Referendum

[earl]

Scratch the surface of the Voice results, and a more complicated picture emerges

Scratch the surface of the Voice referendum results, and a more complicated picture emerges.

www.abc.net.au

This is actually an interesting article. It's also interesting in relation to how the last referendum namely that of becoming a republic.

It'd be interesting hearing any thoughts on that info.

 

[earl]

Nothing should happen next,

I hate to say this to you but you are going to be disappointed. There are currently treaties happening at state level everywhere I believe except NSW. Several No Indigenous voters were voting no because they want a treaty more quickly.

I just added some detail to this:-

Voice referendum results LIVE updates: No vote passes: Jacinta Price questions AEC; Peter Dutton slammed by Adam Bandt

The Voice referendum failed within 90 minutes of the polls closing on Saturday night. The fallout from the result continues on Sunday.

www.smh.com.au

Independent senator and progressive No campaigner Lidia Thorpe said the No victory was a win for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and it was now time for a treaty.

We just voted, its a no answer,, but the fact that the vote no was the answer from majority of Aussies thats not acceptable, you got your shot at it and you lost,
Learn to live with it.

Like we would have if we would have lost.0

This makes absolutely no sense. I didn't get my shot at anything and I haven't lost anything. This wasn't about me. Do you have any evidence I can't respect the democratic process ? What a bizarre bunch of comments.

 

[Tiger-ferret]

I hate to say this to you but you are going to be disappointed. There are currently treaties happening at state level everywhere I believe except NSW. Several No Indigenous voters were voting no because they want a treaty more quickly.

I just added some detail to this:-

Voice referendum results LIVE updates: No vote passes: Jacinta Price questions AEC; Peter Dutton slammed by Adam Bandt

The Voice referendum failed within 90 minutes of the polls closing on Saturday night. The fallout from the result continues on Sunday.

www.smh.com.au

This makes absolutely no sense. I didn't get my shot at anything and I haven't lost anything. This wasn't about me. Do you have any evidence I can't respect the democratic process ? What a bizarre bunch of comments.

So what im reading is that progress is happening regardless of an outcome of a $400mil referendum. Cheers

 

[Demps]

So what im reading is that progress is happening regardless of an outcome of a $400mil referendum. Cheers

Money well spent....

 

[Jedi_Tiger]

I hate to say this to you but you are going to be disappointed. There are currently treaties happening at state level everywhere I believe except NSW. Several No Indigenous voters were voting no because they want a treaty more quickly.

I just added some detail to this:-

Voice referendum results LIVE updates: No vote passes: Jacinta Price questions AEC; Peter Dutton slammed by Adam Bandt

The Voice referendum failed within 90 minutes of the polls closing on Saturday night. The fallout from the result continues on Sunday.

www.smh.com.au

This makes absolutely no sense. I didn't get my shot at anything and I haven't lost anything. This wasn't about me. Do you have any evidence I can't respect the democratic process ? What a bizarre bunch of comments.

treaties at state level don't equate too much, federally was what the Yes movement were after treaty rise
i suggest Premier of S A. will have to reassess his parties position for voting yes at a state level moving forward

 

[earl]

So what im reading is that progress is happening regardless of an outcome of a $400mil referendum. Cheers

Correct. It's interesting.

When it comes to the money though if you want to change the constitution it requires a referendum.

The republic referendum would have cost a similar amount.

It was also something that was pushed via Indigenous leaders.

 

[Tucker]

Well said. The " truth telling" called for must include aboriginal Australians being honest & reflecting on their own failings to improve their own & their childrens/communities circumstances. Absolutely not denying the dark history of colonisation, but truth is a 2 way street.

You can pretty much guarantee that the “truth telling” will be 100% slanted towards how victimised Aboriginal people are. There will be no success stories where white, black and all in between worked together to build this nation. It will be just the horror stories - which of course should be told, however it’s not the whole truth.

 

[Odessa]

Hopefully we develop a good way to improve things for Indigenous people. Not sure what that looks like. Politicians last night showed it's more of the same from them, blaming each other and turning it into a contest. Albo no responsibility and disconnected from working class Australia, while Dutton proposing more politicians doing things to Indigenous people not by them. Think we're exactly where we've always been on the issues and I don't see it leading to a cohesive and effective approach.

If you listen to David littleproud he has some good information and ideas and is the best Politician I have heard talking about Aboriginal problems and thinks canberra has no idea

 

[The Chad]

You can pretty much guarantee that the “truth telling” will be 100% slanted towards how victimised Aboriginal people are. There will be no success stories where white, black and all in between worked together to build this nation. It will be just the horror stories - which of course should be told, however it’s not the whole truth.

I want to key a phrase before what you said takes place-

RELEVANT TRUTH.

It's only relevant if it tells the story you want told.

Get on board "relevant truth'. It's the new 'social distancing'.

 

[Kelce68]

M

Mate, brilliant post. Couldn't agree more. By the way, totally separate question, are you dating Taylor Swift?

Not yet... Haha

 

[Kelce68]

I didn't see any of this however you've certainly displayed this behavior in your post.



I don't understand this at all so I'll point out that someone called out the $40 billion Indigenous spend that when I looked it up was actually $5 bn spend via the reported federal budget spend.

Facts should matter.

$33.4 million from the Productivity Report from 2017. Extrapolating out to 2023, one would assume it would then be approaching that $40 billion figure.

Not only that, but that figure represents 6% of all expenditure, close to double the ~3% of Australians that are Indigenous.

Fair?

Maybe you should've looked harder. ..

 

[earl]

View attachment 7233
$33.4 million from the Productivity Report from 2017. Extrapolating out to 2023, one would assume it would then be approaching that $40 billion figure.

Not only that, but that figure represents 6% of all expenditure, close to double the ~3% of Australians that are Indigenous.

Fair?

Maybe you should've looked harder. ..

Indigenous specific spend is $6bn. The other spend is normal spend for everyone. It's like Medicare, defense forces, aged care etc.

It's not about looking harder. It's about trying to get the right information and then basing discussions on that information. I consider your post proving my point regarding the spend. Let's use the right facts and the right facts wouldn't include that stuff.

 

[Kelce68]

Indigenous specific spend is $6bn. The other spend is normal spend for everyone. It's like Medicare, defense forces, aged care etc.

It's not about looking harder. It's about trying to get the right information and then basing discussions on that information. I consider your post proving my point regarding the spend. Let's use the right facts and the right facts wouldn't include that stuff.

Indigenous-specific spend is on indigenous only programs, money that they're give on top. Money that no other subset of the population gets access to.

Fair?

Obviously, the remaining amount was still spent on indigenous people, but through welfare programs that other Australians also have access to. This doesn't mean its not spent on indigenous people.

Therefore, when people say $40 billion (or thereabouts) are spent each year on indigineous people, they are correct. You can't just erase the other $30-odd billion from the conversation because it doesn't fit your narrative.

They still receive those funds.

Unequivocally.

No one is saying 'we spend $40 million on indigenous-only programs'.

 

[twentyforty]

Indigenous specific spend is $6bn. The other spend is normal spend for everyone. It's like Medicare, defense forces, aged care etc.

It's not about looking harder. It's about trying to get the right information and then basing discussions on that information. I consider your post proving my point regarding the spend. Let's use the right facts and the right facts wouldn't include that stuff.

https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/error-in-the-project-star-hamish-macdonalds-slapdown-of-kamahl-on-40bn-indigenous-spend/news-story/66b67595929877bc11f362438c10b633

 

[earl]

Indigenous-specific spend is on indigenous only programs, money that they're give on top. Money that no other subset of the population gets access to.

Fair?

Obviously, the remaining amount was still spent on indigenous people, but through welfare programs that other Australians also have access to. This doesn't mean its not spent on indigenous people.

Therefore, when people say $40 billion (or thereabouts) are spent each year on indigineous people, they are correct. You can't just erase the other $30-odd billion from the conversation because it doesn't fit your narrative.

They still receive those funds.

Unequivocally.

No one is saying 'we spend $40 million on indigenous-only programs'.

It's misinformation. We have a spend on all Australians which includes Indigenous people and yourself and myself. Then we have a specific Indigenous spend. That is the extra or the delta or whatever you want to call it.

I want to be really clear. The $40 billion dollar figure is misinformation. It's basically an outright lie. They are honestly breaking down spending on aged care, the defense forces etc and trying to apportion that out to Indigenous people. It's completely dodgy and false data.

It also has nothing to do with my narrative. I don't want to have a narrative. I want facts and then to discuss the facts. The facts should be clear and open and then we can discuss the issues.

It's always going to be the delta spend that matters. A good way to look at this is to flip the argument. Do you get rid of hospital care or aged care or the pension for Indigenous people ?

You should read that article to provide more information:-

Using Credlin’s argument, one could assert that the government spends $285.5 billion on women annually.

Or, that $44 million was spent annually on the total number of new baby boys named Oliver who were born in 2016.

Indigenous-specific expenditure accounts for 1.1 per cent of the total direct expenditure on all Australians, Mr Campbell pointed out.

It's such a stupid way to view the breakdown of spending you could argue against any group in Australia being privileged just by without any facts stating well x amount of dollars is spend on group X for instance.

 

[earl]

https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/error-in-the-project-star-hamish-macdonalds-slapdown-of-kamahl-on-40bn-indigenous-spend/news-story/66b67595929877bc11f362438c10b633

Good article. It's very simple. There is a spend for All Australians and then there is a specific Indigenous spend. The specific Indigenous spend is around $6 bn. People quoting a higher figure are spreading misinformation.

The misinformation is the result of people trying to create drama via quoting false figures. So they completely falsify the data to make out that Indigenous spend consists of additional spend for all Australians and this is where they get the vast majority of their figure. I suggest this figure is completely made up as well. It's a dodgy estimate.

 

[Furious1]

At end of the day, it's been run and lost. The main focus now should be on the accountability of where that money goes and what it does. There should be an audit, undoubtedly. It may find everything is above board and more is required, conversely it may find there is more than enough money that is not being used appropriately and therefore changes will need to be made. I don't believe there would be too many Aussies out there that would have a problem providing more funding if they knew it was achieving results. On the other side of the coin, we live in times where wasted finances is just not acceptable.

This should not be a political issue. It is now irrelevant whether the same money was wasted this year, last year or for the last decade. The very fact the issue has so much prominence now means it should not be swept under the carpet. It's time tax payers knew where their money is going and why it doesn't seem to be making the inroads it should, regardless whether you believe its 4.5 billion or 39.5 billion.

As has been stated earlier by others, if/when the money is getting to these communities, the onus is on them to stand up and make a change. Like i always say to my son, that person staring back at you in the mirror is responsible for how your life turns out, your the one who can change it, or you can sit back, look for excuses and blame everyone else. The choice is yours.

 

[Siberian Kitten]

Whatever, in the last 50 years we have spent many billions. We have had thousands of Aboriginal consultants. The restitution money has already been paid

And where are we? Actually much progress has been made, but the media is not interested in what worked because it's not sensational. The mainstream media have been truly awful. Dishonest. Sly. Insulting. Patronising. Evasive. Divisive.

The problems seem to mainly lie in remote communities. There is no way a Canberra-based group can help them at a distance, just as distant governments have never solved the problems of remote communities (Aboriginal or otherwise).

Also, there's an issue with "box tickers". It's said to be insulting to get Aboriginal people to be tested for Aboriginality, but that means more and more jobs, homes and study opportunities designated for Aboriginals will be taken by fakers. How can Aboriginals protect their benefits from fakers without testing? It's in their interests for claimants to prove their bona fides, not just tick a box.

"Just trust us" is not something that happens in a world where trust has been shattered. Albo didn't read the zeitgeist. It was a strange performance from him. He seemed wilfully blind to obvious issues, including the fact that most people who voted no are not racist and would have easily approved recognition in the Constitution - without the extra committee.

The attempt to include the Voice on top of recognition is an example of the old saying "the perfect is the enemy of the good".

Albo's advisers demanded a "perfect" model and it was a bridge too far. If they'd just aimed for "good" instead of "perfect" with Constitutional recognition, everyone would be happier today, and there'd be much less division.

There would also be lower media sales ...

 

[Betterdays22]

Predictable result for mine.
The bullshit being spouted that three quarters of all Aboriginals were voting yes has been exposed.
In the end, it was likely close to the opposite - as Jacinta Price said it was.
Also unsurprising to me is that people living in the inner city LGAs around the country strongly voted yes, whilst those in rural and remote LGAs returned strong no votes.
That further backs up the thoughts I put forward on here months ago that those living in the cities DO NOT LISTEN TO, NOR UNDERSTAND what is going on in the rest of the country. They think they know what’s best and create their own narratives whilst the opposite views are dismissed as bogan, stupid, held by dinosaurs and dickheads or just plain racist.
It was very obvious to us who don’t live in cities that our voices would not be heard when it came to this Voice to Parliament and we rejected it in droves in every state.
On a personal note, I am very disappointed that the Government handled this so poorly. If campaigned correctly, with bi-partisan support and thorough planning, this could have brought the country together. These arrogant fools have now driven a wedge between us as a nation. The crap about Aboriginal leaders wanting a week of mourning will do likewise. It’s a bloody joke and they should feel ashamed.

Tucker that is just totally incorrect. I am looking now at the votes from rural and remote communities in the NT and they have overwhelmingly voted yes.

Edit: added source for reference

 

[tony soprano]

Tucker that is just totally incorrect. I am looking now at the votes from rural and remote communities in the NT and they have overwhelmingly voted yes.

Edit: added source for reference

Yes campaign probablem got to them like desperate albo visiting mosques.