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.

 

[HairyO]

But the independents get some $ if they get a certain percentage or more primary vote so I am also happy to share the love like that.

For sure. We also have a local guy who has run in pretty much every local, state and federal election for the 16 years Ive been in the area and when he is on the ticket he always goes first.

He is an old school leftie and the times he has been on the local council (was Mayor a long time ago) he always got things done.

Im in probably the 3rd or 4th safest seat in the country so I cant do much more than my little protest vote.

Looking at some elections over time I am not too sure that people generally put that level of thought into voting.

I think a lot of people put thought into voting, but ultimately it is about self-preservation in the end, but this is never shown in any of the polling because no-one wants to admit it.

I really dont think there is much of the "my dad voted x, so I vote x" these days. And it will be less like that over time.

 

[Chief]

After 10 years in power - the LNP propose to reform the Indigenous Affairs portfolio...from Opposition.

Wouldn't have anything to do with Ms Price trying to capitalise on her new found political stardom would it? The Voice Australia actually needs.

It's a sop to Mundine, Liddle, Price, who he name checks at every turn. The LNP are so proud of their collection!

 

[Bollox]

The irony is every election 90% of the focus of the major parties is on these groups. Yet for the Referendum Labor seems to have completely failed to make a good argument. I guess it shows how much the party has shifted over recent years that they no longer know how to communicate with what once was their base.

It was simply rejected by the people. They saw it. They heard all the arguments. The nation just didnt like the idea.
There's no mistaking the result.
No excuses need to be invented. No blame game required. Just listen to and trust how they voted.

 

[Ohitsthatguy]

Strong link between electorates' education level and yes vote​

Reports of Islamophobic incidents in Australia rise – as it happened

This blog is now closed

www.theguardian.com

 

[Carringbush2010]

You're wrong, the whole world talked about the referendum lies and racism in Australia.
Open your eyes and stop making silly statements without looking things up first.

‘Lies fuel racism’: how the global media covered Australia’s Voice to Parliament referendum

Could the vote affect the way the world views Australia and potentially have an impact on Australia’s international relations?

theconversation.com

Crushing Indigenous Hopes, Australia Rejects ‘Voice’ Referendum

The proposed Indigenous Voice to Parliament was widely supported by Indigenous voters, but had raised fears and hopes that were both overblown.

www.nytimes.com

Japan-based Nikkei Asia reported:
Australia is the only developed nation with a colonial history that doesn’t recognise the existence of its Indigenous people in the constitution.

I wouldn't be using Japanese based news sources, to bolster your argument, given Japan has a zero immigration policy. Yeah I know that they're independent of the Japanese govt., none the less would be viewed as hypocritical.

More broadly, rightly or wrongly, the Israel / Palestine conflict will soon obscure any referendum news abroad.

 

[Bollox]

So only "the average Aussie" voted properly?

I mean, we get people like you and chuckles up there claiming that "ermagerd this splits the country into different groups".

Meanwhile we hear from the same cookers the that only real Aussies are the people who voted No.

The 70%+ of indigenous people who voted for a voice to parliament are... ? What are they to you? Be honest.

They are Australians.
No more and no less Australian than others.

Do you believe they are MORE Australian than some others and should be treated differently ? Be honest yourself.

 

[Skeppersap]

Does a majority vote mean it is right?

Yes.... Under the constitution, everyone is equal, regardless of skin colour. An overwhelming majority of equals voted for this to remain. Therefore it is right.

Not sure how much more simple it could be!

 

[Kyptastic]

Yes.... Under the constitution, everyone is equal, regardless of skin colour. An overwhelming majority of equals voted for this to remain. Therefore it is right.

Not sure how much more simple it could be!

Except that constitution also allows for the Parliament to make laws about specific races. Laws which are almost uniformly directed at Indigenous people. Doesn't sound very equal to me.

 

[Skeppersap]

Except that constitution also allows for the Parliament to make laws about specific races. Laws which are almost uniformly directed at Indigenous people. Doesn't sound very equal to me.

So that laws can be created to help close the gap..... Does not mean the constitution has to be further amended to introduce further racial division.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

Any campaign needs to understand what the misinformation will be about and start out strong countering then before they become entrenched

The yes campaign gave far too much credit to people's ability to see through the BS

It would be manly because it's an issue the average punter wouldn't exactly know or care about.

People see through the BS when they have a bit of knowledge.

 

[South of the Yarra]

Yes.... Under the constitution, everyone is equal, regardless of skin colour. An overwhelming majority of equals voted for this to remain. Therefore it is right.

Not sure how much more simple it could be!

Then the constitution is failing what it is meant to do. Not sure how much simpler I can make it. I would suggest the constitution was created so that it would be more than words. It would be actions. Aboriginal people are not close to being equal. And it is a frightening prospect that you think they are.

 

[tandino]

In what respect? In the process of government or on the ground?

Not on the ground. Not to find out it works or not, that's a bit of a fools errand. But form the model first and put the principle to the referendum.

 

[Reg Grundy35]

Except that constitution also allows for the Parliament to make laws about specific races. Laws which are almost uniformly directed at Indigenous people. Doesn't sound very equal to me.

FFS. If they are so "advantaged" why are they so "disadvantaged"?

 

[Chief]

They are Australians.
No more and no less Australian than others.

Do you believe they are MORE Australian than some others

What is an Australian to you? Is it just a transplanted European?

and should be treated differently ?

They already are, by a lot of non-indigenous people. Ask. Listen. You will find out.

Making space for this voice to make representations on local issues that have remained unresolved in many areas is the LEAST we could do and call ourselves compassionate and human.

 

[Chief]

Not on the ground. Not to find out it works or not, that's a bit of a fools errand. But form the model first and put the principle to the referendum.

They did form a model.

People ignored it. Didn't even look at it.

 

[Chief]

Yes.... Under the constitution, everyone is equal, regardless of skin colour. An overwhelming majority of equals voted for this to remain. Therefore it is right.

Not sure how much more simple it could be!

When was the last time you read the constitution?

 

[Reg Grundy35]

Then the constitution is failing what it is meant to do. Not sure how much simpler I can make it. I would suggest the constitution was created so that it would be more than words. It would be actions. Aboriginal people are not close to being equal. And it is a frightening prospect that you think they are.

Exactly. Most people who demand equality don't want current inequality considered. They just want to freeze things as they are now and continue on "equally"

 

[sherb]

Yes.... Under the constitution, everyone is equal, regardless of skin colour. An overwhelming majority of equals voted for this to remain. Therefore it is right.

Not sure how much more simple it could be!

Maybe in the constitution, but not in reality.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Out of curiosity, for those defending either voting no or the no campaign, what do you view as the major downside of voting Yes? Please try to not use "it could of" or "it might have", I mean real things of substance.

I get people want to argue why voting Yes wouldn't be as positive as some would have hoped, or that constitutionally there are grey areas etc. etc., but I'm really struggling to see the convincing argument as to why voting yes in the referendum would have been a bad thing.

While this is a good point, no one really has an answer, mainly due to the Voice would be an unknown until put into practice.

 

[JackOutback]

nah pretty well sums it up. They asked for bugger all really and 60% of the country said F#@K off!. It was their idea not Albos. They will take it personally - as they should - except for Price and Mundine - who will be LNP legends until they find a reason to give them the arse. Any of your celebrations are for a kick in the guts to First Nation Australians. Make sure you don't kid yourself its something else when youre sipping your champers.

As someone posted earlier, given that the issue didn't affect non-Indigenous people in any tangible way and many people across Australia probably rarely even encounter Indigenous Australians, it really was a vote on whether you like Aboriginal people. And what a ******* shitshow of an answer we gave them.

 

[Dirty_banchez]

Dutton already reneged on his promise. What a weasel.

 

[sherb]

Exactly. Most people who demand equality don't want current inequality considered. They just want to freeze things as they are now and continue on "equally"

"We all are Equal, but some people are more Equal than others".

 

[sherb]

So that laws can be created to help close the gap..... Does not mean the constitution has to be further amended to introduce further racial division.

it's only "racial division" if you choose it to be so.

It really is that simple.

 

[Blue Arrow]

Down to 39% now, predicted to fall to 38% after postals.

 

[The Punter]

They did form a model.

People ignored it. Didn't even look at it.

Doesn't a model mean numbers of members, method of selection, etc?

The yes campaign lost ground due to a lack of detail. May as well have filled that void with detail.