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.

 

[FredLeDeux]

“I’m hesitant on a vaccine that was rushed” - OMG you are anti Vax! You want old people to die!!!

“I don’t think it’s fair for trans women to compete against women” - OMG you are Transphobic. Why are you so intolerant!!!

When you have indigenous spokespeople like Lidia Thorp running around slurring hate speech and claiming every white person is evil meanwhile still not having a set process on how to avoid people like her sitting in “the voice” then I wouldn’t be surprised a huge amount of people are hesitant.

You are going to vote No to the Voice because Lydia the Terrible might get a say on it?

 

[00Stinger]

The real question is WHY are these people voting no?

Are they doing it because they want the country to work towards a treaty first? Or because they don't trust indigenous people?

The Twitter zombies with neo-Nazi and "Aryan" symbols on their profile love the way Sky and Co are making their case for them, and they are vocal about it.

I have no idea and haven't paid much attention to it

But I have seen a few respected aboriginal people either promoting the 'no' vote or saying that people who vote 'no' aren't racist

But from the little I have read or heard from people that is the opposite that I am being told

 

[00Stinger]

You'll find the abuse and violent threats are largely coming from the right.
But I conceded that's not what the Murdoch media has instructed you to think.

Meh, seen it probably equally from both sides to be honest, but hey I guess you like most people feel the need to be on the left or right and blame the other side

 

[Chief]

I have no idea and haven't paid much attention to it

But I have seen a few respected aboriginal people either promoting the 'no' vote or saying that people who vote 'no' aren't racist

But from the little I have read or heard from people that is the opposite that I am being told

I haven't heard them say "if you vote no you aren't racist". But I sometimes skim read in front of the TV so do you have any links?

 

[Chief]

“I’m hesitant on a vaccine that was rushed” - OMG you are anti Vax! You want old people to die!!!

You know it wasn't rushed, yeah? OK.

“I don’t think it’s fair for trans women to compete against women” - OMG you are Transphobic. Why are you so intolerant!!!

Do you think your opinions surrounding this, and the arguments you put forward, might indicate your trans phobia?

I've heard arguments against it that weren't transphobic.

When you have indigenous spokespeople like Lidia Thorp running around slurring hate speech and claiming every white person is evil meanwhile still not having a set process on how to avoid people like her sitting in “the voice” then I wouldn’t be surprised a huge amount of people are hesitant.

I don't agree with your characterisation of Thorpe, but we have open racists and homophobes in parliament.

Are you campaigning to remove parliament from the constitution?

From these examples I can say yes, you need better arguments.

 

[10571z]

You know it wasn't rushed, yeah? OK.


Do you think your opinions surrounding this, and the arguments you put forward, might indicate your trans phobia?

I've heard arguments against it that weren't transphobic.


I don't agree with your characterisation of Thorpe, but we have open racists and homophobes in parliament.

Are you campaigning to remove parliament from the constitution?

From these examples I can say yes, you need better arguments.

Not rushed ok. Clearly peoples skepticism of the vaccine has been justified with further data coming out. Again I’m not anti vaxer I’ve had every shot in my life, flu shot yearly and had my Covid shots.

No it’s not transphobia to question if they should compete along side women.

No I’m not advocating to remove parliament because some members are racist and homophobic. But I’d like the opportunity for the general public to vote them out democratically.

 

[00Stinger]

I haven't heard them say "if you vote no you aren't racist". But I sometimes skim read in front of the TV so do you have any links?

SO my apologies, not a direct 'if you vote no you aren't racist' but three prominant aboriginal people either promoting a 'no' vote or in Tony Armstrong case either 'yes or no' could be good

Tony Armstrong

ABC host reveals surprising opinion on the Voice

ABC presenter Tony Armstrong has spoken out on the Voice to Parliament referendum in a new interview, revealing a somewhat surprising stance on the highly debated issue.

www.skynews.com.au

Warren Mundine

Mundine accuses ABC of bias during Voice interview

Indigenous affairs advocate and businessman Warren Mundine has accused the ABC of bias on live television during a heated interview about the Voice to Parliament.

www.skynews.com.au

Megan Krakouer

One of Australia's most respected Indigenous leaders blasts the Voice

Outspoken lawyer Megan Krakouer, Perth's Citizen of the Year 2023, says the Voice will be irrelevant, powerless and toothless with 'no guarantee of change'.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Without reading a whole lot into the matter myself, reading stuff like this from respected aboriginal people makes me wonder if this is voting 'yes' is a good idea or is it just tokenism from a lot of white city dwelling people who want to feel warm and fuzzy about something that isn't going to address a problem.

A little like making workplaces be diverse without merit, rather than fixing communities with low socio economic issues and making the problem better and more sustainable

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Not rushed ok. Clearly peoples skepticism of the vaccine has been justified with further data coming out. Again I’m not anti vaxer I’ve had every shot in my life, flu shot yearly and had my Covid shots.

No it’s not transphobia to question if they should compete along side women.

No I’m not advocating to remove parliament because some members are racist and homophobic. But I’d like the opportunity for the general public to vote them out democratically.

LOL
The kind of scepticism we were getting at the height of Covid was contrived and rediculous. Hysterical idiots.

 

[Chief]

SO my apologies, not a direct 'if you vote no you aren't racist' but three prominant aboriginal people either promoting a 'no' vote or in Tony Armstrong case either 'yes or no' could be good

Tony Armstrong

ABC host reveals surprising opinion on the Voice

ABC presenter Tony Armstrong has spoken out on the Voice to Parliament referendum in a new interview, revealing a somewhat surprising stance on the highly debated issue.

www.skynews.com.au

Warren Mundine

Mundine accuses ABC of bias during Voice interview

Indigenous affairs advocate and businessman Warren Mundine has accused the ABC of bias on live television during a heated interview about the Voice to Parliament.

www.skynews.com.au

Megan Krakouer

One of Australia's most respected Indigenous leaders blasts the Voice

Outspoken lawyer Megan Krakouer, Perth's Citizen of the Year 2023, says the Voice will be irrelevant, powerless and toothless with 'no guarantee of change'.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Without reading a whole lot into the matter myself, reading stuff like this from respected aboriginal people makes me wonder if this is voting 'yes' is a good idea or is it just tokenism from a lot of white city dwelling people who want to feel warm and fuzzy about something that isn't going to address a problem.

A little like making workplaces be diverse without merit, rather than fixing communities with low socio economic issues and making the problem better and more sustainable

Tell me if you see the difference here. Honestly and in good faith.


Tony Armstrong:

“I’m leaving it to the people who actually know their c**p to give advice on it but what I do think is lost in the conversation is the fact that it’s not binary.

“Regardless of whichever way it goes, the irony will be, it’s not necessarily going to be the black fella whose vote makes a difference.”

This is the case: a "no" vote for sound reasons - like treaty first - is not racist. But racists will vote no to stop ANYTHING.

Voting no so that black woman you don't like doesn't get to be heard? The one that wants treaty first? Yeah that's racist.

Warren Mundine is there for Warren Mundine.

Referencing George Orwell’s Animal Farm, the Liberal Leader warned of a "Orwellian effect" where some Australians would be more equal than others.

We already have this situation in Australia. Mundine's party seeks to serve those who are "more equal than others". He's a hypocrite.

Megan Krakouer:

A leading Aboriginal activist has blasted Labor's proposed Voice to Parliament as being meaningless to impoverished Indigenous communities.
...
Ms Krakouer said she is set to campaign against the Voice because it lacked the power to actually bring any change to the people she represents.

Megan Krakauer wants MORE power and MORE say than she thinks the voice gives her people. Her reasons for a no are diametrically opposed to Warren Mundine's.

Do you see the difference?

 

[00Stinger]

Tell me if you see the difference here. Honestly and in good faith.


Tony Armstrong:



This is the case: a "no" vote for sound reasons - like treaty first - is not racist. But racists will vote no to stop ANYTHING.

Voting no so that black woman you don't like doesn't get to be heard? The one that wants treaty first? Yeah that's racist.

Warren Mundine is there for Warren Mundine.



We already have this situation in Australia. Mundine's party seeks to serve those who are "more equal than others". He's a hypocrite.

Megan Krakouer:



Megan Krakauer wants MORE power and MORE say than she thinks the voice gives her people. Her reasons for a no are diametrically opposed to Warren Mundine's.

Do you see the difference?

Yeah so there is a lot of mixed messaging out there and it seems people of both sides have some self interest for varying reasons

I am trying to work out if a 'yes' vote is going to fix the issues or is a bit of tokenism like a lot of thing are these days to make people feel like they have made a difference when they really haven't

Nothing more, nothing less. And like I was up front with, I need do do a bit more research myself on the matter.

 

[Chief]

Yeah so there is a lot of mixed messaging out there and it seems people of both sides have some self interest for varying reasons

Megan Krakouer

'I want to see something with teeth, I want to see legislative change and I want to see policy which protects the interests of all Australians and particularly First Nations peoples,' Ms Krakouer told The West Australian.

'It is going to be the highest consultative body of Indigenous First Nations people across the country...with no power whatsoever. Sure, it may have the ability to influence, but we are still unclear on the details on how that will actually play out right across the country.'

She added: 'I walk with thousands of our most impoverished brothers and sisters. I have seen premature and avoidable death haunt every single one of these families.

'I know that I will be speaking for many of them, and they will agree with what I am calling for, Is it so wrong to ask for the Voice to be more and with ‘teeth’ so that fewer of my people fall over early and unfairly?'

 

[10571z]

Yeah so there is a lot of mixed messaging out there and it seems people of both sides have some self interest for varying reasons

I am trying to work out if a 'yes' vote is going to fix the issues or is a bit of tokenism like a lot of thing are these days to make people feel like they have made a difference when they really haven't

Nothing more, nothing less. And like I was up front with, I need do do a bit more research myself on the matter.

This.

People like feeling good but doing token gestures but will it change anything or create further division?

How can we guarantee the right people get in. How can we know it won’t be Lidia Thorpe types attempting to stop absolutely everything.

 

[00Stinger]

This.

People like feeling good but doing token gestures but will it change anything or create further division?

How can we guarantee the right people get in. How can we know it won’t be Lidia Thorpe types attempting to stop absolutely everything.

Yep, whether it is going to fix the issue or a be a feel good gesture is my query. I just don't like being told by people on the 'yes' bandwagon (not all, but a lot) that I am part of the problem for not automatically saying 'yes'

I see diversity quotos in the workplace being implemented especially in the government sector for employees and contractors that do not address any of the issues, just puts unqualified people into certain positions that creates more issues

 

[Saint]

There are certainly indigenous voices like those above, including Thorpe, who want something more, including potentially a treaty. They think the Voice doesn't go far enough.

Then there's people like Warren Mundine who has an un-democratic voice and has made his career of being appointed to indigenous boards by the Libs to take cash and deliver very little. He doesn't want to upset his life-long gravy train. I put Price in this boat as well. She's got her voice now, time to kick out the ladder for anyone else.

I think that's healthy and disproves the notion that the "Yes" campaigners are calling everyone racist or that dissent isn't welcome.

I wouldn't call myself a campaigner, but I'm relatively vocal (in no real meaningful way) that I think if all those indigenous voices got together and decided this is the path they want (not unanimously, as there are compromises) then I'm supportive of it. I've read the information they put together and think this is a good start for indigenous people and very likely to do good things and very unlikely to have any of the adverse impacts that people are imagining (I don't believe they really think it, they're just trying to use fear to drive the uneducated to a No vote)

 

[Chief]

will it change anything or create further division?

These aren't the only options. This is a false binary.

 

[Grin]

Yeah so there is a lot of mixed messaging out there and it seems people of both sides have some self interest for varying reasons

I am trying to work out if a 'yes' vote is going to fix the issues or is a bit of tokenism like a lot of thing are these days to make people feel like they have made a difference when they really haven't

Nothing more, nothing less. And like I was up front with, I need do do a bit more research myself on the matter.

No it won't "fix" the issue. It's a step to enshrine in the constitution that indigenous voices are at least heard, if not acted on. Given that, I guess you're right and we should just continue with the status quo.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Because that’s how the left works. If you dare question anything they are supporting you will be torn to shreds.

That's actually how the right works.
I acknowledge that you don't seem like the type to ever let reality colour your political ideology.

Both correct, it's how the nutty fringes work.

Not reflective of the majority though.

 

[Carringbush2010]

or saying that people who vote 'no' aren't racist

I haven't heard them say "if you vote no you aren't racist"

Albo has made this claim, however this statement is highly simplistic.

You'd be naive to believe that racist no voters don't exist, and equally naive to believe every single no voter is a racist.

That'd be a pure example of putting people in boxes.

 

[Grin]

Both correct, it's how the nutty fringes work.

Not reflective of the majority though.

It does seem these days that the far right tend to be much more likely to make threats of violence, not just in this issue but across a range of issues. I think the argument that the extremes of both sides do it is simply a justification for the right with no basis in reality. I can't think of any social media campaign by, say, left wing indigenous people against a right wing journalists that is threatening and sustained.
Happy to be corrected.

 

[Festerz]

It does seem these days that the far right tend to be much more likely to make threats of violence, not just in this issue but across a range of issues.

Yep - the growing real threat of right wing violence and terrorism in Australia has been a dominant theme of ASIO status reports in recent years.

ASIO has also noted that these threats rose significantly during the covid pandemic and you can't help but draw conclusions as to what role the sharp shift to the right of conservative side of politics has played in this rising threat.

Assessing the Risks of the Radical Right

nsc.crawford.anu.edu.au

Right-wing extremism in Australia

th[align="right"], td[align="right"] { text-align:right !important; } th[align="center"], td[align="center"] { text-align:center !important; } Caitlin Grant, Foreign Affairs, Defence and Security Key issue Right-wing extremism has existed in Australia for many d

www.aph.gov.au

While the end of covid restrictions has reduced that threat of violence, there is general fear that the current discussion and debate around the Referendum could ignite that threat once again.

Deliberately divisive and false fear-mongering references by Peter Dutton to Animal Farm and the 'Orwellian Effect' that will somehow make Indigenous Australians more equal than their non-Indigenous counterparts and his claims on national media that the Referendum will “re-racialise” Australia is at the heart of this concern.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

It does seem these days that the far right tend to be much more likely to make threats of violence, not just in this issue but across a range of issues. I think the argument that the extremes of both sides do it is simply a justification for the right with no basis in reality. I can't think of any social media campaign by, say, left wing indigenous people against a right wing journalists that is threatening and sustained.
Happy to be corrected.

ASIO certainly have said that right wing terrorism is an ongoing threat.

But it’s much easier for fascists and pretend centrists to blame some lefty hippies for all of lifes woes.

 

[00Stinger]

No it won't "fix" the issue. It's a step to enshrine in the constitution that indigenous voices are at least heard, if not acted on. Given that, I guess you're right and we should just continue with the status quo.

Where did I at any stage say I was voting 'no'? And furthermore, where did I at any stage say we should continue with the status quo?

You clearly fall into the category of people I was referring to who go on the attack very quickly

 

[Carringbush2010]

It does seem these days that the far right tend to be much more likely to make threats of violence, not just in this issue but across a range of issues. I think the argument that the extremes of both sides do it is simply a justification for the right with no basis in reality. I can't think of any social media campaign by, say, left wing indigenous people against a right wing journalists that is threatening and sustained.
Happy to be corrected.

Of course that's the rights mo, but they also use the 'cancellation' method to appeal to the dumb support, this is not news.

You've got nazis and their symps, and similar on the far right who make threats of violence, and the 'lefties will destroy our way of life' slippery slope Armageddon style argument, designed to cancel far left views and garner the even dumber support.

You've got irrational progressives, and similar on the far left who make threats of cancellation. It's designed to silence the far right, but too often, some with salient views who are not right or left have their 'view' railed against because it's not the 'narrative'.

- Happens both ways -

For instance, on this topic, you can bet your bottom dollar that some far lefties will view any no vote as racist, no ifs buts or maybes, with no nuanced thinking. Just 'you said no, you * racist'

The difference between the far left and the far right, on any political subject, is the left, even the far left have best intentions at heart for all.

The far right only have self interest at heart, and attempt to appeal to those even dumber than themselves, and use emotive language and have cottoned onto the 'oppose views that will destroy our society' - Armageddon style.

Worth noting, msm and social media gives the impression that either side are large and influential, thankfully they aren't in reality.

 

[10571z]

No it won't "fix" the issue. It's a step to enshrine in the constitution that indigenous voices are at least heard, if not acted on. Given that, I guess you're right and we should just continue with the status quo.

There are hundreds of cultures represented in this country why not have a voice for each individual one?

What makes the members of the “voice” qualified to give opinions on such matters?

End of the day I believe this just further divides and makes an “Us and Them” culture.

Indigenous Australia’s are already represented in parliament as voted democratically in.

 

[Grin]

Where did I at any stage say I was voting 'no'? And furthermore, where did I at any stage say we should continue with the status quo?

You clearly fall into the category of people I was referring to who go on the attack very quickly

Sure. You were just asking the question. Parroting the message of the No campaign.
Sorry you feel so attacked and defensive. Another trait of the No campaign.

Just to clarify: You no longer feel that the Voice must "fix" the issue for you to vote yes?