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.

 

[Festerz]

People forget that the voice was odds on to be passed 12 months ago? The polls were very favorable for the voice.

What went wrong?

A recently installed Opposition Leader trailing miserably behind a newly elected PM saw the Referendum as a chance to improve his political capital by mobilising his and his coalition partners political machines to spread doubt and misinformation about the Voice proposal.

Although the Uluru proposal was developed under his own coalition government, Dutton announced his formal opposition to the Voice referendum just 6 months ago.

'Don't Know. Vote No!' slogans and posters used in the last referendum were taken from Liberal Party storerooms across the nation, dusted off for re-use to muddy the waters.

Marginal conservative politicians seeing an opportunity for career advancement leapt at the opportunity to take centre stage.'

A story that has been told many times in other failed referendums.

Or as the Age's Tony Wright put succinctly:

Opposition, confusion and manufactured doubt have always condemned Australian referendums to failure.

After this weekend, the record remains that no referendum has ever been successful in Australia without the support of political leaders from all major parties.

1) Elites jumping onboard: People are sick and tired of seeing privileged celebrities/high profile people telling everyone what to think and who to vote for. The corny instagram photos with "Yes" written on their palms etc. Social media has become a nauseating cesspool of self-promotion mixed with virtue signaling. Some of it was up there with the incessant virtue signalling during covid. Who can forget the Imagine cover. Pass me the vomit bucket.

2) Big business jumping on board: When does big business give a stuff about equity and inclusion? Qantas was a case in point. Don't lecture us and then rip us off blind. Im staggered the Yes vote sided recruited celebrites and big business. They should have been telling both to stay far away.

3) Rental criss/housing crisis:

Oh I see - yours was a rhetorical question as a platform for a cut and paste BS narrative. Silly me for taking someone who calls who calls themselves 'greyhound punter' seriously.

 

[Reg Grundy35]

As i have said: the leftie doesn't do self-reflection.

congratulations on your first win in a very long time. All it took was putting the boots into some blackfellas! Do another victory lap!!

 

[Cap]

No not necessarily. Other reasons might include cognitive deficiency, apathy, sociopathy or LNP membership. The latter could still be racists or just simply desperate to win something, anything for once in a long time.

I think you can pick the racists by the level of celebration from the result.

Everyone else understands the implications if they agreed or not.

 

[Cosmic Energy]

Interesting looking at the stats outside of the inner city from polling areas in Victoria, some areas with relatively high migrant levels voted yes at higher than the state result.

Clayton, Box Hill, Springvale, Sunshine were all above 50%. Glen Waverley & Oakleigh around 50%.

Some at the other end - Moe at 27%, Shepparton 26%, Swan Hill 17%.

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I don't know what media you consume but I saw about 80:20 advertising in favour of Yes.

The algorithms are smart, as a "highly educated individual" you were the target market for the yes ads

 

[Carringbush2010]

View attachment 1831998

 

[Saint Shags]

Well if we actually did that, the result would have been different.
That was the whole point of it.

Disappointing but not surprised.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I really don’t think that’s right

Ok.

 

[ElectricG]

Ok.

(Was kinda hoping you’d then google it and acknowledge the error)

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

lol we are now bringing out the voters were hoodwinked argument whenthe reality was that people didn't buy the divisive and racist voice. That included a lot I know who despise Peter Dutton also

The 'divisive and racist Voice' lol. Nice propaganda Mr IPA. Embarrassing stuff

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

They already do. $40B a year. I hope this gets audited so we can see who's skimming money off the top

Ah, the tolerant left. Always shows itself eventually. Awful, hatefilled people like you are dangerous because you think you're superior. Thankfully you always get slapped down by the majority

Rest up, busy week of hating everyone coming up

You're the hater champ. On every issue you're a backwards chump.

 

[Present Not Past]

They already do. $40B a year. I hope this gets audited so we can see who's skimming money off the top

Ah, the tolerant left. Always shows itself eventually. Awful, hatefilled people like you are dangerous because you think you're superior. Thankfully you always get slapped down by the majority

Rest up, busy week of hating everyone coming up

Why don't you show me the source for the $40B figure?
What, you scared?

 

[bzparkes]

Damn those racist indigenous senators for telling people to vote No

 

[Skeppersap]

Damn those racist indigenous senators for telling people to vote No

They only like indigenous to be successful if they agree with their political views.....

 

[Present Not Past]

Damn those racist indigenous senators for telling people to vote No

Name all the senators who told voters to vote No.
Let's not be racist,
You won't and no one is surprised.
I've called you out for what you are.

 

[cartwright]

80% support from indigenous was accurate.

 

[bzparkes]

Name all the senators who told voters to vote No.
Let's not be racist,

What are you getting worked up? The 2 most prominent senators of the No campaign are indigenous.

How is that being racist?

 

[Yellow Feathers]

l love democracy.

 

[Carringbush2010]

(Was kinda hoping you’d then google it and acknowledge the error)

This is what I posted in 8164, I googled this.

“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?”

Actually I concede, the wording does in fact state a Voice would be established.

I think the wording is flawed though because............

That is NOT a guarantee a Voice would've been established, it guarantees recognition, just coz it says 'by establishing' doesn't guarantee a Voice, it only invites it.

That Voice body would have to be established by those that want it, i:e ATSI people, not the parliament. This has been stated many times.

Of course one could fairly assume a Voice would've been implemented.

 

[Present Not Past]

What are you getting worked up? The 2 most prominent senators of the No campaign are indigenous.

How is that being racist?

I knew you couldn't do it, thanks for participating anyway.

 

[Skeppersap]

80% support from indigenous was accurate.

Hahaha, did you even read that? She has cherry picked booths to best suit the message she wants to sell.... And still couldn't come up with one that is even close to 80%...... Then states that it looks like the 80% claim was correct.

How on earth do people repost this as if it is proving a point?

 

[ElectricG]

This is what I posted in 8164, I googled this.

“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?”

Actually I concede, the wording does in fact state a Voice would be established.

I think the wording is flawed though because............

That is NOT a guarantee a Voice would've been established, it guarantees recognition, just coz it says 'by establishing' doesn't guarantee a Voice, it only invites it.

That Voice body would have to be established by those that want it, i:e ATSI people, not the parliament. This has been stated many times.

Of course one could fairly assume a Voice would've been implemented.

But we’ve also been shown what would’ve gone into the constitution which includes “there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice”.

It has to exist.

 

[bzparkes]

I knew you couldn't do it, thanks for participating anyway.

I just explained it to you.

It's always the same with you people: ask an irrelevant, nothing question, misinterpret the answer and walk away in 'victory' while everyone around you thinks you're completely stupid.

Let me spell it out for you simply;

I have NFI who the other senators pushing for a No vote are because only Thorpe and Price were publicly masqueraded as the face of the No vote and I don't care that much for politics anymore

Then, dipshits claim were 'racist' because the country voted 'No'(I voted yes btw, shove that up your backside), despite many people probably voting No because of senators Price and Thorpe being so prominent in the campaign. Many people probably thought they were following the wishes of the indigenous, despite the the vote showing otherwise.

Now get the * down from your soap box. It's embarrassing for you.

 

[Roobs321]

People forget that the voice was odds on to be passed 12 months ago? The polls were very favorable for the voice.

What went wrong? There will be little self-reflection from the Yes group. Already the frenzied lashing out has begun: "The savages are racist", "Murdoch and his misinformation", "Sky News", etc etc. Here are my thoughts.

1) Elites jumping onboard: People are sick and tired of seeing privileged celebrities/high profile people telling everyone what to think and who to vote for. The corny instagram photos with "Yes" written on their palms etc. Social media has become a nauseating cesspool of self-promotion mixed with virtue signaling. Some of it was up there with the incessant virtue signalling during covid. Who can forget the Imagine cover. Pass me the vomit bucket.

2) Big business jumping on board: When does big business give a stuff about equity and inclusion? Qantas was a case in point. Don't lecture us and then rip us off blind. Im staggered the Yes vote sided recruited celebrites and big business. They should have been telling both to stay far away.

3) Rental criss/housing crisis: I don't want to bang on at all about immigration - my thoughts on this matter are well known. This issue has been exacerbated under the Albanese government - it is undoubtedly a national emergency. It is one thing to advocate for closing the gap on indigenous inequality - it is a national priority - however, many on the left willingly turn a blind eye to the issue of housing and excessive immigration. I don't have all the answers in this regard. I will say this however: It is cost free for an inner city leftie to advocate for closing the gap - there is no down side that they take on personally - hence why it is so popular.

Of course, housing adorability may mean that the leftie's inner city unit may have to fall in value - all of a sudden there is a personal risk and a down side that the leftie will generally scoff at and turn a blind eye.

Such rampant hypocrisy doesn't go unnoticed by the unwash.

That is my 2 cents.

My advice to Albo: get back to basics.

You see to me that kind of fickle petty reasoning changing one’s vote is pathetic, the kind of irresponsibility that disappoints other voters.

I mean, elites & corporates coming aboard? Who cares, I didn’t take any notice, so easily ignored and certainly no reasonable excuse. You aren’t voting for best campaign or least annoying campaigners. And you can juggle more than one issue at once, it’s a copout and disgrace to not give the referendum the mere few seconds of dignified thought it warranted. At the end of the day it is you and the issue at hand, and all else is noise and spite for the easily distracted. Be better.

 

[Pugz89]

It's still not representation in parliament however you want to twist the language.

It offered no power to legislate, no veto, nothing but the ability to give advice.

Neither does any ordinary citizen, but would you agree each electorate's member of parliament represents their electorate in Parliament? It's the same principle. It is simply adding in a group that would have their say on indigenous issues and putting forward that view to the govt. Whether or not the govt of the day acts on that, I would say that there is definitely a representation component.

 

[revo333]

Fancy a Hawthorn supporter throwing shade at No voters for being racist.

Might be time to support another football club.