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.

 

[Kram]

Vast majority but that actually is semantic.

Of course your opinion on Indigenous affairs and welfare is much more informed and important that actual Indigenous Australians.

Well I seeing as I have significant Indigenous ancestry and have personally experienced racism involving my own mother am I allowed to have an opinion your majesty?

 

[Elixuh]

Your mistake is believing I have to validate my view to you. Why? It’s your view asking for change; it’s your view positing an accusation; the logical onus is on you to sway my mind, not the other way round. Your view is the overwhelming minority. Mine is the majority. Self-righteous indignation only sets you back and makes me doubt your intentions.

You don’t, but you should. I’m the upgraded model.

 

[Tadpole]

no voters don't read they just want someone to give them the details

Can they even read, it is it just their comprehension skills that are severely lacking?

 

[Demonic Ascent]

The pamphlet was irrelevant. it had no detail on it.

A lot of people would have put it in the bin without reading it.

Is that what you think? Send out a vague pamphlet and that's it job done?

What did you want, a TEDtalk? It's not an overly complex matter, people complaining about a lack of information are grasping at straws to justify their decision.

 

[Engimal v3]

than actual Indigenous Australians.

 

[phantom13]

Well I seeing as I have significant Indigenous ancestry and have personally experienced racism involving my own mother am I allowed to have an opinion your majesty?

You can do whatever you like, pretty big logical fallacy in your argument and ultimately, the whole "it wont do anything" remains a lie.

 

[phantom13]

Thats fair, shouldnt have made an assumption. Seem insane to me to stand in the face of what the overwhelming majority of your people want and still a decision based on misinformation but ill cop that.

 

[Kram]

You can do whatever you like, pretty big logical fallacy in your argument and ultimately, the whole "it wont do anything" remains a lie.

You are a nice well meaning bloke but I don't think I've ever seen many so aggressively and arrogantly opinionated.

 

[Dirty_banchez]

The voice wouldn't have closed the gap. Indigenous Australians need seats in the HoR. I just don't see any other way.

We have residents on Thursday Island wanting self-governance which is not going to happen. Interesting times ahead.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I said a few pages back there should be a complete audit on it all to see whos skimming the money. Seems a reasonable option. Unsure why any yes voter would be against this? Its obvious the funds aren't getting there so lets find out where its going...

Will achieve more than the voice would. Suspect some career pollies have too much to hide here

How do you stop the money from an audit going into the pockets of pwc or similar who produce glossy bullshit and no actual useful outcome, only increasing costs

 

[Crankyhawk]

Was Norman ostracised by authorities following his support?

I think he was, am on phone so hard to link.

Edit already answered better by other posters. I remember only learning about Peter not long before he died as he was interviewed on SEN - I recall being very moved by what he was saying. They replayed it after he died as well.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The voice wouldn't have closed the gap. Indigenous Australians need seats in the HoR. I just don't see any other way.

We have residents on Thursday Island wanting self-governance which is not going to happen. Interesting times ahead.

How would your system of HOR seats for them work?
Similarly to what was being discussed for the Voice?
Because , as we've seen, MP's who happen to be Indigenous are not necessarily representing the Indigenous people.

 

[Chetan Gupta]

wWho is making that assumption???? The voice isn’t all about negative things … it was also about conserving a culture …
You basically just voted against a permanent voice for those communities …. Lucky you and your family don’t have to live in them.

As I was telling I support recognition for first people. And consultation with communities. But Voice was not just recognition but for improving disadvantage. Constitution is permanent thing. So if putting it then it assumes permanent disadvantage. And assumes all Aboriginal descent are disadvantaged.

My children have grandparents from four cultures including Aboriginal. We celebrate all. We don't need it in constitution to keep culture.

 

[Crankyhawk]

EXACTLY FFS. Why are you arguing with me

This is proof the gap will never close. Somehow its racist to audit white run departments that offer services to indigenous. Do you see how ludicrous that is?!?! Given that, how do you expect anyone to have difficult conversations about this in parliament when legitimate questions/criticisms are off limits?

Those audits (of white services as you say) are also completely ineffective- we still see increasing waste.
Sack every one who does not provide a component of front facing service.

 

[faible]

Interesting

Filmed in "Eastman colour"

Eastmancolor - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[burge13]

How do you stop the money from an audit going into the pockets of pwc or similar who produce glossy bullshit and no actual useful outcome, only increasing costs

No idea here

Bit sad people don't want the billions spent looked at to improve it all because -

People indigenous supposedly get the money so it's somehow racist to want to spend it better
Their political team isn't calling for it
Worried government won't **** up the spending paying for the audit

Don't you think?

 

[Chief]

A lot of types around here I wouldn't be surprised if the referendum was more about themselves first and the actual welfare of indigenous Australians a distant 2nd.

Hence they voted No.

 

[Number37]

The voice wouldn't have closed the gap. Indigenous Australians need seats in the HoR. I just don't see any other way.

We have residents on Thursday Island wanting self-governance which is not going to happen. Interesting times ahead.

How would you know it wouldn't have closed the gap?

To get seats in the HoR there would need to be constitutional change.

 

[Gavin Excell]

No idea here

Bit sad people don't want the billions spent looked at to improve it all because -

People indigenous supposedly get the money so it's somehow racist to want to spend it better
Their political team isn't calling for it
Worried government won't * up the spending paying for the audit

Don't you think?

The whole idea of the Voice was to give advice on how to spend it better

As has been outlined to you previously auditing is already undertaken but is narrow in its focus

Dutton fully knows this. The demand for "audits!" is straight out of Howard playbook to justify axing ATSIC

 

[Dirty_banchez]

How would your system of HOR seats for them work?
Similarly to what was being discussed for the Voice?
Because , as we've seen, MP's who happen to be Indigenous are not necessarily representing the Indigenous people.

Yeah it would be tricky. I guess one solution would be to increase the number of seats in the HoR to 251 or 301, and have the maximum size of an electorate set. Essentially, breaking up larger regional/remote seats into small electorates which would cover indigenous communities.

Metropolitan seats would have to increase to ensure the city/country divide did not favour any party.

If Tony Abbott and Dutton really want 'Assimilation', then Indigenous Australians must be better represented within the legislative branch. And 151 seats is inadequate given the size of our country.

 

[Dirty_banchez]

How would you know it wouldn't have closed the gap?

To get seats in the HoR there would need to be constitutional change.

HoR seat numbers could be increased without a constitutional amendment.

 

[Tyrohad]

Weren't the Voice representatives going to be decided on at the grassroots level and not be gormless suits from Canberra? Wasn't that the whole point of it? A translatory body made up from people who know the different cultures best and who could make that known TO the pollies rather than having it be dictated to from outside the community?

Wasn't that the ENTIRE point? Healing the disconnect?

So it's not one suit but a multitude of people representing the different groups all across Australia? And you're happy to pay a public servants wages for these multitude of public servants that only serves 3% of the public? Not accounting thier expenses to bring said issues to Canberra?

Last time I checked, I'm pretty sure elected MPs liase with community elders in their electorate. How is that different to the Voice?

 

[JackOutback]

As I was telling I support recognition for first people. And consultation with communities. But Voice was not just recognition but for improving disadvantage. Constitution is permanent thing. So if putting it then it assumes permanent disadvantage. And assumes all Aboriginal descent are disadvantaged.

My children have grandparents from four cultures including Aboriginal. We celebrate all. We don't need it in constitution to keep culture.

No it doesn't. If the Voice resolved all outstanding issues and closed the gap, then it could just advise on things like maintaining connection to culture. Or it could even be removed by referendum.

 

[Saint]

The voice wouldn't have closed the gap. Indigenous Australians need seats in the HoR. I just don't see any other way.

We have residents on Thursday Island wanting self-governance which is not going to happen. Interesting times ahead.

I wouldn't be surprised to see progressive State Govts grant greater levels of self-governance to indigenous areas, as they already do. The problem in southern states is that a lot of those indigenous areas were originally forced re-settlements and aren't historically a great look.

 

[Tyrohad]

No it doesn't. If the Voice resolved all outstanding issues and closed the gap, then it could just advise on things like maintaining connection to culture. Or it could even be removed by referendum.

I love it when we spend half a billion dollars like it's nothing. How about legislate it and put the money to better use