Play Nice Referendum - Indigenous Voice in Parliament - Part 2

[Gethelred]

Link to the proposed Referendum, from the Referendum Working Group:

(Edited 6 April 2023)

These are the words that will be put to the Australian people in the upcoming referendum as agreed by the Referendum Working Group (made up of representatives of First Nations communities from around Australia):

"A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?"

As well as that, it will be put to Australians that the constitution be amended to include a new chapter titled "Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples".

The details would be:


View attachment 1636890

The Prime Minister has committed to the government introducing legislation with this wording to parliament on 30 March 2023 and to establishing a joint parliamentary committee to consider it and receive submissions on the wording, providing ALL members of Parliament with the opportunity to consider and debate the full details of the proposal.

Parliament will then vote on the wording in June in the lead up to a National Referendum.

The ANU has issued a paper responding to common public concerns expressed in relation to the proposed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice here:

Indigenous Voice to Parliament | Australian National University

Responding to common concerns about an aboriginal and torres strait islander voice First Nations portfolio Background

www.anu.edu.au

Summary details of the key points from this paper may be found in Chief post here:

The Uluru Statement from the Heart:

Not specifically No. In any case it does not form part of the Referendum proposal.

View attachment 1769742

Seeing as things have gotten a bit toxic in here, let's try to return things to a more civil tone.

The following will result in warnings to begin with, and if said behaviour continues will be escalated:

• referring to another poster as racist without direct provocation.
• dismissing or deriding another poster's lived experience.
• personal attacks or one line posts designed solely to insult or deride.

You might notice that the final rule is from the board rules. Thought we should probably remember that this is against the rules in case it's been forgotten.

Let's play nicely from here, people.

 

[Skeppersap]

Do you have evidence that is not advisory only?

Representation means representation to advise only, nothing more nothing less.

Under what definition?

 

[adogsfan5]

When presented with any examples they also go no not that.

Not just this thread either.

It's always just a few people, it's never widespread or state sanctioned or systemic.

It's a repeated pattern of behaviour that constantly seeks to downplay, minimise or dismiss racism and especially structural racism from discussion

There’s worse said on here than “calling the country racist is incorrect because not everyone is racist”.

There’s some rotten behaviour occurring in here on both sides.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I see you also don't understand how screenshots of tweets work

Yet you've tweeted sky news, you give the impression they're the exact opposite of your world view.

Would I be incorrect in that statement?

 

[Carringbush2010]

Under what definition?

Answer a question with a question I see.

Do you have evidence that this body will have vote in the houses for advice they give?

 

[Carringbush2010]

There’s worse said on here than “calling the country racist is incorrect because not everyone is racist”.

There’s some rotten behaviour occurring in here on both sides.

Just to be clear I'm not on the no side, I've made that clear and as to why.

I do agree though there has been some utterly disgusting behaviour on both sides, some obvious racist comments, and obvious demonizing of posters with reasonable comments IMHO.

 

[Skeppersap]

Answer a question with a question I see.

Do you have evidence that this body will have vote in the houses for advice they give?

No....I never said they did have power to vote in either the lower or upper house.

What will happen if the representation comes in the form of a demand instead of 'advice'?

I believe our brilliant PM said it would be a brave PM who ignored the representations....

 

[South of the Yarra]

People in my household understand what true racism actually is...... E.g. constitutional change which separates the population based on their skin colour. Horrific stuff!

I would strongly suggest they don't.

 

[Skeppersap]

I would strongly suggest they don't.

I would strongly suggest they do.

 

[adogsfan5]

Just to be clear I'm not on the no side, I've made that clear and as to why.

I do agree though there has been some utterly disgusting behaviour on both sides, some obvious racist comments, and obvious demonizing of posters with reasonable comments IMHO.

I know you’re not on the no side, hence I’m going into bat for you.

 

[freddy mercury]

Think y'all need to accept its not going to happen and move on, let's just be one country, much easier, right?

 

[South of the Yarra]

I would strongly suggest they do.

By the definition you offered on behalf of your household it sounds as if they have never encountered true racism.

 

[South of the Yarra]

Think y'all need to accept its not going to happen and move on, let's just be one country, much easier, right?

It is ok we can wait another 250 years for us to be one country.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Think y'all need to accept its not going to happen and move on, let's just be one country, much easier, right?

It's not over until Gina writes a poem.

 

[Carringbush2010]

No....I never said they did have power to vote in either the lower or upper house.

What will happen if the representation comes in the form of a demand instead of 'advice'?

I believe our brilliant PM said it would be a brave PM who ignored the representations....

Ok, hypothetical, let's say your fear is confirmed about 'demand' (unlikely in any case)

Let's pretend that demand is an impediment on the 97% of the population that are non indigenous, do you honestly think that any parliament of the day will pass such advice as legislation?

Legislation passed = political suicide. How can you not see that?

 

[freddy mercury]

It's not over until Gina writes a poem.

She'll throw money at the problem

 

[Skeppersap]

Ok, hypothetical, let's say your fear is confirmed about 'demand' (unlikely in any case)

Let's pretend that demand is an impediment on the 97% of the population that are non indigenous, do you honestly think that any parliament of the day will pass such advice as legislation?

Legislation passed = political suicide. How can you not see that?

Does it then become a constitutional crisis? I don't know..... Do you?

 

[CM86]

Well, this thread is getting out of control.


Maybe we can cool it with the racism, misinformation and dog whistles?

And adogsfan5 and Carringbush2010, can you give it a rest, please?
I understand you can't handle differing opinions to yours, but this dishonest meta conversation is just taking the thread more and more off track as you diminish racism and the actions of many 'No' supporters.

 

[MP_]

Think y'all need to accept its not going to happen and move on, let's just be one country, much easier, right?

One country who doesn’t want to bring equity to its indigenous people, ignorance is bliss I see

 

[Carringbush2010]

I know you’re not on the no side, hence I’m going into bat for you.

Thanks adogs, I think it's futile though, as my centred position obviously comes across as extreme right wing to the mods and others in this forum.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

She'll throw money at the problem

Who do you think is funding the NO campaign?

 

[adogsfan5]

Well, this thread is getting out of control.


Maybe we can cool it with the racism, misinformation and dog whistles?

And adogsfan5 and Carringbush2010, can you give it a rest, please?
I understand you can't handle differing opinions to yours, but this dishonest meta conversation is just taking the thread more and more off track as you diminish racism and the actions of many 'No' supporters.

I haven’t posted any opinions on this thread or have had any differing opinions to other posters.

Thanks for dropping by though, for more of your toxic and irrelevant bull*hit.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Well, this thread is getting out of control.


Maybe we can cool it with the racism, misinformation and dog whistles?

And adogsfan5 and Carringbush2010, can you give it a rest, please?
I understand you can't handle differing opinions to yours, but this dishonest meta conversation is just taking the thread more and more off track as you diminish racism and the actions of many 'No' supporters.

Contesting differing opinions does not equate to 'can't handle', it's merely contesting differing opinions.

Not sure why claiming labeling a whole country as racist by 'racist country' is such a sky fall.

That is not 'dishonest' it is merely my observation, are others allowed to contest my view in that? Sure, but I'm also allowed in my view.

It's a discussion forum remember, not a one way street.

 

[adogsfan5]

Contesting differing opinions does not equate to 'can't handle', it's merely contesting differing opinions.

Not sure why claiming labeling a whole country as racist by 'racist country' is such a sky fall.

That is not 'dishonest' it is merely my observation, are others allowed to contest my view in that? Sure, but I'm also allowed in my view.

It's a discussion forum remember, not a one way street.

A good one to mute, trust me. Trolls and attempts to suspend others.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I haven’t posted any opinions on this thread or have had any differing opinions to other posters.

Thanks for dropping by though, for more of your toxic and irrelevant bull*hit.

This doesn't help adogs.

CM86 merely posted cm's view, fair enough, but labeling that post as 'toxic and irrelevant bs' doesn't promote civil discussion, and will only counterproduct your argument.

In short don't give em ammo.

Admittedly even I've been guilty of this in the past.

Apologies.

 

[adogsfan5]

This doesn't help adogs.

CM86 merely posted cm's view, fair enough, but labeling that post as 'toxic and irrelevant bs' doesn't promote civil discussion, and will only counterproduct your argument.

In short don't give em ammo.

It’s not their first time singling me out for no reason. They do it for a very specific reason to troll.