Play Nice Referendum - Indigenous Voice in Parliament

[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.

 

[Rob R]

What tosh. Do we acknowledge the SAS war criminals too? Most military members aren’t in a dangerous job and are well compensated, they don’t really fight for our freedoms either.

Scummo tried to bring that “thank you for your service” rubbish into our culture, thank f**k Albo has dropped it.

That thankyou for service crap angered a lot of service personnel as well as it removed the separation between veterans (only those who have served ina warzone) and people who never went into harms way - especially the bludgers who have never left Canberra.

Sent from my SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[schneebly111]

That thankyou for service crap angered a lot of service personnel as well as it removed the separation between veterans (only those who have served ina warzone) and people who never went into harms way - especially the bludgers who have never left Canberra.

Sent from my SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Virgin Airlines a few years back was going to start “thanking the diggers” in announcements and giving priority access to “veterans”.

The proposal was so unpopular and condemned by almost everyone who wasn’t a nationalist bootlicker that it was dropped within a day.

An Indigenous Acknowledgement of Country is a completely different thing. Far right cookers are just using “thank the diggers for their service” to smear indigenous people.

 

[schneebly111]

 

[Ghost Patrol]

 

[Festerz]

 

[The Punter]

I would humbly suggest it was in trouble the instant Dutton et al decided to oppose it.

 

[killtaker1993]

I will be voting YES because I am not a racist and I am educated

 

[Rob R]

It is in no danger at all, just people trying to make a story and ensure the yes vote continues to get donations etc.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[checkraiseulite]

that ANU paper is a pretty ordinary document.

 

[Chief]

that ANU paper is a pretty ordinary document.

Link?

 

[checkraiseulite]

Link?

the one up the top of the page.

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

 

[Chief]

the one up the top of the page.

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

Looks fine to me.

What in particular do you take issue with?

 

[checkraiseulite]

Looks fine to me.

What in particular do you take issue with?

from reading your posts you are clearly quite pro-voice, so that’s somewhat understandable.

i don’t take issue with the content. i just don’t think it really answer questions/concerns most uninformed undecided/leaning no voters might have and just keeps repeating vague jargon. some of it was contradictory.

found it strange that the cost of it wasn’t mentioned once.

the characterisation of the voice as “subservient” to parliament was strange.

 

[FredLeDeux]

from reading your posts you are clearly quite pro-voice, so that’s somewhat understandable.

i don’t take issue with the content. i just don’t think it really answer questions/concerns most uninformed undecided/leaning no voters might have and just keeps repeating vague jargon. some of it was contradictory.

found it strange that the cost of it wasn’t mentioned once.

the characterisation of the voice as “subservient” to parliament was strange.

Told 'em they needed a cartoon version for the "undecided"

 

[Chief]

i just don’t think it really answer questions/concerns most uninformed undecided/leaning no voters might have

Like what?

To be honest I am guessing any questions after that are stupid ones. Like "Where is my white man of European descent's voice to parliament??"

 

[checkraiseulite]

Like what?

To be honest I am guessing any questions after that are stupid ones. Like "Where is my white man of European descent's voice to parliament??"

what’s the plan? do people on the voice get paid? how much and who by? will they have staff? will they have a budget for consultants like every other government department / body?

the article makes it clear that “it’s the vibe” and parliament will work out the finer detail later.

you only have to look at brexit (which has been a complete disaster for the uk and i bet people on both sides of politics wish had never been held) to realise that’s not a great approach.

obviously the stakes are a lot lower with this, but the idea is the same.

speaking of brexit, the attitude of the pro voice voters to call anyone who expresses any hesitation or concern about the voice stupid, racist uneducated bigot will only drive people to vote against it.

 

[Chief]

what’s the plan? do people on the voice get paid? how much and who by? will they have staff? will they have a budget for consultants like every other government department / body?

Dunno. It will be fine.

the article makes it clear that “it’s the vibe” and parliament will work out the finer detail later.

you only have to look at brexit (which has been a complete disaster for the uk and i bet people on both sides of politics wish had never been held) to realise that’s not a great approach.

How is this anything like the scale of Brexit??

obviously the stakes are a lot lower with this, but the idea is the same.

Not really.

speaking of brexit, the attitude of the pro voice voters to call anyone who expresses any hesitation or concern about the voice stupid, racist uneducated bigot will only drive people to vote against it.

Yeah but look at the sort of people who are agitating for a no vote: lots of them are stupid and racist.

There are plenty of indigenous people who object to it for what are valid reasons along the lines of needing a treaty first.

Your Andrew Bolt and Tony Abbott types are just bigots.

 

[checkraiseulite]

Dunno. It will be fine.

it may well be. but do you find it strange this wasn't mentioned in the document aimed at helping people understand what it is and how it will work?

How is this anything like the scale of Brexit??

omg, that's, like, exactly what i said in my next sentence.

the implementation of brexit following the referendum was and is being handled woefully. i expect a lot of people who voted leave regret it and would have changed their vote had they appreciated the consequences. it was obviously run by morons who must have thought it was no chance to get up or hadn't considered the fall out if it did.

rational people are right to expect a bit of detail.

but that may be fine if all it will be is a "subservient" body limited to making "representations" that parliament is free to pay lip service to while ignoring, the same as most calls for "pubic consultation" in government processes now.

 

[QuietB]

If every council in Australia books a drag queen book reading on the day of the referendum it will get up by at least 20% while all the cookers do cooker things

 

[TheEscapeClub]

What tosh. Do we acknowledge the SAS war criminals too? Most military members aren’t in a dangerous job and are well compensated, they don’t really fight for our freedoms either.

Scummo tried to bring that “thank you for your service” rubbish into our culture, thank f**k Albo has dropped it.

Has Albo dropped it? News to me, I received my lapel service badge, my copy of the oath, my discount card and my white card last week.

It makes me cringe.

We volunteered, we don't need want or deserve the, 'thanks for your service', garbage

 

[schneebly111]

Has Albo dropped it? News to me, I received my lapel service badge, my copy of the oath, my discount card and my white card last week.

It makes me cringe.

We volunteered, we don't need want or deserve the, 'thanks for your service', garbage

Watch footage of the election night coverage - when Scummo gives his concession speech at the start he proudly makes a point he has introduced a “thank you for your service” line at the start of every speech - something which Albanese doesn’t do, and no other politician has picked up. At the start of that speech Scummo gave what must be the most pissweak Acknowledgment and that he rushed through, but then immediately made that point about “thank you for your service” with gusto and delight. Watch at 6.57:30.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Except for one One Nation MP in SA who made a speech in parliament, when they open with an Acknowledgment of Country she got up and basically said “instead of thanking Indigenous people I’m going to honour our military heroes etc”.



So ”thank you for your service” is definitely being used as a political tool by those who are anti-Indigenous to make a point about who they really think needs to be “honoured”.

 

[Saint]

Watch footage of the election night coverage - when Scummo gives his concession speech at the start he proudly makes a point he has introduced a “thank you for your service” line at the start of every speech - something which Albanese doesn’t do, and no other politician has picked up. At the start of that speech Scummo gave what must be the most pissweak Acknowledgment and that he rushed through, but then immediately made that point about “thank you for your service” with gusto and delight. Watch at 6.57:30.

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

www.youtube.com

Except for one One Nation MP in SA who made a speech in parliament, when they open with an Acknowledgment of Country she got up and basically said “instead of thanking Indigenous people I’m going to honour our military heroes etc”.



So ”thank you for your service” is definitely being used as a political tool by those who are anti-Indigenous to make a point about who they really think needs to be “honoured”.

They're going to try and make it look like it's a zero sum game between ATSI people and veterans. The irony being that most veterans I know from WW2 and Vietnam would be disgusted with that approach.

 

[Saint]

what’s the plan? do people on the voice get paid? how much and who by? will they have staff? will they have a budget for consultants like every other government department / body?

the article makes it clear that “it’s the vibe” and parliament will work out the finer detail later.

you only have to look at brexit (which has been a complete disaster for the uk and i bet people on both sides of politics wish had never been held) to realise that’s not a great approach.

obviously the stakes are a lot lower with this, but the idea is the same.

speaking of brexit, the attitude of the pro voice voters to call anyone who expresses any hesitation or concern about the voice stupid, racist uneducated bigot will only drive people to vote against it.

I mean, that's the point of the constitution and then the Parliament is supposed to work out the finer detail later.

I'll file all these questions under "things which were not explained in the constitution".

I also agree that education and information is the key to bringing "No" voters to the "Yes" side.

It also seems clear to me that misinformation is the main tool for bringing "Yes" voters to the "no" side.

You don't combat misinformation with ridicule, but with actual information.

 

[checkraiseulite]

I'll file all these questions under "things which were not explained in the constitution".

why not in the "obvious things were not explained, or even mentioned, in the document published to help people understand how the voice will work?" file.

You don't combat misinformation with ridicule, but with actual information.

on this, we are definitely agreed. you also combat ignorance with the actual information.

 

[Saint]

why not in the "obvious things were not explained, or even mentioned, in the document published to help people understand how the voice will work?" file.



on this, we are definitely agreed. you also combat ignorance with the actual information.

At this stage of development, you don't have all the details. Just like they didn't when they wrote the first constitution, because they had to get together as parliament and take action on the constitution.

If the ALP were to release or try to release legislation and those details, the LNP and One Nation would bog the whole thing down in arguing over the amount of funding, or people, or details which don't need to be solved for the constitutional amendment.

It's like asking the new Tasmanian Football Club who's playing full forward and how much they're going to be paid today. (it's a question for later). And not funding the Stadium because we don't even know who's playing Full Forward.