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.

 

[Grin]

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.

This is certainly the argument that has been run on Fox and by Peter Dutton.
On the one hand, the voice is tokenism. On the other, it will result in apartheid.

Can you think of any reasons that indigenous people might deserve to be heard?
Also, given your great concern about equality, can you point me to any posts you have made where you express concern about the inequalities that Indigenous people suffer?

 

[Ghost Patrol]

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.

Does Pauline Hanson‘s voice speak for you?

 

[00Stinger]

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?

omfg I swear some of you are bloody mad

My fault for being offended and getting defensive for being accused of something I didnt say or do

And to answer your last condescending comment, if I gather enough information to think that voting 'yes' won't really accomplish anything I will just donkey vote.

 

[10571z]

Does Pauline Hanson‘s voice speak for you?

She speaks for the people who voted for her. That’s how democracy works.

 

[Festerz]

I will just donkey vote.

If the shoe fits.

 

[Gough]

omfg I swear some of you are bloody mad

My fault for being offended and getting defensive for being accused of something I didnt say or do

And to answer your last condescending comment, if I gather enough information to think that voting 'yes' won't really accomplish anything I will just donkey vote.

Donkey vote on a yes/no question?

 

[Carringbush2010]

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

I've stated this before, Indigenous Australians already represented in parliament are representing party policy (whichever party they're a member of).

This is different, this is representing the indigenous, not interests of a political party (which hold little if any positive interest for first nations people).

Yeah I know there's a fear 'just vote for it and we'll sort the detail later' - that's how the constitution was formed. Positive notion followed by the how to achieve it. (A bit more nuanced than that, but that is the basic premise). Same principle as 'we'll appoint Fly as our coach and work the finer details later'

There is nothing to fear, if the end of the day fear is, 'the indigenous will take back the land our houses are on or banish anyone non indigenous from these shores' (May have put a bit of mayo on it), how do you think the bulk of the population would accept that? They wouldn't, therefore by extension allowing a group such power would be political suicide.

The members of the voice are only there to advise govt. on issues / policies that may effect them, nothing more, nothing less.

The other fear you stated: 'will create further divide' - well that is true only for those who don't want change, which is very much the noisy minority, spud head wants you to believe the 'divide'.

The rest of us, in the middle, will be aligned in not fearing the 'voice'.

Join us!

 

[Carringbush2010]

She speaks for the people who voted for her. That’s how democracy works.

Yeah and that ain't many.

 

[Carringbush2010]

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?

This is the sort of bickering and making assumptions of ones position that create divide.

if you wanna promote the no vote - post like this.

omfg I swear some of you are bloody mad

My fault for being offended and getting defensive for being accused of something I didnt say or do

And to answer your last condescending comment, if I gather enough information to think that voting 'yes' won't really accomplish anything I will just donkey vote.

If you wanna say you're gonna vote no - post like this.

 

[mcnulty]

This is the sort of bickering and making assumptions of ones position that create divide.

if you wanna promote the no vote - post like this.

Have to agree. Saw recently on one the betting exchanges that this was line-ball. Obviously more reliable analysis (polls, markets etc) will come in after the date is set etc., but it surprised me- thought this would be a relatively easy sell.

Looks like the now familiar tactic of supporters will be to browbeat anyone with concerns into submission. Good luck with that. Makes me think it’s probably going down.

 

[00Stinger]

Donkey vote on a yes/no question?

Nah, just wanted to see the response I got from the bloke I was replying to

 

[Grin]

Nah, just wanted to see the response I got from the bloke I was replying to

Looked more like a melt to me. I must have misinterpreted you again.

 

[Pie eyed]

She speaks for the people who voted for her. That’s how democracy works.

Is it acceptable that she's lies for them as well as speaks for them?

An opinion is one thing.
Lies and misinformation is a another.

 

[Rob R]

Just received the following email (even though I told the Libs to f off and stop emailing me during scummos reign of corrupt incompetence)



Later this year, Australians will be asked to decide whether to change our Constitution and create a permanent Indigenous Voice.

This referendum is not simply about “recognition”. Both major parties support that.

This Voice proposal represents the most radical change to our Constitution – our nation’s rule book – in our history.

The Government has overlooked the concerns of many legal experts. It is pursuing a Voice that covers all areas of “executive government”.

This means that no issue – the economy, national security, infrastructure, health, education and more – would be beyond its scope.

In the words of a member of the Government’s Referendum Working Group:

"The voice will be able to speak to all parts of the government, including the cabinet, ministers, public servants, and independent statutory offices and agencies – such as the Reserve Bank...It (parliament) can’t shut the voice up." (The Australian, 1/4/2023)

Many legal experts have warned this Voice could risk years of litigation.

The High Court would determine the powers and remit of this Voice, not the Parliament.

And no one can predict with any certainty what a future High Court might decide.

Enshrining this Voice into the Constitution means it’s permanent.

When we need to unite the country, it would permanently divide us by race.

Our Constitution is not something you should toy with lightly.

However, the Government refuses to provide basic details on how the Voice would operate.

The proposal is that Australians vote first, before the Government works out the detail.

You wouldn’t buy a house without inspecting it, or a car without test-driving it.

This Voice proposal is legally risky with unknown consequences.

Yet when Australians have raised legitimate concerns, they’ve been dismissed.

Fortunately, this referendum won’t be the choice of any political party, corporation or celebrity.

It will be every Australian’s choice.

For more information about the Voice, read here: www.liberal.org.au/laborsvoice

Regards,

[https://mcusercontent]
Peter Dutton
Leader of the Opposition
























Authorised by A. Hirst for the Liberal Party of Australia.
Corner of Blackall and Macquarie Streets, Barton ACT 2600.
Click here to unsubscribe from this list.

[https://liberal]

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[00Stinger]

Looked more like a melt to me. I must have misinterpreted you again.

You didn't misinterpret me the first time. You just blatently made up bullshit



Sent from my SM-S908E using Tapatalk

 

[Grin]

You didn't misinterpret me the first time. You just blatently made up bullshit

Nah. Just shed some light on your bullshit, which you've understandably found quite upsetting. But I don't think you were fooling anyone, except maybe some Murdoch drones, so I probably didn't need to.

 

[10571z]

Is it acceptable that she's lies for them as well as speaks for them?

An opinion is one thing.
Lies and misinformation is an another.

Name one politician that hasn’t been caught lying?

I’m no Hanson fan. My point remains she was voted by the people for the people for better or for worse.

 

[mcnulty]

Is it acceptable that she's lies for them as well as speaks for them?

An opinion is one thing.
Lies and misinformation is a another.

Good grief they all lie. I disagree with just about everything that comes out of her mouth, but the ratio of fabrication to what she actually believes is probably no different from any other politician.

 

[00Stinger]

Nah. Just shed some light on your bullshit, which you've understandably found quite upsetting. But I don't think you were fooling anyone, except maybe some Murdoch drones, so I probably didn't need to.

You didn't shed anything except make up utter bullshit

But if that makes you feel cool, enjoy

 

[Saint]

Also, for all the people saying "they've already got representation, everyone is supposed to be equal.

Then somebody should mention this to Canberrans (400k people, 2 Senators) and Tasmanians (500k people, 12 Senators).

States, via the Senate, have unequal representation (including parliamentary voting rights). So all Australians already have "unequal" rights under the existing constitution.

And all we're talking about here is a consultative body, no parliamentary voting rights.

 

[Gralin]

Also, for all the people saying "they've already got representation, everyone is supposed to be equal.

Then somebody should mention this to Canberrans (400k people, 2 Senators) and Tasmanians (500k people, 12 Senators).

States, via the Senate, have unequal representation (including parliamentary voting rights). So all Australians already have "unequal" rights under the existing constitution.

And all we're talking about here is a consultative body, no parliamentary voting rights.

we dont have representative democracy in general

Nationals got 3% of the primary vote in the HoR and 10 seats
Greens got 12% of the vote and 4 seats

if we had representative democracy Nats would have ended up with 4 seats and greens with 18

and no this isn't an argument against the voice, just further agreeing with you that our system is not, and has never been equal

 

[Not Important]

 

[The Punter]

The BRS stuff, because he decided to play it out in a civil court, dealt with fact. Facts need to be proven and tested.

Any truth telling process that is like the one that took place at Hawthorn is going to be problematic.

 

[The Passenger]

On the one hand, the voice is tokenism. On the other, it will result in apartheid.

Living in the UK I'm fairly out of the loop and well behind on matters, but seeing Corey Bernardi try to claim something small like th voice as a form of apartheid is mind boggling to say the least... He's about four beers short of a four pack.

 

[Not Important]

fantastic.

"The poison in Australia's bloodstream" - The Shot

I carry with me the fuzzy cognitive dissonance of a white man educated in a settler colony, an old land...

theshot.net.au