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.

 

[nut]

Last I heard the Yes vote had about a 30% chance of being successful; I should have prefaced my point by saying that any money that was going to be spent on setting up the voice could be used meaningfully IMO.


What is stopping us from listening now?
What has been said that we haven't heard?
How is the voice is going to change this?

So how has the “no” era worked ? Because we are headed towards a continuation of the “no” era…

 

[killtaker1993]

And yet people believe it will so happen!

Yeah, it's very distressing that they do. They don't understand that the Voice itself is self-explanatory in that it only has advisory capacity. It's like they think the whole thing is a 'Threat to Parliament' or a 'Direct Order to Parliament'. As other posters have said before, it's easy to sell fear when all people have to do is vote to do nothing

 

[Kyptastic]

The next election is 1.5 years away; by then there could be a bipartisan model put forward at the same time if No gets up. This time next week we will know the results. Just wait.

If you believe that the LNP are going to put up any sort of model I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

Even IF Dutton put something together that was acceptable to Labor, the Nats would never agree.

 

[Gavin Excell]

T

Not sure what that actually means.

But your comment about bipartisan support is utter nonsense.

By definition a referendum is binary - it offers just two options …YES or NO.

And in a social media environment driven by binary positioning on everything, it is far too easy for a weak politicians to pick a side for political advantage against his/her opponent rather than focussing on the facts and ethics of the issue.

And of course the rise of social media driven politicking was not something those who drew up the Australian Constitution could have ever imagined.

The fact is that Albanese went to the last election with a promise to go to a Referendum with a constitutionally enshrined Indigenous Voice to Parliament. A recommendation coming from the Uluru process established by the previous Coalition Government, of which Peter Dutton was a senior Cabinet Minister.

So you see the origins of this Referendum were based in bipartisanship. A Labor Prime Minister implementing a Coalition policy.

But what changed is Peter Dutton changing his and his party’s position AFTER a losing the election purely for cheap political reasons to bring down his opponent using Indigenous welfare as a weapon.

Dutton’s LNP carefully crafted and informative political campaign to destroy the Voice Referendum his own side of politics had cultivated over several years ?…

IF YOU DON’T KNOW VOTE NO.

FMD This is a simpleton feckwit playing cheap politics who was never interested in a bipartisan solution to resolving the huge gap between the health and life outcomes of Indigenous Australians and the rest of us.

The sad reality is that we as a nation have fallen for it.

That Albo thought Dutton would play along is naive. He was caught up in the emotion of election night and in the Canberra bubble thought this was an issue dear to all Australians. Dutton an a-hole- he was always going to think short term gain

I'm sure if Albo had his time again he wouldn't have gone about it differently

 

[Romeoh1]

people last night saying "I'm voting no because in 20 years or whatever they will say my house is on sacred land and take it"

Is this a possibility?

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

No. It’s an advisory body.

 

[Toump Ass]

The indigenous groups asked for this.

Yes.

Albo listened.

That's very nice of him.

Saying NO is saying you don't want to listen anymore.

And Australia has decided it doesn't want to listen any more.
What if they keep talking? Do we send them to Christmas Island?

 

[nut]

T

That Albo thought Dutton would play along is naive. He was caught up in the emotion of election night and in the Canberra bubble thought this was an issue dear to all Australians. Dutton an a-hole- he was always going to think short term gain

I'm sure if Albo had his time again he wouldn't have gone about it differently

It’s not Albo’s voice FFS

 

[spike101]

If you believe that the LNP are going to put up any sort of model I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

Even IF Dutton put something together that was acceptable to Labor, the Nats would never agree.

As I said; 148 hours is not a long time to wait; the discussion could all be irrelevant by this time next week.

 

[Home Alone]

people last night saying "I'm voting no because in 20 years or whatever they will say my house is on sacred land and take it"

Is this a possibility?

On SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app

'These people', have they previously been a source of knowledge and experience that you have benefited from? People who have had a positive influence on your life?

 

[nut]

people last night saying "I'm voting no because in 20 years or whatever they will say my house is on sacred land and take it"

Is this a possibility?

On SM-S908E using

BigFooty.com mobile app

This is why I say Australia is a dumb country … the same stupidity is why we get rapped of our natural resources.

 

[Gavin Excell]

It’s not Albo’s voice FFS

It required him to take it to the vote

 

[Toump Ass]

I feel this helps convey my point a bit more effectively. This means that there will always be a voice. Neither side can just get rid of it completely like has been done in the past.

So we can't get rid off the Voice- cool. So we just ignore it, or more likely, fill it with sycophants instead.

 

[nut]

It required him to take it to the vote

No it required someone to take it to the vote … who gives a Sh!t who that was….

Julian Leeser… wanted it also.. WTF is your point

 

[Toump Ass]

Wonder what Albo would do differently if he had a chance.

Yes campaign feels like it's been a bit of a trainwreck to be honest.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

CM86 is right, as ideologies communism is not as evil as fascism, the reason people suffered and continue to suffer under communist leaders like Stalin, Mao and Xi is that communism is used to gain support and power and then they just become dictatorships with all power and wealth concentrated in a few and violence used to control the population.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Marx recognized that communism would need to be instated by force.
Most communist states used violence on its own population.
Was there a communist state that didn't?

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I'm probably voting No, but open to being swayed if I hear a good argument.

What's the straightforward argument for voting yes?

From history, I feel I particularly get swayed by arguments not based on emotion or "do the right thing", proper reasons would be helpful.

It will allow a very small minority of Australia to have an input to the government with issues specific to them.
It will allow them to do this without being lost within the mainstream of issues from the majority of Australia.
The government will not be obliged to act upon this input unless they consider it prudent to do so.

Its simply acknowledging the rights of the aboriginals and Torres straight islanders to have this input.

I figure it won't affect me , so why block it.

 

[Saint Shags]

So we can't get rid off the Voice- cool. So we just ignore it, or more likely, fill it with sycophants instead.

That is a possibility.
But on the flip side, we could see real quantifiable improvement.

The Status Quo has shown to be an utter failure. Why not try something different?

 

[nut]

Wonder what Albo would do differently if he had a chance.

Yes campaign feels like it's been a bit of a trainwreck to be honest.

You are wondering about asking the people of Australia if they want to recognise the First Nation people in its constitution and provide a non binding advisory platform ??? Are you dense?
Seriously ???

Shouldn’t a “Liberal” be pro self determination?

S

 

[Gavin Excell]

No it required someone to take it to the vote … who gives a Sh!t who that was….

Julian Leeser… wanted it also.. WTF is your point

That he thought Liberals would play along

 

[sansian]

Yeah, it's very distressing that they do. They don't understand that the Voice itself is self-explanatory in that it only has advisory capacity. It's like they think the whole thing is a 'Threat to Parliament' or a 'Direct Order to Parliament'. As other posters have said before, it's easy to sell fear when all people have to do is vote to do nothing

I want to vote yes, but I am scared that the really good intent of this will be taken, bastardised and used in a way that it is not intedned. I know this could be just fear mungering from the No campaign.

Apparently there are constitutional lawyers and ex judges that say the scope is too wide etc. Surely they have experience and know what is involved.

The thing that worries me is that the voice starts commenting on issues that don't actually effect first peoples, but gets twisted to say it does and when it doesn't get accepted, straight to the high court and everything is cauight up.

Can this actually happen or is it just scare mongering again?

 

[nut]

That he thought Liberals would play along

So that’s Albo’s fault??? FMD

 

[nut]

I want to vote yes, but I am scared that the really good intent of this will be taken, bastardised and used in a way that it is not intedned. I know this could be just fear mungering from the No campaign.

Apparently there are constitutional lawyers and ex judges that say the scope is too wide etc. Surely they have experience and know what is involved.

The thing that worries me is that the voice starts commenting on issues that don't actually effect first peoples, but gets twisted to say it does and when it doesn't get accepted, straight to the high court and everything is cauight up.

Can this actually happen or is it just scare mongering again?

OMG… google it

 

[Gavin Excell]

So that’s Albo’s fault??? FMD

Yes it is
For all the noble intents going to a referendum without having support of the Opposition is pointless.
It's terrible politics

 

[nut]

Google it

 

[Festerz]

Wonder what Albo would do differently if he had a chance.

It’s a fair question.

Only 8 out of 44 referendums in Australia have got up.

A politician concerned about his political future and credibility wouldn’t bother would they?

A politician who believed in the idea would. And would surely use their political capital on winning a landslide victory to give it a shot knowing that was his/her best chance. Albanese did this and will be judged kindly for having stuck to his principles in the long term I think, unlike his political opponents.

History shows Australian PMs who have been in power in losing referendums have not suffered politically. Current polling of Albanese v Dutton have shown this trend will continue. Dutton will have won the battle but lost the war.