it.

My daughter had two younger, active Labradors, and he found their constant harassment too much. He also became distressed when we played with all the dogs, not just him. Consequently he became aggressive, and snapped at, and bit, myself and my wife.

One incident involved a night in hospital. With our daughter having a child, we made the tough but necessary decision to put him down. McPherson said, "Fear is the underlying emotion associated with aggression in physically and mentally healthy dogs." This is so true. Nelson is now at peace, and so are the owners, albeit saddened.

Glenn Brotchie, Warrnambool

Onus on us to "learn dog"

As Tegan McPherson says, dog attacks occur for a variety of reasons. As owners, we are obliged to monitor our dogs for signs that indicate fear as it frequently precedes aggression. Sadly, most people gain dogs, blissfully unaware of what they need, how they learn and modern methods of training.

Knowledge of dog body language is crucial, for pet ownership and community safety. Yet how many people understand what it means when a dog licks its lips or shows the whites of its eyes? The early signs of discomfort must be noted so we can stop it escalating. We must provide more education in dog behaviour and body language. It's up to us to learn to speak dog. Otherwise, there will be more tragic deaths.

Debbie Lustig, Elsternwick

Ban aggressive breeds

Tegan McPherson says that "deed, not breed, should be the determining factor in labelling a dog as dangerous". If so, why are particular breeds judged better suited for some tasks than for others? The answer is their genetic characteristics. Golden retrievers make poor guard dogs and Labradors are little used as cattle dogs. And more inherently aggressive breeds are required for bailing up wild boars.

But it is an unnecessary debate. Ban the five or so breeds that are over-represented in attack statistics – starting with American Staffordshire terriers – and the number of attacks will drop. That is more important than the supposed right for a person to own any breed desired.

Greg McCarry, Epping, NSW

Impact of homelessness

Assistant Housing Minister Luke Howarth says the number of homeless are a "very, very small percentage of the population". However, the number "affected by" homelessness multiplies when you consider the distress to others caught up in this crisis.

These include: those offering a couch to homeless friends; the family and friends of a homeless person who are not in a position to help; medical practitioners who treat patients with physical and mental injuries resulting from living on the streets; police who attend the victims of attack and even murder; and workers in homeless shelters who have to turn away most of the desperate people seeking a bed.

Our government should commit to a massive build of public housing to tackle the growing number of people on the waiting list. The former Public Housing Renewal Program – now the Social Housing Renewal Program because community housing providers will manage the new housing – does not do this. And most new dwellings in this scheme will be for the private market.

Janet Graham, West Melbourne

Cowardly conduct

How gutless of Boris Johnson to refuse to back Sir Kim Darroch. The latter's opinion of Donald Trump and his administration, which was likely correct anyway, was confidentially expressed to the government that employed him to give it the best advice he could. Mr Johnson should criticise the leaker. He has a reputation as a bit of a buffoon, now he has added to it that of someone who makes poor and overreactive judgments. Let us hope he does not become prime minister. Britain deserves better.

Anthony Whitmarsh, Viewbank

Super sensitive Trump

So, Donald Trump can insult and call other people names, but when someone insults or criticises him he gets his undies in a bunch. If you dish it out, you have to be able to take it.

Sarah Walburgh, Port Melbourne

Suckers for punishment

Billy Miller, I am glad you're enjoying your politics-free life (Letters, 12/7) but if you are anything like me, it will be short-lived. I am reminded of Michael Palin's character Gordon Ottershaw when his beloved team, Barnstoneworth United, suffered another crushing defeat. After tearing the local pub apart and crying, "Useless, useless, useless", he demurely tells the publican he would see him at training next week.

Vivienne Bond, Warburton

AND ANOTHER THING

Indigenous recognition

Scott Morrison, stop humouring naysayers and give our First Peoples the formal respect which is owing to them.

Hugh McCaig, Blackburn

Why do a handful of Coalition right-wingers have a veto on any progressive policy?

Garry Meller, Bentleigh

The fact that any MP opposes giving a voice for First Nations leaves me ashamed to be an Australian.

John Cummings, Anglesea

The usual suspects, Morrison, Dutton, Andrews and Kelly, are at it again with their "third chamber" lie.

John Handley, Cheltenham

Have Indigenous Australians write their own constitution, noting the arrival of Europeans to their country.

Barry Revill, Moorabbin

Politics

Morrison tells us Australia needs more love. Is the bonk ban over then?

Sarah Bone, Wonthaggi

Next federal Assistant Housing Minister Luke Howarth will refer to homelessness as a "lifestyle choice".

Ray Peck, Hawthorn

If the Coalition wants to boost consumer confidence, it should increase Newstart. The extra money won't go straight to banks.

Tom Vanderzee, Preston

Given the choice between a nanny state and woefully inadequate self-regulation, I'll take Mary Poppins.

Vikki O'Neill, Ashburton

Furthermore

Lim Hung solved Rubik's Cube in 17.10 seconds, using his feet. I can't put on a pair of socks in that time.

Sam Bando, St Kilda East

Where can I get a decent insurance policy to protect me from the banks?

Les Aisen, Elsternwick

Move the Boxing Day Test to Perth? Now that's just not cricket.

Paul Custance, Highett

Now we'll have to root for the Kiwis.

Rod Matthews, Fairfield

When will we wise up and make dog breeds that are most often responsible for mauling deaths illegal?

Ian Hudson, Yarrambat

*Sign up to editor Alex Lavelle's exclusive weekly newsletter at: www.theage.com.au\editornote.