The Voice. An Australian referendum

[ShortForBob]

well my understanding is that this comes in two parts

The change to the constitution that simply states that there shall be a reporting body.
That's it. That reporting body could be 3 indigenous stockmen and their dog.
That cant be changed without another referendum.

It's the second bit that everyone is makeing the fuss about .
That's the legislation that creates that reporting body. Like any other legislation, that can be changed by the houses whenever it no longer suits. Bit like the old ASTIC
We don't usually bother pouring over the fine detail of legislation, we leave that to the people we elected to represent us. Why would we insist this is published before the referendum?

I really don't understand what the fuss is about in the constitutional change.
Other than people making a fuss just for the sake of it or simply being bloody minded.

 

[Mid]

we leave that to the people we elected to represent us.

trust me I'm a politician ...........

the fok .

 

[Alhadder]

well my understanding is that this comes in two parts

The change to the constitution that simply states that there shall be a reporting body.
That's it. That reporting body could be 3 indigenous stockmen and their dog.
That cant be changed without another referendum.

It's the second bit that everyone is makeing the fuss about .
That's the legislation that creates that reporting body. Like any other legislation, that can be changed by the houses whenever it no longer suits. Bit like the old ASTIC
We don't usually bother pouring over the fine detail of legislation, we leave that to the people we elected to represent us. Why would we insist this is published before the referendum?

I really don't understand what the fuss is about in the constitutional change.
Other than people making a fuss just for the sake of it or simply being bloody minded.

Meli ALL legislation/bills are published before debated in the Parliament, which our elected pollies then debate...and mostly vote on party lines, especially the ALP.

Why should this be any different? The Opposition needs to see the detail and be given the opportunity to debate it in the Parliament. The accompanying Regulations are generally a different kettle of fish.

 

[ShortForBob]

Meli ALL legislation/bills are published before debated in the Parliament, which our elected pollies then debate...and mostly vote on party lines, especially the ALP.

Why should this be any different? The Opposition needs to see the detail and be given the opportunity to debate it in the Parliament. The accompanying Regulations are generally a different kettle of fish.

Who says they won't see the detail of the CONSTITUTIONAL change to debate in parliament before the referendum?

There's so much misinformation being flogged on social media by parties like Advance Australia and a certain former PM. I'm quite happy to wait and see what's actually in the program when it's final draft is produced.

check this out. I've heard the bolded line quoted almost verbatim by certain Qlders here.

and yes, it's from Aunty :0

Former prime minister Tony Abbott is among a group of advisers to a conservative lobby group that last month was found to have published false information about the Voice to Parliament proposal in Facebook ads.

Key points:​

• Advance Australia was accused of spreading false information about the Voice to Parliament on Facebook
• Tony Abbott publicly defended the Facebook ads
• The AEC ruled that Advance Australia breached electoral laws with its ads about Zali Steggall and David Pocock

Founded in 2018 and backed by wealthy donors, Advance Australia has twice been found to have breached electoral laws with misleading or false political advertising.

In December, it published a series of Facebook ads about the Voice, which gathered 2.2 million audience impressions and were seen most often by Queenslanders over the age of 65.

The ads warned Australians that voting yes at the upcoming Voice referendum would provide "one race of people with special rights and privileges".

That claim was flagged as false information by one of Facebook's fact-checking partners, RMIT University.

"We found that it was not accurate," assistant director of RMIT FactLab, Sushi Das, said.

"We spoke to some of the country's leading constitutional and legal experts. And in their view, the proposal for the Voice to Parliament did not confer any rights on anyone, much less special rights."

Tony Abbott advising controversial conservative lobby group Advance Australia

Former prime minister Tony Abbott is among a group of advisers to a conservative lobby group that last month was found to have published false information about the Voice to Parliament proposal in Facebook ads.

www.abc.net.au

 

[ShortForBob]

trust me I'm a politician ...........

the fok .

Like it or not, that's why we elect politicians.

 

[Alhadder]

Who says they won't see the detail of the CONSTITUTIONAL change to debate in parliament before the referendum?

There's so much misinformation being flogged on social media by parties like Advance Australia and a certain former PM. I'm quite happy to wait and see what's actually in the program when it's final draft is produced.

check this out. I've heard the bolded line quoted almost verbatim by certain Qlders here.

and yes, it's from Aunty :0

Former prime minister Tony Abbott is among a group of advisers to a conservative lobby group that last month was found to have published false information about the Voice to Parliament proposal in Facebook ads.

Meh...I don't have any patience to listen to what TA says or read a report from Aunty about what he says. Didn't respect him much as PM and respect him even less now. He's a mouthpiece for the conservative right of the right wing and is part of the problem that still exists in the Libs Federally and here in WA.

And re your first sentence I didn't say the detail of the Constitutional change won't be seen. I'm talking about your point re the legislation that creates the regulatory body. If it's legislation it will be brought before the Parliament and debated and that will probably be after the Referendum. If it's just Regulations then they will not be. I think part of the issue atm is that the enabling Legislation or Regs will not be seen before the Referendum and that's what many people are getting their knickers in a twist about.

 

[ShortForBob]

Well personally, I can't see any problem with debating the legislative change after the 'in principle" constitutional change.
The government has already given "the people" the fairly detailed account of how they will work this, more than we ever get with other legislation. What gets debated in parliament would be based around that.
There's already elements that seek to destroy this before it gets off the ground, just as there was with Medicare, the corruption commission. Getting the Referendum through is one hope that this principal of an indigenous advisory voice is set in stone and cannot be easily overturned no matter how many changes to the legislation are made by incoming governments.

 

[Happy]

There's already elements that seek to destroy this before it gets off the ground, just as there was with Medicare, the corruption commission. ......this principal of an indigenous advisory voice is .....

Medicare and the CC were good and necessary, which is why the opposition to them failed. And many of the elements opposed to the proposed voice are indigenous leaders who see it as just another meaningless gravy train for the usual suspects.

Oh, and it's "principle." You're welcome.

 

[ShortForBob]

Medicare and the CC were good and necessary, which is why the opposition to them failed. And many of the elements opposed to the proposed voice are indigenous leaders who see it as just another meaningless gravy train for the usual suspects.

Oh, and it's "principle." You're welcome.

Many? who?
Price apparently worked or maybe still works for Advance Australia

 

[Alhadder]

Since this thread is about recording official information I put the below link to a story by Brett Worthington on Aunty's website this morning, so it must be true

Undoubtedly there will be discussion threads closer to the vote...too early now.
This thread is simply a reference to post official information on to help you answer your questions.
I'll only be C&P official information as the process evolves. I trust others will do the same.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-01-25/voice-to-parliament-albanese-dutton-strategies-referendum/101886144

Seems the journo is questioning Albo's small target strategy re providing more detail on The Voice referendum. Sort of echoes quite a few comments from many contributors to this thread. Good to see Aunty catching on to the mood out there.

Maybe it's a piece to highlight to Albo, or more likely his advisers, that the electorate is leaning toward not supporting the referendum without more detail.

 

[MikeHunt]

Its just another sinecure for lefty Labor mates... and they are trying to lock it in. Its no different with the trade unions, which despite their use of public money, don't have anywhere near the level of oversight and transparency of public corporations. Given that there was no Aboriginal Nation pre white settlement (and inter-breeding between settlers and the indigenous population); but a land mass with 700 or more tribes of varying levels of friendliness towards each other, there's no indigenous model that can be proposed for the Voice. I will suggest one. Create an appointed position to advise the Prime Minister of the day on indigenous issues - within the parliament, or outside, advising the PM. Clearly someone just did that for Albo... whispered in his ear and said "get yer arse up to the Alice, pronto". It worked. Legislate it, but don't expose the country to a racist piece of Constitutional change.

 

[The Dark Knight]

Its just another sinecure for lefty Labor mates... and they are trying to lock it in. Its no different with the trade unions, which despite their use of public money, don't have anywhere near the level of oversight and transparency of public corporations. Given that there was no Aboriginal Nation pre white settlement (and inter-breeding between settlers and the indigenous population); but a land mass with 700 or more tribes of varying levels of friendliness towards each other, there's no indigenous model that can be proposed for the Voice. I will suggest one. Create an appointed position to advise the Prime Minister of the day on indigenous issues - within the parliament, or outside, advising the PM. Clearly someone just did that for Albo... whispered in his ear and said "get yer arse up to the Alice, pronto". It worked. Legislate it, but don't expose the country to a racist piece of Constitutional change.

Too logical.

Will never happen under these clowns.

 

[Goodvibes]

You'd have to be stupid or Meli to commit 100% to voting yes without seeing the detail.

Funni as.

Rich White Cunts who own yachts, tell abo's what they should and should not do.

If the 1967 referendum was run again now, the one that took the first nations off the Fauna Act, it would fail because of fakebook addicted RWC's that have been convinced of the same thing racist bogan's believe. But they have no fucking idea how they have been played. Bogan's are jut too stupid so I will excuse them.

YCMTSU

 

[00seven]

Funni as.

Rich White Cunts who own yachts, tell abo's what they should and should not do.

If the 1967 referendum was run again now, the one that took the first nations off the Fauna Act, it would fail because of fakebook addicted RWC's that have been convinced of the same thing racist bogan's believe. But they have no fucking idea how they have been played. Bogan's are jut too stupid so I will excuse them.

YCMTSU

Which way did you vote in '67? You keep telling us you're a rich white cunt that owned yachts.

 

[Goodvibes]

Which way did you vote in '67? You keep telling us you're a rich white cunt that owned yachts.

I was still 'shitting yellow' in 1967.

I'm proof that if you have half a brain, that racist mysoginit bullshit doesn't have to rule you life. But it doesn't work if you are lazy, you have to work to get an education first.

 

[00seven]

I was still 'shitting yellow' in 1967.

I'm proof that if you have half a brain, that racist mysoginit bullshit doesn't have to rule you life. But it doesn't work if you are lazy, you have to work to get an education first.

You're a rich white cunt who owned yachts. You beat kangaroos with a stick & tell abos what to do.

 

[The Dark Knight]

Funni as.

Rich White Cunts who own yachts, tell abo's what they should and should not do.

If the 1967 referendum was run again now, the one that took the first nations off the Fauna Act, it would fail because of fakebook addicted RWC's that have been convinced of the same thing racist bogan's believe. But they have no fucking idea how they have been played. Bogan's are jut too stupid so I will excuse them.

YCMTSU

You really are a stupid fuck.

Was too young to know anything about it at the time, but removing them from that act and giving them the same rights was NOT a blank cheque referendum.

Did I mention that you are a stupid fuck?

 

[ShortForBob]

Funni as.

Rich White Cunts who own yachts, tell abo's what they should and should not do.

If the 1967 referendum was run again now, the one that took the first nations off the Fauna Act, it would fail because of fakebook addicted RWC's that have been convinced of the same thing racist bogan's believe. But they have no fucking idea how they have been played. Bogan's are jut too stupid so I will excuse them.

YCMTSU

Yeah, maybe Australians have forgotten the "fair go" and support for the underdog principles that their parents held. Just selfish "got mine, you fuck off" generational whine.

But do us a favour and knock off the Bogan comments, I know many flannel shirt wearing, blue collar working, cold chisel loving, pie eating year 10 drop outs, friends even. They are thoroughly decent, not at all racist, kind people.
But this is Victoria.

my observations of Qld are that most are Bogans of another kind and even Victorian non bogans that migrate there are soon buying their BBQ barge and flashing their bling. Something in the air does it.

 

[The Dark Knight]

"The Voice" is going to be marked down as a failure of Albo's leadership because of his poor handling of the debate and not providing sufficient details, even if it gets up.

 

[Fah Kiew Tu]

"The Voice" is going to be marked down as a failure of Albo's leadership because of his poor handling of the debate and not providing sufficient details, even if it gets up.

I do like how all the violence, drunkenness and assaults in Alice and other places is all the fault of everyone except the people actually getting drunk, bashing people and stealing shit.

And how if only the Voice was implemented, none of that would ever have happened.

Almost enough to get me to vote it up, on the strict understanding that if Govt implements what the Voice people recommend, they OWN the results. But I know they'll still blame everyone else, so - no.

The whole thing is a huge no win. If strict alcohol and finance controls are imposed on a race basis, that is absolutely racial discrimination and those adversely affected who DON'T do the shit have every right to be affronted. As a sorta libertarian type, I'd agree with them.

OTOH if everyone shrugs and says 'Can't discriminate, sort it yourselves' then the result is rapidly unliveable communities. As we see in Alice and other places.

And if we DO round up all the offenders and jail them, the screams of over-representation and racial discrimination in the 'Justice' system once again rise up to the heavens.

So - fuck it. Cut off the booze to Alice and other places in total. Everyone goes dry. We haven't tried that yet, let's see how that plays out. I reckon I know, but it'd be an interesting experiment in enforcing a limited prohibition. The smugglers should make a motza.

FKT