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.

 

[CM86]

I'll pass, do you realise how busy this month is with meetings that are WAY more important to me. I don't believe politicians and it is both sides, it's literally which one do I hate the least, US have it right. Do tell if there's no tax how is it being paid for? That's just a huge red flag personally. Reality is we'll talk it over as a family in a week and a half spend all of 2 mins, and decide as a family how we vote, I wouldn't even have a clue what my other family members are thinking as 2 of them live 2 hours away. When I talk to them it's not about politics, usually about their home life etc.

You've repeatedly brought up this claim of a new tax.
As I know it's not true, I'd like you to either explain where you got that idea from, or stop raising it, as it's misinformation to fuel fear and opposition to The Voice.

Third time asking you where you got this claim of a new tax from.

 

[Gralin]

Anybody left with the suspicion that it might not be her own words Price is speaking at the Press Club? It's suspiciously well worded.

not sure this is the win you think it is Gough

 

[MP_]

Then release the financials of it, there's just too much of a gamble and there's one thing I won't punt with and that's when it MAY impact on my budget. Look you may be correct but at this stage I am not willing to take a punt on "it should", I'd want certainty, and let the leader live and get sacked by this action one way or the other. At the moment it seems he wants an out clause.

Are you this up in arms about fuel prices going up, food going up, rates going up ? I don’t believe voting yes will cost me anymore, but I’m a compassionate person who wants to see equity in this country and to our First Nations people. I’m not actually voting yes for me but for the original custodians of this land.

 

[Gethelred]

Then release the financials of it, there's just too much of a gamble and there's one thing I won't punt with and that's when it MAY impact on my budget. Look you may be correct but at this stage I am not willing to take a punt on "it should", I'd want certainty, and let the leader live and get sacked by this action one way or the other. At the moment it seems he wants an out clause.

You're asking people to prove a negative. This is an illogical request; I get that you don't particularly care for logic Luke, but that's more or less the end of it. This is the reason in the onus is on the person making the claim - in this instance, that instituting the Voice will cost you money - rather than to disprove the claim; the 'burden of proof' is on you to support your statement.

Can you support your statement that the Voice will cost you money, Luke?

 

[Magnum27]

Even though i'm already voting Yes , the religious nutters being on the no side makes me wish i had more than one vote.

Surely being on the opposite to those ****wits should be more than enough reason to vote YES.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

You're asking people to prove a negative. This is an illogical request; I get that you don't particularly care for logic Luke, but that's more or less the end of it. This is the reason in the onus is on the person making the claim - in this instance, that instituting the Voice will cost you money - rather than to disprove the claim; the 'burden of proof' is on you to support your statement.

Can you support your statement that the Voice will cost you money, Luke?

In breaking news, i can't prove that the earth will not disintegrate for unknown reasons tomorrow.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

You've repeatedly brought up this claim of a new tax.
As I know it's not true, I'd like you to either explain where you got that idea from, or stop raising it, as it's misinformation to fuel fear and opposition to The Voice.

Third time asking you where you got this claim of a new tax from.

Logic says these people won’t work for free, so where is the money coming from? If it’s not a tax the government should tell us where it’s coming from? Otherwise I’m not confidently betting on useless politicians who have shown over and over again they are awful (all of them not just this one). Really wish it was an optional vote would not even bother if I could. I care about bottom lines not some airy fairy words from a politician saying “don’t worry leave it to us with implementation” basically. Up to the government to release how it affects normal taxpayers.

 

[Gralin]

Logic says these people won’t work for free, so where is the money coming from? If it’s not a tax the government should tell us where it’s coming from? Otherwise I’m not confidently betting on useless politicians who have shown over and over again they are awful (all of them not just this one). Really wish it was an optional vote would not even bother if I could. I care about bottom lines not some airy fairy words from a politician saying “don’t worry leave it to us with implementation” basically. Up to the government to release how it affects normal taxpayers.

if your taxes aren't getting raised its not costing you money

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Are you this up in arms about fuel prices going up, food going up, rates going up ? I don’t believe voting yes will cost me anymore, but I’m a compassionate person who wants to see equity in this country and to our First Nations people. I’m not actually voting yes for me but for the original custodians of this land.

Not fussed about those prices I can CHOOSE whether to drive or not and what I eat. I budget every week

 

[LukeParkerno1]

if your taxes aren't getting raised its not costing you money

Yeah well not convinced it’s not that’s just a “don’t worry it won’t” until they realise they have to sneakily pay for it somehow. Good reason people are looking at tax havens these days

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Logic says these people won’t work for free, so where is the money coming from? If it’s not a tax the government should tell us where it’s coming from? Otherwise I’m not confidently betting on useless politicians who have shown over and over again they are awful (all of them not just this one). Really wish it was an optional vote would not even bother if I could. I care about bottom lines not some airy fairy words from a politician saying “don’t worry leave it to us with implementation” basically. Up to the government to release how it affects normal taxpayers.

Gee, you must have really hated all the grifting and corruption under Morrison and Gladys.

I’m surprised you still voted for them.

 

[Gralin]

Yeah well not convinced it’s not that’s just a “don’t worry it won’t” until they realise they have to sneakily pay for it somehow. Good reason people are looking at tax havens these days

Now you're into conspiracy theory territory

When was the last time a Government increased income taxes in this country?

How do you think they pay for staff currently, do you have a special parliament staff levy you get charged?

Do you worry that when a government says they are going to employ more teachers or nurses or cops that you're going to get a bigger tax bill?

 

[MP_]

Not fussed about those prices I can CHOOSE whether to drive or not and what I eat. I budget every week

Fair enough. I honestly feel that voice will allow for the current money that is dedicated to indigenous peoples to be better spent and therefore is unlikely to hit my pocket at all. I also feel privileged enough in my life that I could take a hit if it helps someone else out, but I understand not everyone is in that position.

 

[CM86]

Logic says these people won’t work for free, so where is the money coming from? If it’s not a tax the government should tell us where it’s coming from? Otherwise I’m not confidently betting on useless politicians who have shown over and over again they are awful (all of them not just this one). Really wish it was an optional vote would not even bother if I could. I care about bottom lines not some airy fairy words from a politician saying “don’t worry leave it to us with implementation” basically. Up to the government to release how it affects normal taxpayers.

I already answered that, you've ignored it and repeated the same claims and questions.

Government grants, gov funding, states, donations etc.

All things that will be decided and changed by successive Governments that you will be voting for.


I think the issue is, you have absolutely no idea what The Indigenous Voice to Parliament is. Or even how Parliament functions.
Which isn't a bad thing, and is not unusual for many Australians.

But if it concerns you this much, you should send time looking into it and understanding it.

Im happy to answer questions if you're not sure.

So, as you've just made it up, and it's based on nothing. Can you please stop repeating that it will impact you financially.


This is ignoring the fact that it's to help close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people...
And you've made it pretty clear you don't consider them equals.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Yeah well not convinced it’s not that’s just a “don’t worry it won’t” until they realise they have to sneakily pay for it somehow. Good reason people are looking at tax havens these days

Yeah tax havens are a new thing.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Gee, you must have really hated all the grifting and corruption under Morrison and Gladys.

I’m surprised you still voted for them.

Liberal will always be better for my family for a number of reasons (that I don’t have to go into) did I like the politicians Nup but if it is better for my family that’s where I vote always have and pretty much always will, very rarely about policies.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Fair enough. I honestly feel that voice will allow for the current money that is dedicated to indigenous peoples to be better spent and therefore is unlikely to hit my pocket at all. I also feel privileged enough in my life that I could take a hit if it helps someone else out, but I understand not everyone is in that position.

Each to their own and that’s why everyone has a vote, probably why the No will win.

 

[Roby]

Then release the financials of it, there's just too much of a gamble and there's one thing I won't punt with and that's when it MAY impact on my budget. Look you may be correct but at this stage I am not willing to take a punt on "it should", I'd want certainty, and let the leader live and get sacked by this action one way or the other. At the moment it seems he wants an out clause.

The referendum really doesn't revolve around you, but whatever. I guess you missed the point.

 

[Osho]

Were your suggestions 'nuance' and avoid 'blunders'? If not, could you please explain again?


What have the blunders for the 'Yes' campaign actually been?? Are there any?
Let alone Anything even slightly comparable to the 'No campaign?

Tactical blunders aplenty, from inception. To be expected to some extent with such diverse opinion on which tactics to deploy. But here we are. 4 weeks left. Apparently support still dropping. But that's based on intention, so it's not over yet.

And most recently regarding Marcia's comments.

"Compared to the no campaign" - what kind of comment is that, what do I care about the no campaign, they are predictable and disingenuous. Wouldn't expect anything else. You know, we hold ourselves to higher standards than just being better than the no campaign. Such a superficial metric.

A successful yes campaign is still a matter of self determination imo. Still time.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Tactical blunders aplenty, from inception. To be expected to some extent with such diverse opinion on which tactics to deploy. But here we are. 4 weeks left. Apparently support still dropping. But that's based on intention, so it's not over yet.

And most recently regarding Marcia's comments.

"Compared to the no campaign" - what kind of comment is that, what do I care about the no campaign, they are predictable and disingenuous. Wouldn't expect anything else. You know, we hold ourselves to higher standards than just being better than the no campaign. Such a superficial metric.

A successful yes campaign is still a matter of self determination imo. Still time.

Cherry picking a comment from a speech, out of context. Well done, newscorp have trained you well.

 

[Osho]

Cherry picking a comment from a speech, out of context. Well done, newscorp have trained you well.

So you fellas can't handle criticism of the yes campaign. That's weak.

 

[Beerfish]

I also feel privileged enough in my life that I could take a hit if it helps someone else out, but I understand not everyone is in that position.

Yeah some people have to go to Octoberfest.

 

[wayniac]

Anybody left with the suspicion that it might not be her own words Price is speaking at the Press Club? It's suspiciously well worded.

Is your reaction to her eloquent presentation and excellent follow-up questions a tad judgemental or outright racist? Doesn't she fit yopur stereotype of the helpless aboriginal? I think she's a remarkable woman and as far as Albo goes, meh.

 

[Sttew]

Yeah some people have to go to Octoberfest.

€14.90 a beer at Oktoberfest, thats $25!!

 

[CM86]

Tactical blunders aplenty, from inception. To be expected to some extent with such diverse opinion on which tactics to deploy. But here we are. 4 weeks left. Apparently support still dropping. But that's based on intention, so it's not over yet.

And most recently regarding Marcia's comments.

"Compared to the no campaign" - what kind of comment is that, what do I care about the no campaign, they are predictable and disingenuous. Wouldn't expect anything else. You know, we hold ourselves to higher standards than just being better than the no campaign. Such a superficial metric.

A successful yes campaign is still a matter of self determination imo. Still time.

Ok, so I'll ask again.

Were your suggestions 'nuance' and avoid 'blunders'? If not, could you please explain again?​

What have the blunders for the 'Yes' campaign actually been?? Are there any?​

Let alone Anything even slightly comparable to the 'No campaign?​

​

I'm asking again, because you're acting like you want to engage, but you're not engaging.
And you seem to attack people who push you to actually engage.



And "Compared to the 'No' campaign" is an obvious question, because it's the direct comparison.
And it leads deeper into my main point, that the 'Yes' campaign has been run well, but is constantly and unfairly attacked for any hint at a perceived slight.
Whereas the 'No' campaign that's leading most of the accusations, has literally been caught out multiple times for deliberate and dishonest acts.

It is YOUR suggestion that 'blunders' are having this impact, and causing this outcome.
So why is it only the perceived 'blunders' from the 'Yes' campaign that have an impact, and not the 'No' campaign?