Referendum 2023

Status
Not open for further replies.
Some interesting points out of that video.
1. albanese has said that the government will implement the Uluru system from the heart IN FULL which means 100% Treaty.
2. The proposal doesn’t spell out whether The Voice would provide consultation to the Parliament or the Executive. The prime minister has said it will by the executive which by definition includes special committees. Very dangerous.
 
balmain boy said:
balmain boy said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...
Where did I say I was voting one nation? If i’m being honest your post was one of the most stupid posts i’ve seen on this thread. You literally just branded anyone who doesn’t agree with you as ignorant or racist.
 
earl said:
earl said:
I provided some links for you to investigate. You should investigate.

Why would this hurt anyone ? Why not take a risk to potentially improve the situation ? Is this proposal put together by Indigenous people ? Will they have to take responsibility for it working ?

I haven't yet heard a good argument for no. I've got some good arguments for yes though.

Do you think it's telling that most of the noise for voting no is solely based on the zero-sum (what about me) argument ?
Click to expand...

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.
Click to expand...
Facts that will see NO vote succeed
1 NO mention before election
2 NO even basic information ( just trust me it feels good)
3. Anyone who votes NO is chicken Little ,then realised he must try and change his nasty hypocriptical behavior
4 Appointed radical vitriolic socialists to lead the yes vote who only have a discussion on calling anyone who does not have the same views .... RACISTS
5. Lopsided funding, with the yes vote getting many more millions to represent their no detail speel
6 Free flights for yes campaigners supplies by the Irish disgraced entitled conman
7. Caught out early on with the W.A tree planting fiasco which was closed down by Albo
8. Langton would be a leader (God help us)

Yes vote reasoning just trust me and blackout it will feel good
 
WestsEffTheRest said:
earl said:
It's cool to have a different opinion but I don't believe I'm underestimating any problems or airily waved away any fair claims.

Let's put the cost into perspective fairly though because it's important to react appropriately to various spending and it's good to separate fact from emotion.

The Nuclear submarines cost $300bn. Indigenous spend is $5bn.
Click to expand...
At the moment it is 30 billion per year!!!
Click to expand...
 
balmain boy said:
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?
Click to expand...
If the NO vote succeeds, we'll be labelled a racist nation, if the YES vote succeeds and the opinions of the committee are ignored the whole of government will be labelled racist. It's a no win situation.
 
tigerballs said:
If the NO vote succeeds, we'll be labelled a racist nation, if the YES vote succeeds and the opinions of the committee are ignored the whole of government will be labelled racist. It's a no win situation.
Click to expand...
who does The Voice present opinions and recommendations to? Parliament or the executive ? Makes a massive difference and will also make a difference when issues get to the High Court.
 
l haven't seen much discussion here about the role of the High Court. The High Courts role is to rule on the correct implementation of theConstitution. If government makes a decision without consultation with the Voice it will be straight in high court. I think the High Court will get a lot more traffic
 
colinbh said:
How?
Click to expand...

Not sure if your serious or not by comparing
the referendum to apartheid but here are some
points. South Africa was dominated politically,
socially, and economically through minoritarianism
by the nation's minority white population from
1948 until the early 90's. 3.5 million black Africans
were removed from their homes and forced into
segregated neighbourhoods as a result of
apartheid legislation in some of the largest mass
evictions in modern history. Blacks weren't able
to vote, weren't able to inter mingle with whites,
were prohibited from marrying/having relations
with whites, trains, hospitals and ambulances
were segregated, Black people were not allowed
to run businesses or practices in areas designated
as "white South Africa" unless they had a permit –
such being granted only exceptionally. Public
beaches, swimming pools, some pedestrian
bridges, cinemas, parking spaces, graveyards,
parks, and public toilets were segregated.
Most restaurants and hotels in white areas were
not allowed to admit blacks except as staff. Blacks
were prohibited from attending white churches
under the Churches Native Laws, they had to
carry passes around them at all times in their
own country and were stripped of citizenship
in certain areas etc. Apartheid was horrible.
I despise when people use the word so casually.
Especially when it's used for mundane issues
and in the wrong context. Not a personal shot
at you, just in general. We're lucky we never had
to live under such injustices here in Australia
 
Mistymuzzle said:
l haven't seen much discussion here about the role of the High Court. The High Courts role is to rule on the correct implementation of theConstitution. If government makes a decision without consultation with the Voice it will be straight in high court. I think the High Court will get a lot more traffic
Click to expand...
I mentioned this breify earlier on in this thread.
The Government must request representation from the voice in everything.
That means the Voice committee will need to be working 24/7/365. Obviously they can’t, so just how big will the Voice department be?
Smaller Operational (up to a 1000 employees) or Larger Operational (1001 to 10000 employees)?
Like you said, failure to include them will likely result in high court action.
Just how much will this cost?
 
Mistymuzzle said:
I t doesnt say that anywhere
Click to expand...
Advice

The Voice will give independent advice to the Parliament and Government​

  • The Voice would make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
  • The Voice would be able to make representations proactively.
  • The Voice would be able to respond to requests for representations from the Parliament and the Executive Government.
  • The Voice would have its own resources to allow it to research, develop and make representations.
  • The Parliament and Executive Government should seek representations in writing from the Voice early in the development of proposed laws and policies.

Reference:

Culture and Empowering Communities | NIAA

Strengthening of Indigenous cultural expression and conservation and working with communities to set priorities and greater influence over decisions that affect them.
voice.gov.au voice.gov.au
 
Tucker said:
Advice

The Voice will give independent advice to the Parliament and Government​

  • The Voice would make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
  • The Voice would be able to make representations proactively.
  • The Voice would be able to respond to requests for representations from the Parliament and the Executive Government.
  • The Voice would have its own resources to allow it to research, develop and make representations.
  • The Parliament and Executive Government should seek representations in writing from the Voice early in the development of proposed laws and policies.

Reference:

Culture and Empowering Communities | NIAA

Strengthening of Indigenous cultural expression and conservation and working with communities to set priorities and greater influence over decisions that affect them.
voice.gov.au voice.gov.au
Click to expand...
Wow so both
 
Tucker said:
Advice

The Voice will give independent advice to the Parliament and Government​

  • The Voice would make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
  • The Voice would be able to make representations proactively.
  • The Voice would be able to respond to requests for representations from the Parliament and the Executive Government.
  • The Voice would have its own resources to allow it to research, develop and make representations.
  • The Parliament and Executive Government should seek representations in writing from the Voice early in the development of proposed laws and policies.

Reference:

Culture and Empowering Communities | NIAA

Strengthening of Indigenous cultural expression and conservation and working with communities to set priorities and greater influence over decisions that affect them.
voice.gov.au voice.gov.au
Click to expand...
It’s becoming clear why there was no detail earlier. Seems they’ve moved from having no power, being only an advisory voice, to having access to the executive government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Members online

Total: 880 (members: 1, guests: 879)
Back
Top