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.

 

[FIGJAM]

We're happy to have that doddery old fool as our Head of State and specifically mentioned in the constitution but it's too much to ask to mention our original inhabitants in it. So much for national pride.

Split the question and you'd have had unwavering support from all parties (save for a Queensland crackpot or two).

 

[Toump Ass]

You know they can do multiple things at the same time, yeah?

Since when. Useless campaigners running the country can't even manage one thing at once.

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

We get * all benefits from state and federal governments up in Kennedy. Development is slow compared to urban areas. The aid that we do get goes into welfare because we get * all up here. Rinse repeat.

Then you lot wonder why we take harsh stances on what you think is a straight forward issue. You city slickers are out of touch when it comes to rural matters. And you think an advisory body will be a step towards change? Lmao get ****ed

You haven't answered his question

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

It was pretty nasty

In the early 90s my wife’s family were cutting the throats of their sheep because they couldn’t afford bullets

That sort of stuff sours you on the politicians who made the decision for a lifetime

It almost seems like 'hidden history'. I've never heard of it before! I can see why the distrust grew. Peoples' livelihoods aren't something you should tinker with unless you've got a compensatory scheme already set up.

 

[peetoo]

Or New England where the sometime deputy pm runs a protest campaign each time he’s looking for re election?

People, he’s been the deputy PM? Why would next time be different?

At least Katter seems likeable. Bananaby by just comes across as surly and contrary

 

[Tyrohad]

So your actually advocating for a voice than? Local voices is what it was supposed to be about.

We have a voice, the seat of Kennedy...

Yet what do has it done for the community compared to an urban area.

 

[Aristotle Pickett]

The attack on remote communities by Mundine and Price calling them rapists all the time is nothing short of rank racism

 

[Gralin]

Its a very white left wing thing to criticize white people generally for political results they dont like, while ignoring ethnically diverse minorities for the political decisions they make.

The ethnically diverse heavy Western Sydney seats were all strongly no, but you won't hear labels of racism about them. Those same seats were also strongly no for the same sex marriage plebiscite. Didnt hear left wing criticism about it though.

The money behind the no campaign came from US Christian lobby groups and people like Clive and Gina and Twiggy

They also targeted migrant communities, Mundine himself said this, that they knew they could target these communities to sway them.

The No Campaign was planned, run and funded by white conservatives with the help of people like Price and Mundine who were happy to be the faces of it for their personal benefit.

It's a white conservative thing to point to the fact they get migrants to agree with them as either proof that they're not racist or that the migrants are the real issue

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

We have a voice, the seat of Kennedy...

Yet what do has it done for the community compared to an urban area.

All your doing and saying is advocating for a voice. Take the responsibility out of a government representatives hands.

 

[Chief]

Split the question and you'd have had unwavering support from all parties (save for a Queensland crackpot or two).

Nah you would have gotten the same shit from Dutton and Crew whose aim was to damage the Labor government by appealing to racism and fear.

They admitted this was what they were doing when they campaigned against their own plan.

 

[Swan4Life]

Price will be the conduit, who will continue to consult with aboriginal people in remote communities who are the most marginalised - as she has done in recent years. Kerryn Liddle will also play a significant role.

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

Price will be the conduit, who will continue to consult with aboriginal people in remote communities who are the most marginalised - as she has done in recent years. Kerryn Liddle will also play a significant role.

So why wasn't anything done in the previous decade than? Are you trying to erase history and past efforts.

 

[Footy Is The Win]

Half a billion dollars later all we get is a shit fight.

Well done Albo, couldn't see that coming.

 

[Richard Pryor]

The irony being the electorates with the highest yes vote have the highest old, rich white population …

this highlights to me how weird it is the LNP has continued trying to morph into US Republicans. I feel like historically the LNP is more rich toffs who want to be able to rort the tax system, moreso than American style right wing ideologues, right up until John Howard when the culture war rot really started to get pushed.

 

[baris]

We're happy to have that doddery old fool as our Head of State and specifically mentioned in the constitution but it's too much to ask to mention our original inhabitants in it. So much for national pride.

You're really out of touch with reality aren't you. A large proportion of the no voters don't have a problem with recognising indigenous people in the constitution on the proviso it is simply that. The thing they have a problem with is the voice element or any element that does or can give them rights over all other Australians. It is that simple.

 

[Chief]

Price will be the conduit, who will continue to consult with aboriginal people in remote communities who are the most marginalised - as she has done in recent years. Kerryn Liddle will also play a significant role.

Two voices! It's an improvement I suppose.

 

[Gough]

You're really out of touch with reality aren't you. A large proportion of the no voters don't have a problem with recognising indigenous people in the constitution on the proviso it is simply that. The thing they have a problem with is the voice element or any element that does or can give them rights over all other Australians. It is that simple.

The reality is Australians had the chance to enshrine Indigenous people in the Constitution and we turned it down as per the result yesterday. If that makes you uncomfortable it should.

 

[FIGJAM]

Nah you would have gotten the same s**t from Dutton and Crew whose aim was to damage the Labor government by appealing to racism and fear.

Nah! That's political suicide.

The question would basically read "Am I racist?". Nobody in their right mind could hitch their wagon to saying No to a benign Constitutional Recognition.

 

[Chief]

A large proportion of the no voters don't have a problem with recognising indigenous people in the constitution on the proviso it is simply that.

A platitude?

The thing they have a problem with is the voice element or any element that does or can give them rights over all other Australians. It is that simple.

So - it's OK as long as there is no actual change?

 

[Roobs321]

And the irony is 'yes' voters denigrate Bob Katter for being outspoken and a right winger but he's just the voice for the locals up here....

I mean come on, he's one of the longest seating member for Kennedy and he gets laughed out of federal parliament.

Then you guys have the nerve to ask why a seat such as Kennedy has a stance such as the one on the referendum.

The rural/urban disconnect is clear

A couple of us in this thread live in Kennedy and still voted yes as despite the clear local issues around services and disadvantages it remains a straightforward issue for a responsible voter and requires you to meet the issue at hand on good faith and think for the greater good at the federal level beyond your own local circumstances or most pressing issues. Own your no rather than this empty city slicker rhetoric projection which lacks nuance

 

[Festerz]

Price will be the conduit, who will continue to consult with aboriginal people in remote communities who are the most marginalised - as she has done in recent years. Kerryn Liddle will also play a significant role.

Price - who believes the strong YES result from remote Indigenous communities across Australia, including in the NT is due to manipulation from the AEC?

AEC responds after Jacinta Nampijinpa Price questions ‘conduct’ in Indigenous communities that voted yes

Price claimed there was ‘manipulation’ in remote communities but electoral commission says ‘ability to campaign at any polling place … was the same for everyone’

www.theguardian.com

I have no idea but would think, this, her strong and vocal leadership of the NO campaign and her comments about colonialism being generally good for Indigenous peoples will generate a lot of anger and disappointment in those communities and make her totally unsuited for the healing role that is now required after this Referendum. But that is not really what Dutton is concerned about, is it?

 

[Chief]

Nah! That's political suicide.

If he thinks it will benefit him and his, he will do it.

The question would basically read "Am I racist?". Nobody in their right mind could hitch their wagon to saying No to a benign Constitutional Recognition.

If it was a Labor proposal, I bet his crew would figure out an angle which is "yes but not this" or "yes but not now".

They just did it with their OWN PARTY'S PLAN!

 

[AlwaysHawks15]

You're really out of touch with reality aren't you. A large proportion of the no voters don't have a problem with recognising indigenous people in the constitution on the proviso it is simply that. The thing they have a problem with is the voice element or any element that does or can give them rights over all other Australians. It is that simple.

See that's where the term misinformation comes from. When it's a marginalised race of people you have to be specific to their needs because making policies with everybody in mind isn't working. Its a unique situation not alike many races around the world and it needs to be treated as such. We are all equal doesn't apply. This seems to get lost on people such as yourself.

 

[sherb]

Half a billion dollars later all we get is a s**t fight.

Well done Albo, couldn't see that coming.

The LNP turned it into a s**t fight when they opposed it.

 

[Richard Pryor]

A platitude?

So - it's OK as long as there is no actual change?

In my informal discussions at work and stuff I feel the general vibe was that a lot of people feel like if political change doesn't benefit them personally it must be detrimental to their life somehow. So regrettably it feels like indigenous people will only get platitudes if voting is used to determine outcomes.

What's the old saying? If 51 percent vote to kill the 49 it's democracy in action.