BirchgroveTigers
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2017
- Messages
- 445
The voice is nothing more than an advisory body. We know that as the text for which we will be voting is confirmed.People need to think more about the statement of some people that the voice (as proposed) is going to improve the lot of the indigenous peoples and it seems the "right" thing to do.
That is way too simplistic a view and this referendum is not a simple situation.
It is too important and the overarching effect of the outcome is still too vague.
Lets look at it like this.....
If Yes "wins" we have a constitutional enshrined instrument (probably never to be removed) called "The Voice" that accord to proponents, is nothing more than an advisory panel. The Government of the day can do anything they want with this advice, including completely ignoring it - so as an instrument of change it is toothless in reality. And we have divided the populace, and spent, how much $360M? on a toothless tiger; not forgetting the millions that will be pumped into the Voice bureaucracy every year for the advice to be ignored.
All for politics.
If, as the No campaign say, it is the crack in the wall for reparations, land rights, Blak Sovereignty, GDP sharing etc then $360M will be but a piddle in the bucket and the full and complete ramifications of such a change to the constitution should have been clearly spelled out for all of the nation to consider and understand and not be hidden behind simplistic jingoistic "helping hands" "smiley happy clappies", let alone understanding the link between what may be and its primary proponents - who happen to be trade unionists, marxists and a whole host of white knights.
There are a lot of advisory bodies, such as the Productivity Commission or the Australian Human Rights Commission whose advice is regularly ignored. That doesn’t mean those bodies shouldn’t exist.
Describing people as support it as “unionists, marxists and a whole host of white knights” is quite rude and dismissive of lots of everyday Australians who think it’s a step forward.
It’s a hard debate but let’s keep it civil.