Discussion The Random Discussion Thread

[Dard Ball Get]

I don't see any issue with the permanency, as I certainly don't think recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islanders should be a temporary acknowledgement.

The notion that the voice confers special powers of any sort to anybody, let alone ones extending beyond indigenous matters, is an inaccuracy. Parliament retains full control over it's own procedures.

The sky is not falling.

Not sure anyone is insinuating it is.
Unless you’re conflating different discussion points with an extremist of choice a la others on here.

Re: reach;

“It will be empowered to make representations that reach into the executive branch of government, and not just the parliament.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples

-Proposed section 129(ii)”


As I said, more reading to do.

 

[Yawkey way]

Are you suggesting we don't have a race based socio-economic hierachy now?

Yes I am, people come from the 4 corners of the globe to Australia and other western democracies and succeed that is simply a fact. So much so that people whine about tiger mums etc and universities in the US for example look to discriminate against certain races who simply work harder. A situation that has just been ruled unlawful as a blanket policy by the scotus.

Equality of opportunity should never be confused with outcomes. People are free to makes choices, choices about where and how they live, what they spend money on, what’s important to them influences thousands of choices. When you seek to legislate outcomes it’s called discrimination imo, positive affirmation call it what you like it all adds up to the same thing.

 

[Dard Ball Get]

Yes I am, people come from the 4 corners of the globe to Australia and other western democracies and succeed that is simply a fact. So much so that people whine about tiger mums etc and universities in the US for example look to discriminate against certain races who simply work harder. A situation that has just been ruled unlawful as a blanket policy by the scotus.

Equality of opportunity should never be confused with outcomes. People are free to makes choices, choices about where and how they live, what they spend money on, what’s important to them influences thousands of choices. When you seek to legislate outcomes it’s called discrimination imo, positive affirmation call it what you like it all adds up to the same thing.

Yep the US is an extreme example of that, disgraceful where they find themselves

 

[Yawkey way]

Which opinion is hotly contested?

The power the voice will have is hotly contested. Simply having an extra voice places one group above all other, I’d have thought that was undeniable.

 

[L_W_P]

Yes I am, people come from the 4 corners of the globe to Australia and other western democracies and succeed that is simply a fact. So much so that people whine about tiger mums etc and universities in the US for example look to discriminate against certain races who simply work harder. A situation that has just been ruled unlawful as a blanket policy by the scotus.

Equality of opportunity should never be confused with outcomes. People are free to makes choices, choices about where and how they live, what they spend money on, what’s important to them influences thousands of choices. When you seek to legislate outcomes it’s called discrimination imo, positive affirmation call it what you like it all adds up to the same thing.

It's the "Priority Pick" of life...

 

[phantom13]

Yes I am, people come from the 4 corners of the globe to Australia and other western democracies and succeed that is simply a fact. So much so that people whine about tiger mums etc and universities in the US for example look to discriminate against certain races who simply work harder. A situation that has just been ruled unlawful as a blanket policy by the scotus.

Equality of opportunity should never be confused with outcomes. People are free to makes choices, choices about where and how they live, what they spend money on, what’s important to them influences thousands of choices. When you seek to legislate outcomes it’s called discrimination imo, positive affirmation call it what you like it all adds up to the same thing.

Feels a real stretch to me to suggest that the advisory voice to parliament is going to have any power or even suggestion to legislate on discriminatory practices when you have stuff like health reforms, education opportunities and reforms, life expectancy, infant mortality rates and incarceration rates effectively destroying any hint Indigenous Australians currently have for opportunity. Is there a specific concern you think the voice will have power to act on? Im asking in good faith because i genuinely cant think of any.

The power the voice will have is hotly contested. Simply having an extra voice places one group above all other, I’d have thought that was undeniable.

Is it? I feel like the actual implementation of it was somewhat unclear but has been overtly clarified for some time now. Representation, advice and recommendations. None of those things is really any form of effective power. As for one voice above any other, every elected MP represents its constituents. Given the extremely low number of indigenous constituents in all bar a handful or electorates it seems pretty difficult to argue they will have more representation than the rest of us and given the significant disadvantages they face that doesn't seem at all fair or balanced.

 

[CursingFijian]

I think its more important to fix the real issues Health - Education - Life expectancy etc

Our politicians don't need a voice to do this it should already be a matter of urgency

will the voice committee be the right people to represent the people that need help most ? I doubt it

Will the voice fix this or in 10 - 15 years will we have the same problems we have now ?

That's exactly what the voice is about though Mowman, mapping out a new pathway that achieves better outcomes for Aboriginal & Torres Straight Islanders.

Yes I am, people come from the 4 corners of the globe to Australia and other western democracies and succeed that is simply a fact. So much so that people whine about tiger mums etc and universities in the US for example look to discriminate against certain races who simply work harder. A situation that has just been ruled unlawful as a blanket policy by the scotus.

Equality of opportunity should never be confused with outcomes. People are free to makes choices, choices about where and how they live, what they spend money on, what’s important to them influences thousands of choices. When you seek to legislate outcomes it’s called discrimination imo, positive affirmation call it what you like it all adds up to the same thing.

There's a lot to unpack there.

Your assertion that people are free to make choices about where and how they live is mind blowing for me.

 

[Yawkey way]

Yep the US is an extreme example of that, disgraceful where they find themselves

View attachment 1789965

We have some terrible examples here that I have first hand knowledge of but won’t expand on. Let’s just say the bar for some insane opportunity’s is so low and exclusively for one group and I’ve seen those opportunities rejected if favour of mind boggling ones and I’ve also seen them accepted and badly abused.

 

[Dard Ball Get]

We have some terrible examples here that I have first hand knowledge of but won’t expand on. Let’s just say the bar for some insane opportunity’s is so low and exclusively for one group and I’ve seen those opportunities rejected if favour of mind boggling ones and I’ve also seen them accepted and badly abused.

Agreed

 

[Mowman]

This is a fair point but youre saying we should stick with the status quo whilst acknowledging the status quo doesnt work.

The worst case scenario is it doesnt actually change anything but provides some public recongition of our First Nations people. Best case scenario it improves all the things you listed through the recommendations and advice. Reality is likely somewhere to the low end of the middle.

To me this is the crux of the argument, whats the downside versus whats the potential upside? Given the downside is so low its virtually non existent, why would you vote no?

No i don't think we should stick with the status quo

I think the people in charge and responsible ( Politicians ) need to be made accountable for the mistakes they are making. But that wont happen

No the worse case scenario is that things get worse

We don't need the voice to tells us we need to fix the health and conditions standard of life of the indigenous people. Labor - Liberal - Greens do your jobs stop making excuses and wasting billions of $$$$

 

[phantom13]

We have some terrible examples here that I have first hand knowledge of but won’t expand on. Let’s just say the bar for some insane opportunity’s is so low and exclusively for one group and I’ve seen those opportunities rejected if favour of mind boggling ones and I’ve also seen them accepted and badly abused.

I think weve all heard stories or seen examples of this stuff being abused but its substantially less than the nepotism or private school boys clubs ive seen.

Is the fact that in a handful of cases its been abused/rorted really good reason to abandon it?

 

[phantom13]

No i don't think we should stick with the status quo

I think the people in charge and responsible ( Politicians ) need to be made accountable for the mistakes they are making. But that wont happen

No the worse case scenario is that things get worse

We don't need the voice to tells us we need to fix the health and conditions standard of life of the indigenous people. Labor - Liberal - Greens do your jobs stop making excuses and wasting billions of $$$$

Serious question, in the event that the voice gets up, how can it possibly make anything worse?

Like i agree with the sentiment that stuff should just be cracking on but its not. This might be a circuit breaker, it might not, but i really cant see how it possibly makes the situation worse.

 

[Yawkey way]

That's exactly what the voice is about though Mowman, mapping out a new pathway that achieves better outcomes for Aboriginal & Torres Straight Islanders.


There's a lot to unpack there.

Your assertion that people are free to make choices about where and how they live is mind blowing for me.

I’d have thought that as an Australian citizen there are few constraints except those we place on ourselves in relation to where and how we live. Yes we have laws but within the framework of those laws what’s stopping you moving from cape York to Hobart, what’s stopping you living any lifestyle you choose other than your means to provide or sustain it. You can’t live in a remote settlement and have the Alfred hospital and melbourne uni close by but that’s still your choice. How many people living the city are only there because they need jobs, education, health services etc and if they could get those things elsewhere they’d move. Still a free choice though based on how I rate or rank those things in my life. I’d have lived a life of surfing, diving and fishing down the coast if all I didn’t have to compromise on other things I rate and didn’t have to think about others as well.

 

[Mowman]

Serious question, in the event that the voice gets up, how can it possibly make anything worse?

Like i agree with the sentiment that stuff should just be cracking on but its not. This might be a circuit breaker, it might not, but i really cant see how it possibly makes the situation worse.

So who is deciding on the people who represent the voice ? Our politicians the same ones that have made the mess ?
Will these representatives have the very best interest of the people they are working for ? I doubt it very much

So in 10 years things are no different and billions have been wasted on the wrong things again, thats going backwards to me

 

[Yawkey way]

I think weve all heard stories or seen examples of this stuff being abused but its substantially less than the nepotism or private school boys clubs ive seen.

Is the fact that in a handful of cases its been abused/rorted really good reason to abandon it?

I’d question many things including the perceived nepotism of private schools. My eldest sons thesis covered socio economic disadvantage across local government areas. I think I’d be pretty safe in saying that fancy ovals, pools and overseas trips are an overrated smoke screen when compared to invested supportive parents.

Anyway it’s an interesting chat on here as ever but I’m off to workout and have some r rays and an ultra sound on my hip later in the week so I’m out.

 

[phantom13]

I’d have thought that as an Australian citizen there are few constraints except those we place on ourselves in relation to where and how we live. Yes we have laws but within the framework of those laws what’s stopping you moving from cape York to Hobart, what’s stopping you living any lifestyle you choose other than your means to provide or sustain it. You can’t live in a remote settlement and have the Alfred hospital and melbourne uni close by but that’s still your choice. How many people living the city are only there because they need jobs, education, health services etc and if they could get those things elsewhere they’d move. Still a free choice though based on how I rate or rank those things in my life. I’d have lived a life of surfing, diving and fishing down the coast if all I didn’t have to compromise on other things I rate and didn’t have to think about others as well.

There is a massive gap between living in a remote community and demanding the Alfred versus living in a remote community and demanding access to healthcare though. These are the extreme examples youve said you dont want to engage in.

So who is deciding on the people who represent the voice ? Our politicians the same ones that have made the mess ?
Will these representatives have the very best interest of the people they are working for ? I doubt it very much

So in 10 years things are no different and billions have been wasted on the wrong things again, thats going backwards to me

I mean putting aside that we waste billions on all sort of shit that provides zero benefit to anyone (let alone some of our most vulnerable people) how are they wasting billions by making recommendations? And with all due respect, if youre voting No to the voice, then you are absolutely advocating for keeping the status quo. Change nothing and nothing changes.

 

[Yawkey way]

So who is deciding on the people who represent the voice ? Our politicians the same ones that have made the mess ?
Will these representatives have the very best interest of the people they are working for ? I doubt it very much

So in 10 years things are no different and billions have been wasted on the wrong things again, thats going backwards to me

Money isn’t the problem and we know according to minster burney what many of those problems are. Given it’s her job to fix them and we have so many advisory bodies maybe truth telling needs to start with where the moneys going and what’s not working. How about we leave the constitution and our democracy alone, that’s sounds pretty good to me.

 

[George]

 

[gringo2011]

No i don't think we should stick with the status quo

I think the people in charge and responsible ( Politicians ) need to be made accountable for the mistakes they are making. But that wont happen

No the worse case scenario is that things get worse

We don't need the voice to tells us we need to fix the health and conditions standard of life of the indigenous people. Labor - Liberal - Greens do your jobs stop making excuses and wasting billions of $$$$

Everyone has had a go and no-one has managed to fix it. The reason that everything is so far behind was well meaning and some not well meaning mistakes setting them back a long way in the past. There is a pretty easy comparison to a new club like Gold Coast coming in and if without a strong leg up, they were starting from so far back they probably never catch up. It's taken a long time to even get close to level with sides with long term advantages.

Governments keep throwing money at fixing it and can't get on top of it. It's no easy fix and like disadvantage anywhere there is so much more to it than spending and easy decisions. The reason they get priority University and stuff is that they hope that one influences a hundred type of thing and it tips the right way up. Kids were taken from families and they grew up without a model to copy. You can't just fix that with a cheque book.

This just lets them advise government on what they think is the best ways to fix it. It might actually be cheaper than politicians throwing money at it to make it go away.

 

[CursingFijian]

So who is deciding on the people who represent the voice ? Our politicians the same ones that have made the mess ?
Will these representatives have the very best interest of the people they are working for ? I doubt it very much

So in 10 years things are no different and billions have been wasted on the wrong things again, thats going backwards to me

I don’t know the answers to that question Mowman. That’s a different debate for a different time, but it’s not a good enough excuse to not recognise Aboriginals and Torres Straight Islanders in our constitution.

The British gave Fiji it’s voice to Parliament in 1876.

 

[Mowman]

I mean putting aside that we waste billions on all sort of s**t that provides zero benefit to anyone (let alone some of our most vulnerable people) how are they wasting billions by making recommendations? And with all due respect, if youre voting No to the voice, then you are absolutely advocating for keeping the status quo. Change nothing and nothing changes.

And change that isnt done right is useless
And just agreeing with something without all the information isn't the right thing either

 

[Yawkey way]

There is a massive gap between living in a remote community and demanding the Alfred versus living in a remote community and demanding access to healthcare though. These are the extreme examples youve said you dont want to engage in.

I mean putting aside that we waste billions on all sort of s**t that provides zero benefit to anyone (let alone some of our most vulnerable people) how are they wasting billions by making recommendations? And with all due respect, if youre voting No to the voice, then you are absolutely advocating for keeping the status quo. Change nothing and nothing changes.

I really can’t do this all day but out of respect last one. I give you credit for understanding that I’m simply making a point about lifestyle choice and use an extreme example to highlight that point. Nether the less is leads on to extremely complex issues relating to the provision of health and education in all areas not just remote ones. There has been no shortage of money and you can hardly argue discrimination when it’s considerably more per person than non indigenous.

What makes you think I’m arguing for the status quo simply because I’m voting no to the voice? I’d really have some truth telling on both sides and I’d audit everyone and everything as my departments have always been. This terrible waste and these terrible outcomes in some instances simply aren’t good enough. I’d say to you that the voice is a massive risk and simply wrong in principle yet it‘s being held up as the magic cure for incompetence, waste and yes corruption in many cases. I’d also so that I’ve used my extreme examples to highlight that realistic expectations also need to be the order of the day.

I’m sure you’re aware of the royal flying doctor and the school of the air, yes this is the life of all those who choose a remote lifestyle. I also know very well a husband and wife who have taught in those remote localities from the torres straight to the NT, it’s an eye opener that’s for sure on so many levels.

Ok I’ll be reading when I have the opportunity.

 

[Mowman]

I don’t know the answers to that question Mowman. That’s a different debate for a different time, but it’s not a good enough excuse to not recognise Aboriginals and Torres Straight Islanders in our constitution.

The British gave Fiji it’s voice to Parliament in 1876.

But its not a debate for a different time, a lot of people would like to know this stuff before they decide how to vote. Thats not a bad thing that people want info before we change the constitution and it doesn't make them a racist if they are thinking about voting no

Back to original comment this has been very badly implemented by the Govenment

 

[gringo2011]

And change that isnt done right is useless
And just agreeing with something without all the information isn't the right thing either

To me not voting yes is what the Greens do, they won't let anything go through unless it's absolutely ideal so end up with nothing. They ruined any kind of climate change action because nothing was better than something that wasn't perfect. 20 years later and there was no energy policy and **** all action in that time. If they were serious they would have had something as a starting point and worked off that platform. This isn't ideal but it's something that will get a start.

They whole thing came out of an acknowledgement that what they've done until now hasn't worked. If someone wants to have a go at fixing it let them go for it. It's too hard basket stuff for most so just gets unfocussed money thrown at it.

 

[George]

You guys have sold me, I'm voting No now