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.

 

[South of the Yarra]

The sad thing that is forgotten is that this is not about politics, it is about people.

 

[10571z]

Do you think that politicians should be forced to listen to indigenous voices, on matters that concern them?

Like, make them do their job?

Wheres the line of what concerns them?

If you acknowledge them as the traditional owners of the land as we are so often reminded EVERYTHING concerns indigenous Australians…

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Again, i never said we were. I hope you understand this time that I dont need your authoritative posts telling me whats what.

Imagine holding a $360M referendum on "well, it couldn't hurt" . Politics is such a ******* sham, shits me to tears.

How about doing something concrete

That's less than we paid for a french submarine, which doesn't exist.

 

[burge13]

It’s cute that you think $360m is a big number in federal politics.

We’re about to vote no to an advisory voice and you think we could do more, maybe think on that.

Federal politics is irrelevant to the fact the PM just flushed that money down the toilet on a vanity project where the selling points are "right thing to do" and "couldn't hurt".

My sincere apologies for holding them to higher standards than you do

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Wheres the line of what concerns them?

If you acknowledge them as the traditional owners of the land as we are so often reminded EVERYTHING concerns indigenous Australians…

Your previous post answers your current post.

 

[Cmarsh]

The sad thing that is forgotten is that this is not about politics, it is about people.

I get that.

Though the reality - when it's about people, its about politics.

 

[burge13]

That's less than we paid for a french submarine, which doesn't exist.

Yes i know your teams better and always right

The subs were, are, and always will be ****ing stupid.

See how sometimes its possible to see passed the party and look at the policy? The regulars here should try it...

 

[phantom13]

Federal politics is irrelevant to the fact the PM just flushed that money down the toilet on a vanity project where the selling points are "right thing to do" and "couldn't hurt".

My sincere apologies for holding them to higher standards than you do

So is it the money or is it not the money?

And those aren’t the selling points those are the bullshit no points

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Yes i know your teams better and always right

The subs were, are, and always will be ******* stupid.

See how sometimes its possible to see passed the party and look at the policy? The regulars here should try it...

I'm accepting an invitation, not voting for a party.

 

[burge13]

So is it the money or is it not the money?

And those aren’t the selling points those are the bullshit no points

They are the selling points because there's nothing tangible on offer

"Seat at the table"
"Voice to be heard"

As if indigenous people aren't consulted already. This is where we're reduced to "this might be different"

Might be?

"Couldn't hurt"

 

[10571z]

Your previous post answers your current post.

Feel free to name 1 parliamentary issue that you couldn’t make a single link back to “affecting indigenous people”

 

[phantom13]

They are the selling points because there's nothing tangible on offer

"Seat at the table"
"Voice to be heard"

As if indigenous people aren't consulted already. This is where we're reduced to "this might be different"

Might be?

"Couldn't hurt"

Reads a lot like you haven’t even bothered to Google any of this so probably not worth engaging either way.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Feel free to name 1 parliamentary issue that you couldn’t make a single link back to “affecting indigenous people”

We all go to the same schools, the same hospitals. Closing the gap would help improve these things for everyone.

You agreed previously that politicians should listen. Why don't you want to force politicians to do this listening part of their job?

 

[phantom13]

They are the selling points because there's nothing tangible on offer

"Seat at the table"
"Voice to be heard"

As if indigenous people aren't consulted already. This is where we're reduced to "this might be different"

Might be?

"Couldn't hurt"

If you’re so adamant we listen to indigenous Australians then why not listen to the 80% who want this?

The 75,000 indigenous Australians who are represented by the NT land councils who have just advocated for the yes vote.

If YOU won’t listen to them and vote for the Voice then what makes you think anyone else is listening to them.

 

[Romeoh1]

Huh? The advice from the Voice to Parliament can either be accepted or rejected by the Government of the day according to what is politically expedient of the governing party.

This has been one of the main criticisms of the Voice to Parliament, that its advice, however worthy, may be rejected according to the ruling non-Indigenous class.

Just because the body of the Voice would be in the constitution doesn't change this.

Yes it does-the advice can be changed but but can’t be taken away. It has to be listened to- the indigenous voices can’t be silenced like they can now. That’s a big change.
Not sure what you wouldn’t give this a go. It’s a chance to do things in a better way- it’s a good chance to see if we can make these things work more effectively- why wouldn’t you take that?

 

[MP_]

The sad thing that is forgotten is that this is not about politics, it is about people.

The lack of compassion is astounding and very disheartening.

 

[10571z]

We all go to the same schools, the same hospitals. Closing the gap would help improve these things for everyone.

You agreed previously that politicians should listen. Why don't you want to force politicians to do this listening part of their job?

Thanks for not naming one…

Absolutely… “Hey guys how do we get more indigenous people to get cancer screen tests in remot areas? What’s the barriers? How can we help improve numbers?”

Fantastic seek advice from people in those situations.

My fear is simple. The wrong people get in the voice and have a say on EVERYTHING. How much does this hold up parliment? How much red tape does this create and how much frictions does it cause? These details haven’t been ironed out.. a simple “yOU caN iGNore THem” doesn’t sit well.

 

[burge13]

If you’re so adamant we listen to indigenous Australians then why not listen to the 80% who want this?

The 75,000 indigenous Australians who are represented by the NT land councils who have just advocated for the yes vote.

If YOU won’t listen to them and vote for the Voice then what makes you think anyone else is listening to them.

As someone else has rightly pointed out, every single group in the country would offer 80% for themselves

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Thanks for not naming one…

Absolutely… “Hey guys how do we get more indigenous people to get cancer screen tests in remot areas? What’s the barriers? How can we help improve numbers?”

Fantastic seek advice from people in those situations.

My fear is simple. The wrong people get in the voice and have a say on EVERYTHING. How much does this hold up parliment? How much red tape does this create and how much frictions does it cause? These details haven’t been ironed out.. a simple “yOU caN iGNore THem” doesn’t sit well.

I agree, your fear is simple. It defines you.

It's also clear you haven't been arguing in good faith.

 

[phantom13]

As someone else has rightly pointed out, every single group in the country would offer 80% for themselves

So we shouldn’t listen to them?

Cool, next time just lead with that.

 

[Sphynx]

Not to mention it’s operating cost will be 2 fifths of * all compared to the general budget and overheads.

* the maintenance cost on Parliament House is probably less but “it’s a fair question to ask”

Haha, oh you are serious…

If the Voice gets up, nothing about a national advisory council or voice to Parliament or whatever else you want to describe it will be cheap.

Further more, there’s already a huge crisis within industries around Australia regarding black-cladding companies and the same few indigenous “entrepreneurs” profiteering through government quotas and spending requirements.

If you don’t think a select few indigenous “entrepreneurs” won’t be the first to rort the system with the Voice, well I have something to sell you….

Most of the worst offenders are all ex AFL footballers.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Politicians are one of the least trusted professions. But all these scared people want to protect them from talking to people.

BECAUSE THEY MIGHT BE THE WRONG TYPE OF PEOPLE!

 

[phantom13]

Haha, oh you are serious…

Great retort. Rich and compelling.

 

[burge13]

So we shouldn’t listen to them?

Cool, next time just lead with that.

Again as someone else has pointed out, they are consulted on everything already.

Not sure where I said dont listen but you do you.

 

[Gibbke]

Let's assume the Voice gets up and the LNP win the next election under Dutton.

What's stopping Dutton from having 'the voice' comprised of Jacinta Price?

Nothing. He's already said he'll revisit the entire concept, supporting the notion but as long as it's not Labor, which right there proves the campaigneriness of the man. The difference in your scenario is that Dutton would have chosen the members of the Voice. There is conjecture (interpreted as subterfuge by the right) as to how Albo's Voice members would be chosen, but what you've implied here is that the ruling party is choosing the panel. You'd have to put in a safeguard here, or make it a transparent process...