Play Nice Referendum - Indigenous Voice in Parliament - Part 2

[Gethelred]

Link to the proposed Referendum, from the Referendum Working Group:

(Edited 6 April 2023)

These are the words that will be put to the Australian people in the upcoming referendum as agreed by the Referendum Working Group (made up of representatives of First Nations communities from around Australia):

"A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?"

As well as that, it will be put to Australians that the constitution be amended to include a new chapter titled "Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples".

The details would be:


View attachment 1636890

The Prime Minister has committed to the government introducing legislation with this wording to parliament on 30 March 2023 and to establishing a joint parliamentary committee to consider it and receive submissions on the wording, providing ALL members of Parliament with the opportunity to consider and debate the full details of the proposal.

Parliament will then vote on the wording in June in the lead up to a National Referendum.

The ANU has issued a paper responding to common public concerns expressed in relation to the proposed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice here:

Indigenous Voice to Parliament | Australian National University

Responding to common concerns about an aboriginal and torres strait islander voice First Nations portfolio Background

www.anu.edu.au

Summary details of the key points from this paper may be found in Chief post here:

The Uluru Statement from the Heart:

Not specifically No. In any case it does not form part of the Referendum proposal.

View attachment 1769742

Seeing as things have gotten a bit toxic in here, let's try to return things to a more civil tone.

The following will result in warnings to begin with, and if said behaviour continues will be escalated:

• referring to another poster as racist without direct provocation.
• dismissing or deriding another poster's lived experience.
• personal attacks or one line posts designed solely to insult or deride.

You might notice that the final rule is from the board rules. Thought we should probably remember that this is against the rules in case it's been forgotten.

Let's play nicely from here, people.

 

[Romeoh1]

That who in their own right mind would vote for a blank canvas

Most people, at every election?

 

[Roby]

SA officially the only state where every electorate voted no, including the Adelaide electorate (also the only inner-city electorate to vote now).

Have to wonder how that will impact the voice legislation that Pete has proposed.

Again, anecdotal, but ALL my family that live in Adelaide hate Aboriginals to the core. They're a little more tolerant of other darker skinned people.. shameful

 

[Stokey]

Maybe you have been in London too long. Melbourne is really easy to get around on pt these days. London- crikey- takes an entire night to get to another suburb.

Really? You obviously did it wrong

 

[Pugz89]

Do we have the stats for aboriginals in Australia as a whole ?

Yes / no vote percent. Cheers

Late to the thread and may have been answered, but because it was an anonymous vote, it wouldn't be possible to get that info.

 

[tastiger]

Too sad for words. So sorry.

Hahahaha, bit dramatic mate. No one has died or anything.

On VOG-L09 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[1990crow]

Hahahaha, bit dramatic mate. No one has died or anything.

On VOG-L09 using BigFooty.com mobile app

For indigenous people today I bet they're mourning. Australia basically said a big up yours to them.

 

[Roby]

Hahahaha, bit dramatic mate. No one has died or anything.

On VOG-L09 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Actually they have. Just goes to show you had no idea that you were voting for.

 

[ElectricG]

100%

ElectricG

I also said earlier that if we had a referendum to increase workers pay by 200%, maybe cap ceo rates to $1Million we would overwhelmingly vote for it. Would that be in the best interests of the country.

Plato I believe once talked about how only intelligent, or educated people should vote in elections due to the misinformation and propaganda even back then. We kind of do that already given we vote members into parliament to make decisions from advisors. I'd rather that, than put it in the hands of the whole population.

I'm an advocate of technocracy in some form. But that wouldn't stop bribery from powerful people or organizations.

How would this work then, purps? Who gets to vote? You?

 

[Purple7x08_24]

Late to the thread and may have been answered, but because it was an anonymous vote, it wouldn't be possible to get that info.

LewisHall A fair indication would be looking at Fitzroy Crossing, I'm unsure on the "WHITE" population in FC, but I'd imagine it COULD bring it up to 80% sold by Albo

	YES	NO	TOTAL
Fitzroy Crossing Total 2 Booths	222​	90​	312​
	71%​	29%​

 

[tastiger]

My dad was indigenous, stolen generation.
And you could definitely tell he was indigenous. But I've got blonde hair and blue eyes and am as white as a ghost so I don't feel right about claiming my indigenous side.

What I wish they had of done for the voice is explained better as to how it would help close the gap. I honestly believe most people want the right thing done but then a lot of people saw another layer of bureaucracy and people hate government.

I think in a way it was failed by Albo and the Labour government.

Well said sir.

On VOG-L09 using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Rob R]

State governments don’t employ enough diligence across their tenders for the clauses they write in their for local and indigenous content.

can't talk to state but federal is a farce, just need to show partial ownership, who does the actual paid work doesn't matter.

On SM-A125F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Festerz]

HAHA, He's not going to introduce it. It's just spin, and now this is over he can throw bombs at Albo come question time.

The legislation has already been passed by both Houses of SA Parliament . More than 6 months ago.

HAHA indeed.

 

[Purple7x08_24]

How would this work then, purps? Who gets to vote? You?

A technocracy appoints experts in given fields to make key decisions in the best interest of the country. It's still open to bribery, and misinformation in the media however. No system is perfect. But the system needs to be transparent to the public.

I understand it still gets tricky balancing social, environmental and economic issues.

There are papers out there on having licenses to vote but I doubt that would work. The problem I have with the system is people are blindly stuck in their ways. Look at the US political system. People are mostly pro democrat or pro republican. How many times do you see someone on twitter retweet something that is blatantly false and they believe it. How many people on social forums share the information that fits their agenda, but ignore anything that doesn't?

I'm university educated, and If I'm being honest it allowed me to think critically and what ultimately lead me to becoming independent although partly due to personal and life experiences. I come from a Labor background, I'm an environmentalist, but on social issues, character development and growth I'm invested in Jordan Peterson's approach.

Unfortunately, too many people refuse to invest time into being an independent thinker, and they blindly accept the misinformation that is spoon fed to them. That goes on both sides of politics.

I guess people will always be biased into voting for what meets their needs the best even if it means lying or subscribing to misinformation. I don't think a population overall can possibly vote in the best interest of the country.

 

[mcnulty]

A technocracy appoints experts in given fields to make key decisions in the best interest of the country. It's still open to bribery, and misinformation in the media however. No system is perfect. But the system needs to be transparent to the public.

I understand it still gets tricky balancing social, environmental and economic issues.

There are papers out there on having licenses to vote but I doubt that would work. The problem I have with the system is people are blindly stuck in their ways. Look at the US political system. People are mostly pro democrat or pro republican. How many times do you see someone on twitter retweet something that is blatantly false and they believe it. How many people on social forums share the information that fits their agenda, but ignore anything that doesn't?

I'm university educated, and If I'm being honest it allowed me to think critically and what ultimately lead me to becoming independent although partly due to personal and life experiences. I come from a Labor background, I'm an environmentalist, but on social issues, character development and growth I'm invested in Jordan Peterson's approach.

Unfortunately, too many people refuse to invest time into being an independent thinker, and they blindly accept the misinformation that is spoon fed to them. That goes on both sides of politics.

I guess people will always be biased into voting for what meets their needs the best even if it means lying or subscribing to misinformation. I don't think a population overall can possibly vote in the best interest of the country.

You’re an independent thinker invested in Jordan Peterson’s approach?

 

[eastfreo75]

The reasons for the No result.
1. People scare about the Voice could become.
2. No detail about the structure of the voice. People don't like un-certainty
3. Anti Woke movement - people are over the elites lecturing them. You can be anti woke and non racist
4. Racism - some people are actually racist
5. The Black Sovereign movement - being louder than the realistic Voice mob. People seeing first nations people very divided about the voice, when in reality 80% wanted the voice.
6. People knowing that a voice will lead to a "treaty" and they are against a treaty.
7. Voters believing already has a voice and this is an extra level of government.
8. Lie that the Voice would become a third house of parliament.
9. That the voice is a vehicle for communists to take over.
10. People believing First nations people already have extra rights and the voice will give them more.
11. The Liberals playing politics and muddying the issues.
12. Voters saying that first nations people are lazy and just want the government to do the work.
13. Alot of right wing nut cases with too much time on their hands.
14. Mining industry funding the "no voice" groups on the internet.
15. People believing that all people should be equal.
16. Sky News muddying the issues.
17. Australia hates change.
18. Labor party having their heads in the sand. Idealist in approach and should have played politics.
19. WA Aboriginal Land act being dumb and unworkable
20. Yes mob not being organised and should have targeted NSW,VIC,SA and TAS. WA and Queensland was a lost cause.
21. Yes mob not understanding that they needed to go hard earlier and more resources to the net,

 

[ElectricG]

A technocracy appoints experts in given fields to make key decisions in the best interest of the country. It's still open to bribery, and misinformation in the media however. No system is perfect. But the system needs to be transparent to the public.

I understand it still gets tricky balancing social, environmental and economic issues.

There are papers out there on having licenses to vote but I doubt that would work. The problem I have with the system is people are blindly stuck in their ways. Look at the US political system. People are mostly pro democrat or pro republican. How many times do you see someone on twitter retweet something that is blatantly false and they believe it. How many people on social forums share the information that fits their agenda, but ignore anything that doesn't?

I'm university educated, and If I'm being honest it allowed me to think critically and what ultimately lead me to becoming independent although partly due to personal and life experiences. I come from a Labor background, I'm an environmentalist, but on social issues, character development and growth I'm invested in Jordan Peterson's approach.

Unfortunately, too many people refuse to invest time into being an independent thinker, and they blindly accept the misinformation that is spoon fed to them. That goes on both sides of politics.

I guess people will always be biased into voting for what meets their needs the best even if it means lying or subscribing to misinformation. I don't think a population overall can possibly vote in the best interest of the country.

I think what you’re describing is called a dictatorship

 

[Gethelred]

You need some copium stat.

Yep. You're done.

 

[whattagun07]

Well said sir.

On VOG-L09 using BigFooty.com mobile app

Indeed.

Plenty of my Facebook feed is filled with people who are saying how ashamed everyone should feel after this vote. Why would anyone want to come out as a No voter? Would be labelled racist, vile, and be heaped with shame. Plenty of hate coming from that side if you ask me.

Such a simplistic view, it infuriates me.

Common misconceptions:

• Voting No is a rejection of Indigenous people.
• Voting No means you don't want Indigenous people to be heard.
• Voting No makes you a racist.
• Voting No means you don't want Indigenous people recognised in the constitution.

They simply worded it incorrectly, trying to make the Voice and Recognition like 'Love and Marriage' (you can't have one without the other)
The lack of information on the who what when where how of the Voice is the reason it failed. I tried to listen, to research, and was open. They failed to convince me. But I guess that makes me 'a racist'. Never mind the fact that it would further divide the population by race...in the constitution.

 

[Purple7x08_24]

You’re an independent thinker invested in Jordan Peterson’s approach?

His approach about being an individual who creates their own path built on independence and resilience rather than the common approach of complaining and waiting for someone to hold your hand. He is a clinical psychologist so he's an expert in his field and I will definitely take on board what he has to say on a range of issues particularly about what it is to be a man. Do you agree that kids should be allowed to play independently? or do you subscribe to the idea of helicopter parenting?

One of the best responses I ever heard him say to a reporter who asked, what is he doing for women. He responded with, well what kind of man does that woman want?

I agree with what he says on energy because he is taking an economic perspective and how that would impact society as a whole. However a lot of his conservative views are lost on me. That's what it is to be independent.

The sad reality in life is that rarely people come along and do anything for you. When it does happen you take it as good fortune, but you need to build strength in yourself. Home ownership is a perfect example.

 

[Purple7x08_24]

I think what you’re describing is called a dictatorship

A Technocracy? It can still be democratically elected. Candidates are nominated, and people vote for them.

I'm suggesting the referendum approach is fundamentally flawed.

 

[South of the Yarra]

I thought all people were equal. Why are we writing groups of people into the constitution and separating them from the rest?

Aboriginal people have been separated for the worse for hundreds of years.

 

[Magnum27]

And I really don't need your kind. You're an anti-social pest.

He'd be a hoot at parties

 

[ElectricG]

A Technocracy? It can still be democratically elected. Candidates are nominated, and people vote for them.

I'm suggesting the referendum approach is fundamentally flawed.

Well okay, but weren’t you saying only educated people will be allowed to vote?

 

[mcnulty]

His approach about being an individual who creates their own path built on independence and resilience rather than the common approach of complaining and waiting for someone to hold your hand. He is a clinical psychologist so he's an expert in his field and I will definitely take on board what he has to say on a range of issues particularly about what it is to be a man. Do you agree that kids should be allowed to play independently? or do you subscribe to the idea of helicopter parenting?

One of the best responses I ever heard him say to a reporter who asked, what is he doing for women. He responded with, well what kind of man does that woman want?

I agree with what he says on energy because he is taking an economic perspective and how that would impact society as a whole. However a lot of his conservative views are lost on me. That's what it is to be independent.

The sad reality in life is that rarely people come along and do anything for you. When it does happen you take it as good fortune, but you need to build strength in yourself. Home ownership is a perfect example.

None of this is anything new. He’s a fraud. And a nutter.

 

[Purple7x08_24]

None of this is anything new. He’s a fraud. And a nutter.

So you're suggesting as a clinical psychologist he cant offer advice specifically about personal and character development?

Are you saying that people shouldn't be confident, and assertive? That's what he sells. You go out there in the real world, and work in factories, and industries and you will get destroyed if you're not confident. I see many people in the workplace who can't even handle the most simplest of criticism without losing it.

I'm sorry but the real world is savage and you need to be prepared for it.