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.

 

[TheEscapeClub]

It was fine until LNP gutted it, took away it's powers and responsibilities and then the corrupt/carpet-baggers set in. It was nowhere near as corrupt as the last LNP Govt.

That story is what the LNP (Howard) sold, but he'd opposed it for 10+ years (while it worked very well) and requisitioned audit after audit which found no corruption or problems. Then 5 years later, with Latham leading the ALP and two leftover idiots in charge of what was left of ATSIC, he was finally able to disband it. (He didn't consider the option of just re-structuring).

Cool story. If it worked well we wouldn't be in this mess which has been around well before ATSIC came along.

 

[JackOutback]

I think most people know Indigenous people are generally suffering from poor outcomes, I think they know the majority of Aboriginal people support this, so yeah, I think they know it's a giant FU to a disadvantaged group of Australians and it's the wrong thing to do. They can try to justify it with specious reasoning or just be quiet and pretend they didn't vote no, but it's a pretty shit thing to do and I don't think you'll find an acknowledged no voter in 10 years except those out and proud that they prevented Aboriginal people from getting something.

 

[TheEscapeClub]

I think most people know Indigenous people are generally suffering from poor outcomes, I think they know the majority of Aboriginal people support this, so yeah, I think they know it's a giant FU to a disadvantaged group of Australians and it's the wrong thing to do. They can try to justify it with specious reasoning or just be quiet and pretend they didn't vote no, but it's a pretty s**t thing to do and I don't think you'll find an acknowledged no voter in 10 years except those out and proud that they prevented Aboriginal people from getting something.

That sounds like me trying to find someone in WA that voted for McGowan at the last election. After 12 months of unfettered.power, no one would admit to it.

 

[compact72]

The attack you get for people voting 'No' is astounding.

The racism card pulled out straight away.

For a group of people that are voting 'Yes', they know how to really attack people for having a voice.

 

[Osho]

I think if you’re voting no and you know you’ll be criticized for doing it and that’s enough to make you quiet about it then you know it’s wrong.

I don’t agree with the No voters here or anywhere but I can at least respect those willing to admit how they’re voting

Here you go, a primer on the Australian Ballot, or secret ballot.

Secret ballot introduced | Australia’s Defining Moments Digital Classroom | National Museum of Australia

In 1856 South Australia became the first state in Australia where all men were given the vote (universal male suffrage), making it one of the most democratic places in the world at that time. In the same year the secret ballot — the casting of votes in secret — was introduced in Victoria...

digital-classroom.nma.gov.au

 

[Chief]

I have and you sooked up about it.

I vote no and Yes voters won't shut up about it.

You vote Yes and I don't care why, it's your vote and not mine.

You kind of keep bringing it up.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

The No vote is going to get up but no one wants to admit to being a no voter.

Doesn’t that say something?

We know it’s the wrong thing to do but also * it.

I would think it's along the lines of how much of a shouting match polarising topics end up becomes. Proper debate just degrades in it.
It's not unique to the referendum either.

 

[Chief]

The attack you get for people voting 'No' is astounding.

The racism card pulled out straight away.

For a group of people that are voting 'Yes', they know how to really attack people for having a voice.

Have you seen the streams of vitriol over the "divisive and racist voice" from no voters on social media?

 

[Pugz89]

Maybe, I’d say it’s more likely they know it’s a s**t thing to do and don’t want to admit it.

That's based on your POV. I'd hazard a guess the overwhelming amount of no voters are voting no, because they think it's the right thing to do, hence voting that way.

 

[compact72]

Have you seen the streams of vitriol over the "divisive and racist voice" from no voters on social media?

Nope. Don't use social media tbh

Sad, so many uneducated opinions out there

 

[ElectricG]

Have you seen the streams of vitriol over the "divisive and racist voice" from no voters on social media?

As someone who spends too much time on social media… I haven’t actually. Nothing like the same level of hectoring.

 

[Goroyals22]

The No vote is going to get up but no one wants to admit to being a no voter.

Doesn’t that say something?

We know it’s the wrong thing to do but also * it.

I have no problem admitting it..


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Chief]

Nope. Don't use social media tbh

Sad, so many uneducated opinions out there

Usually it's the "Sally22398167" accounts with a bunch of other retweets of things like Pauline Hanson or Q-adjacent stuff.

 

[MrKK]

I think if you’re voting no and you know you’ll be criticized for doing it and that’s enough to make you quiet about it then you know it’s wrong.

I don’t agree with the No voters here or anywhere but I can at least respect those willing to admit how they’re voting

We have Yes supporters in here who can't even order a coffee without starting an argument. It's hardly surprising No voters don't want to engage with them.

 

[Not Important]

Nope. Don't use social media tbh

Sad, so many uneducated opinions out there

but that applies to the medya generally. ya need to seek out those who have opinions that qualify as "educated"

 

[Not Important]

this >

 

[MrKK]

Usually it's the "Sally22398167" accounts with a bunch of other retweets of things like Pauline Hanson or Q-adjacent stuff.

I assume those types of accounts are bots so not reflective of any real people on either side.

 

[CM86]

People don't admit to voting 'no', because then they are asked 'why?'.

And it's almost always a case of them being ignorant, tricked by misinformation, or just plain hatred of Indigenous people.

 

[Chief]

I assume those types of accounts are bots so not reflective of any real people on either side.

I assume they are very real.

 

[CM86]

A lot of posters in this thread are cowards.
They're voting 'no', but claim they're voting 'yes'.

And it's not because they're 'scared' of 'yes' voters.

It's because they're pathetic and know they can't actually justify their reasons.
The truth is they've adopted culture war bullshit into part of their personality.

 

[Chief]

A lot of posters in this thread are cowards.
They're voting 'no', but claim they're voting 'yes'.

And it's not because they're 'scared' of 'yes' voters.

It's because they're pathetic and know they can't actually justify their reasons.
The truth is they've adopted culture war bullshit into part of their personality.

I think you're being a bit uncharitable to some people.

 

[JackOutback]

The attack you get for people voting 'No' is astounding.

The racism card pulled out straight away.

For a group of people that are voting 'Yes', they know how to really attack people for having a voice.

I won't say no voters are racist, I will say it's a shit thing for non-Indigenous people to do to a disadvantaged group of Australians asking for help without a valid reason that isn't easily dissected. It's up to the no voter to interrogate the reasons for doing this shit thing to Aboriginal people.

 

[HairyO]

It was fine until LNP gutted it, took away it's powers and responsibilities and then the corrupt/carpet-baggers set in. It was nowhere near as corrupt as the last LNP Govt.

That story is what the LNP (Howard) sold, but he'd opposed it for 10+ years (while it worked very well) and requisitioned audit after audit which found no corruption or problems. Then 5 years later, with Latham leading the ALP and two leftover idiots in charge of what was left of ATSIC, he was finally able to disband it. (He didn't consider the option of just re-structuring).

Fine? Tens of billions of dollars in funding and by all measures things got worse over time.

Can you point to the successful programmes Howard ruined?

It would have been far better if every Aborigine was just given cash directly.

But ATSIC sure did have some nice artwork across all their buildings. So they were very good for artists.

 

[Pakenhamsaint]

I won't say no voters are racist, I will say it's a s**t thing for non-Indigenous people to do to a disadvantaged group of Australians asking for help without a valid reason that isn't easily dissected. It's up to the no voter to interrogate the reasons for doing this s**t thing to Aboriginal people.

It is easy to see why though.
Many feel they're not getting help(particularly those less well off) themselves.

 

[VicPark Bitter]

The No vote is going to get up but no one wants to admit to being a no voter.

Doesn’t that say something?

We know it’s the wrong thing to do but also * it.

I'm voting No and have said so to everyone that has asked me.
maybe don't be such a sanctimonious tosser.