Referendum 2023

[Tucker]

And the Government can wash its hands and say "we tried".

Yep, I’m not entirely convinced they didn’t set this whole thing up to fail to give them virtue signalling points and great ammunition for the next election.
Had they been serious, they would have delayed the referendum until the Engagement Group could provide working details of how the Voice would operate. Had they provided adequate details, they may have achieved bi-partisan support. The bullish way they’ve gone about this referendum leans towards either incompetence or self sabotage. Certainly not great management, no matter how you look at it.

 

[InBenjiWeTrust]

It's disappointing but not totally surprising that a number of people on here are planning to vote no.
I don't understand why people can live with such hatred, to deny indigenous people the opportunity to have a direct say on matters that impact them.

There are currently dozens of similar groups covering various other segments of society. This would just be the 30th different voice to parliament for a community sector, the only difference is this one would be added to the constitution, and that is simply so it cannot be dismantled by any future far right governments that may take government.

Hopefully Australia never again has another government as far right like Abbott or Scomo. But safe guarding this body from them is a sad but necessary step.

The no vote has sadly followed Trumps lead in targeting political conservatives with lies, fake news and fear. Many of these people simply believe what they're told and can't be bothered doing any reading/research on the matter, hence they absurdly offensive "don't know, vote no" slogan. The far right treat Aussies as morons, who are incapable of thinking for themselves and simply don't want Australians to find out answers to their question, as if they did they are far more likely to vote yes. It's fantastic to see lots of Liberal MPs coming out in support of the voice, more should hopefully follow their lead.

I am curious to hear any genuine reasons to vote no that aren't based on ancient white australia policies, ignorance or casual racism.

Sadly, is it possible to be so indoctrinated and close-minded that one cannot even think that there are many valid opinions that are different from theirs? 🤔
In the end, do we strive for "unity, pluralism of thought, human treatment, empathy, understanding", or is the ideal "tyranny, killing fields, gulags, konzentrationslager, ALL MUST think the SAME "?

 

[Mistymuzzle]

Yep, I’m not entirely convinced they didn’t set this whole thing up to fail to give them virtue signalling points and great ammunition for the next election.
Had they been serious, they would have delayed the referendum until the Engagement Group could provide working details of how the Voice would operate. Had they provided adequate details, they may have achieved bi-partisan support. The bullish way they’ve gone about this referendum leans towards either incompetence or self sabotage. Certainly not great management, no matter how you look at it.

The referendum question is actually two questions. 1) Do you want to recognise the first peoples of this nation.? 2) by including this proposal called The Voice.

It would have been a lot less divisive if they separated the questions.

 

[earl]

Earl, you seem to know quite a lot about how this constitutional change will effect the lives of so many people in a positive way.

I don't know how it will work in detail and if I've given that impression I didn't intend too.

There are a couple of benefits of the principle behind the voice in my opinion:-

1. Indigenous recognition in the constitution
2. Indigenous input into Indigenous spend. I like this because it means Indigenous people have to take ownership of the success or failure of how the spend is utilized assuming they are actually listened too. It's only advisory but I still like the principle.

--> I doubt anyone knows exactly what is going to happen but that would be the case no matter if this was completely detailed down to the lowest level of detail.

--> The argument about spend is a bit silly as well. For some perspective the spend on nuclear submarines is over $300 billion. There is much less drama about that spend and it is a lot bigger than what we are discussing.

Has this been done before? Can you name the countries which have changed their constitution in a similar way? Any that you’re particularly impressed with?

Good questions.

I think it has but I can't tell you how similar these representations are too the Australian situation.

Could these Nordic parliaments give a glimpse of what to expect from the Voice?

Sweden, Finland and Norway all have representative bodies for the Indigenous Sámi people. This is how they work.

www.sbs.com.au

I'd love to know and get an unbiased factual viewpoint.

 

[Tucker]

The referendum question is actually two questions. 1) Do you want to recognise the first peoples of this nation.? 2) by including this proposal called The Voice.

It would have been a lot less divisive if they separated the questions.

Hasn’t Dutton promised that he will hold another referendum concentrating on the first question and received huge backlash from the activists?
I’m sure I heard Marcia Langdon say she refuses to work on that Referendum Engagement Group because…”that’s not what we asked for”.
It all comes back to the Uluṟu Statement. Which Labor has backed in full.

 

[earl]

Where's my Generational Trauma? Anyone whose Grand Parents or Great Grand parents lived in the 20th Century surely passed it down to us.

You may have it as well. There is no shame in that. You sound pretty angry to me so it could be the result of some trauma in your past. I can't confirm that for you though.

 

[InBenjiWeTrust]

The referendum question is actually two questions. 1) Do you want to recognise the first peoples of this nation.? 2) by including this proposal called The Voice.

It would have been a lot less divisive if they separated the questions.

💯 perhaps the intention was all along, not to recognise Aborigines, but to use it purely as a political tool?

 

[hank37w]

The referendum question is actually two questions. 1) Do you want to recognise the first peoples of this nation.? 2) by including this proposal called The Voice.

It would have been a lot less divisive if they separated the questions.

Point number 1 would have been a resounding success but Albo trying to be smart, insisted on lumping the 2 together to try and hoodwink the voting public and sneak the voice through by not separating these 2 very different propositions.

Of course he would not listen to logic and present this referendum as 2 separate propositions and stuck to trying to get it through by trying to fool or make members of the public feel guilty if they said NO and the fact of the matter is that it just went too far and got to the stage where Albo would not dare change the wording of the referendum because the radicals behind the YES side of this referendum would crucify him.

Now as it stands when this referendum gets voted down, Albo will be saying to the radicals, I stood strong with you people and it's so unjust that there are so many stupid redneck, racist people in this country.

Talk about divisive, and regardless of the outcome there is going to be a hell of a lot of problems caused by this whole episode.

 

[twentyforty]

I don't know how it will work in detail and if I've given that impression I didn't intend too.

There are a couple of benefits of the principle behind the voice in my opinion:-

1. Indigenous recognition in the constitution
2. Indigenous input into Indigenous spend. I like this because it means Indigenous people have to take ownership of the success or failure of how the spend is utilized assuming they are actually listened too. It's only advisory but I still like the principle.

--> I doubt anyone knows exactly what is going to happen but that would be the case no matter if this was completely detailed down to the lowest level of detail.

--> The argument about spend is a bit silly as well. For some perspective the spend on nuclear submarines is over $300 billion. There is much less drama about that spend and it is a lot bigger than what we are discussing.



Good questions.

I think it has but I can't tell you how similar these representations are too the Australian situation.

Could these Nordic parliaments give a glimpse of what to expect from the Voice?

Sweden, Finland and Norway all have representative bodies for the Indigenous Sámi people. This is how they work.

www.sbs.com.au

I'd love to know and get an unbiased factual viewpoint.

Are you saying those countries you've mentioned have actually written an indigenous voice into their constitution?

 

[Kaito]

Point number 1 would have been a resounding success but Albo trying to be smart, insisted on lumping the 2 together to try and hoodwink the voting public and sneak the voice through by not separating these 2 very different propositions.

Of course he would not listen to logic and present this referendum as 2 separate propositions and stuck to trying to get it through by trying to fool or make members of the public feel guilty if they said NO and the fact of the matter is that it just went too far and got to the stage where Albo would not dare change the wording of the referendum because the radicals behind the YES side of this referendum would crucify him.

Now as it stands when this referendum gets voted down, Albo will be saying to the radicals, I stood strong with you people and it's so unjust that there are so many stupid redneck, racist people in this country.

Talk about divisive, and regardless of the outcome there is going to be a hell of a lot of problems caused by this whole episode.

Quit talking in hypotheticals and mocking up
scenarios in your head. This isn't a left/right
issue. Your lot were quite as church mice during
the LPA years in government. I'm not even a big
Albo fan, just over the hypocrisy & bullshit lol

 

[Kaito]

The Voice isn’t about reparations, but it’s the first step towards them.
The Uluṟu Statement from the Heart makes this abundantly clear.
Voice, Treaty, Reparations. That’s the recommendations from that report.
It isn’t a conspiracy theory. People are aware of the intentions.
I don’t necessarily think saying no to the voice will stop this movement, it is well underway, but I can see why people are concerned.

Voice, Treaty, Truth but I see what u did there haha

 

[hank37w]

Quit talking in hypotheticals and mocking up
scenarios in your head. This isn't a left/right
issue. Your lot were quite as church mice during
the LPA years in government. I'm not even a big
Albo fan, just over the hypocrisy & bullshit lol

Couldn't agree more, I'm over Albo's hypocrisy & bullshit too.

 

[earl]

Are you saying those countries you've mentioned have actually written an indigenous voice into their constitution?

I'm not sure. You investigate and tell me.

 

[Kaito]

Couldn't agree more, I'm over Albo's hypocrisy & bullshit too.

Barely been a year mate, you better strap in!
2013-2022 were hardly wonder years. Dutton
hasn't got a chance in hell to be the next PM,
not just imo but also based on opinion polls

 

[426Tlgerland]

No matter what way you vote , 5is is going to divide this country once the result comes in , you can’t have a vote on an issue about one thing when the people that its about are on both sides , yes / No. I have no idea still

 

[balmain boy]

Hatred?

Far right people like Warren Mundine? Far right people like Anthony Mundine and Lidia Thorpe?

Plenty of legitimate, non ignorant, non racist reasons in this thread but you've raised your political flag pretty high mate and Im not sure you will be able to see past it.

So what are these legitimately points? Please do share.

And yes the Mundines are right wingers, and they've sold their soul many many times. Warren being on the board of mining companies digging up sacred sites says it all. They don't care about indigenous issues, they pretend they do and sell their opinion to the highest bidder.

I'm not talking about politics, I'm talking about respect and creating a shift to hopefully help our First Nations people. What we've been doing as a nation hasn't been working for decades, a change is needed. Will the voice help? Who knows, but it certainly won't do any harm.

The worst case scenario for Australia if the voice succeeds is that the opinions of the committee get ignored, or they find it too challenging to settle on consensus. Given that, why are people so afraid of giving it a go?

 

[balmain boy]

This post just makes me want to vote no even more.

Well if that's the case, it's sad that you're a lost cause for politics. If you're so closed off to discussion and are going to vote one nation for the rest of your life then, that's distressing, but your choice.

 

[balmain boy]

“The far right treat Aussies as morons, who are incapable of thinking for themselves”

Lol the moderate to far left do the same.

One reason to vote no is that we don’t need another layer of bureaucracy to make a complicated and expensive social issue even more complicated and expensive. I can guarantee you the gap won’t close if the yes gets up. But you might feel better about yourself by telling no voters they are racist.

The systems we currently have in place aren't working. Something needs to change. Actually consulting directly with the people that you're trying to help isn't a bad thing.

You say the moderates and lefts are equally patronizing. It's not uncommon for opposing views to come across that way, but don't you think it's wrong that the party trying to attract their core market have to rely on manipulating them and relying on their laziness to try win?

 

[balmain boy]

No matter what way you vote , 5is is going to divide this country once the result comes in , you can’t have a vote on an issue about one thing when the people that its about are on both sides , yes / No. I have no idea still

They're not on both sides. The vast majority of indigenous Australians are in favour of it. Has every indigenous Australian been polled? Of course not, and no policy will ever please everyone. Of the figurehead Indigenous No voters there's the Mundines who are corporate sellouts, going to right wing events the other week, sitting on boards of mining companies etc, they're not exactly the voice of the common man. Jacinta Price, well she even came out last week and said that white collonialism had had a positive impact for indigenous Australians. That's just such a ridiculously insensitive, outrageous and disrespectful thing to say about her people.

It shouldn't be divisive. There is nothing to lose from saying yes, it will never even impact most of us but could help bridge the gap that sees indigenous Australians with a much lower life expectancy than non indigenous people. We've got to try something new, this is what the Uluru statement of the great asked for, Albo has merely put it to the public to have their say. Liberal politicising calling it "Labor's risky voice" is incorrect and unnecessary.

 

[Tiger-ferret]

The systems we currently have in place aren't working. Something needs to change. Actually consulting directly with the people that you're trying to help isn't a bad thing.

You say the moderates and lefts are equally patronizing. It's not uncommon for opposing views to come across that way, but don't you think it's wrong that the party trying to attract their core market have to rely on manipulating them and relying on their laziness to try win?

I agree, direct consultation is a great thing. It’s already happening. You think programs are implanted with no direct consultation at the moment? That’s political spin. could it be better, like yes. Just like our hospital and education systems. It could always be better.

Does someone from the city, sitting on an appointed body, need to consult on another mobs business in a remote area for example? what happens if their goals and values don’t align? The voice will be a political entity regardless of how you spin it.