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.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

We will get to see just how racist Australia is, I've always maintained we are as racist as the US so I suspect we will see much of it during this process

 

[Festerz]

Here we go - all of a sudden we have a wave of thinly veiled racists purporting to be experts on Constitutional Law.

And justifying their racism by ignorantly trying to equate a culture with tens of thousands of years prior existence on this land with the religious beliefs and ethnic interests of those who have arrived in the past 200 years and been the substantial beneficiaries not just of the stolen land but from the commercial and legal structures created to enforce their power.

Who express faux outrage at the mere thought of formal recognition of the Indigenous first peoples in our Constitutional framework.

 

[campbell]

We will get to see just how racist Australia is, I've always maintained we are as racist as the US so I suspect we will see much of it during this process

Sad but true.

I was recently involved in a Health Equity process, co design.
Sadly, it threatened people, sadly it exposed the fears and racist beliefs a vast majority hold.

This discussion will be ugly for First Nations people.

 

[Donakebab]

Having seen what ten years of inaction looks like I think there's an appetite for change and Morrison's quiet Australians may turn out to be a loud minority.

Oh I agree, but while I think it will get up the journey there is going to be awful.

 

[campbell]

David Speers, please respect Sorry Business.

 

[andrewmillman]

Is there going to be a formal "Vote No" advocacy group? Slogan could be "For Equality: Vote No"

 

[Baltimore Jack]

 

[Festerz]

David Speers, please respect Sorry Business.

With David Speers hosting Insiders, Stan Grant now hosting QandA and Sarah Ferguson hosting 730, I think you will see the conservative rump of the LNP more than happy to use ABC TV as a key platform for their decisive political gaming of the Indigenous voice referendum.

These hosts will be incapable of resisting the 'two sides' fallacy that the conservatives will use as their rallying cry to promote their lack of respect for Indigenous peoples.

And, taking a leaf from Howard's success of shutting down any move away from the British monarchy during the republican debate, the 'unintended (and of course unspecified) consequences' slogan will be rolled out constantly. Stifling any chance of reasoned and intelligent discussion of the need for finally providing formal recognition to Indigenous Australians in our Constitution.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Is there going to be a formal "Vote No" advocacy group? Slogan could be "For Equality: Vote No"

I'm sure you will get the chance to rub elbows with Pauline Hanson and Katherine Deves.

 

[Gough]

Oh I agree, but while I think it will get up the journey there is going to be awful.

It's also going to make the hard right more angry and resentful if it gets up, further demonstrating that their time has passed.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

David Speers, please respect Sorry Business.

Speers still holds the view that is the job of white people to make decisions for black people

 

[Gralin]

I recognise there has been great wrongs carried out against aborigines. I even noted our constitution already enshrines racism in multiple sections.......and deliberately so. Our federation was built on motivations of fear and racism.

I'm just uncertain that enshrining or deepening racism in our constitution is the way to go.

I just feel there are better ways to achieve the same, if not better outcome.

You're so antiracist that you constantly use racist terms. You've done so again in this post.
It's almost like you're actually racist yourself.

Is there any land on the planet not stolen?

Imperialism does its best to make the answer to that no.
It's not an argument against acknowledgement though.
Or an argument against doing something about it.

 

[campbell]

Speers still holds the view that is the job of white people to make decisions for black people

Indeed he does.
Ah, he was sitting on Yolgnu land and being so disrespectfil.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Is there any land on the planet not stolen?

Is there any other country on the planet that hasn't signed a treaty with the First Nations people they stole land off?

 

[Festerz]

I'm sure you will get the chance to rub elbows with Pauline Hanson and Katherine Deves.

and of course the self appointed intellectual giant of the group...

 

[Gralin]

I'm sure you will get the chance to rub elbows with Pauline Hanson and Katherine Deves.

This is a problem for a few reasons.
This is how the media will cover this.
They'll wheel out the racists for the no side and not Indigenous people that don't want it.

So it will be framed as racist to vote no and inclusive to vote yes.

They'll act like all Indigenous people are behind the yes vote (unless they're a liberal mouthpiece)

And as usual we'll have a bunch of white people talking about what's best for the Indigenous people here.

 

[carltonchelsea]

Look at the rednecks race in here to claim this referendum is divisive and racist as they sit comfortably on First Nations lands.
I’m prepared for the shitshow that will ensue because our white folk populace are scared of a change well overdue!
VALE Archie Roach, would have loved that your eyes had witnessed this historical “YES”, soar like your voice did Sir!

 

[Crankyhawk]

Here we go - all of a sudden we have a wave of thinly veiled racists purporting to be experts on Constitutional Law.

And justifying their racism by ignorantly trying to equate a culture with tens of thousands of years prior existence on this land with the religious beliefs and ethnic interests of those who have arrived in the past 200 years and been the substantial beneficiaries not just of the stolen land but from the commercial and legal structures created to enforce their power.

Who express faux outrage at the mere thought of formal recognition of the Indigenous first peoples in our Constitutional framework.

I’d doubt that the recognition step would meet with much opposition

The voice one can easily be inflated into a scare campaign (eg the fear that the voice would exercise a veto power over legislation that could affect First Nations people which is pretty much any legislation)

But a voice which is only providing documented advice/ perspective (ie minuted in parliament as well) but without a veto, I don’t know if that would be enough for those on the progressive end.

 

[Crankyhawk]

This is a problem for a few reasons.
This is how the media will cover this.
They'll wheel out the racists for the no side and not Indigenous people that don't want it.

So it will be framed as racist to vote no and inclusive to vote yes.

They'll act like all Indigenous people are behind the yes vote (unless they're a liberal mouthpiece)

And as usual we'll have a bunch of white people talking about what's best for the Indigenous people here.

I would expect that the media (who are looking for no to get up) would actively seek out indigenous people who are against the proposal to best knock it over.

 

[Crankyhawk]

Is there any other country on the planet that hasn't signed a treaty with the First Nations people they stole land off?

Most of Europe (no treaty with the now extinct Neanderthals)
Does any of the South American countries have one with the various native tribes

 

[Dirty_banchez]

View attachment 1461243

The yes vote is significantly higher than what I thought it would be. I want to see what the proposed amendment looks like before I decide on a position.

 

[Pessimistic]

And now we see why Gillard was a little reluctant to give the lnp some free kicks by prioritising SSM

 

[Dirty_banchez]

Albo is suggesting the details will be revealed after the referendum. I am not comfortable with that arrangement.

 

[Gralin]

I would expect that the media (who are looking for no to get up) would actively seek out indigenous people who are against the proposal to best knock it over.

But we're talking about Murdoch here, he'll use his regulars like Warren Mundine and Anthony Dillon.

While the ABC will use Tony Abbott....

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Albo is suggesting the details will be revealed after the referendum. I am not comfortable with that arrangement.

No, the details are available here Final Report | Indigenous Voice