The referendum, yes or no?

[Rajaz]

I assume this is a fun and safe question to ask here since we are almost just anonymous here. What are you going to vote for this referendum about the First Peoples of Australia?

[johnny]

After doing a bit of research, it’s a no for me

[John_Diaz]

I don’t like people telling me what to do. TV Ad say vote “yes”, people on the street giving flyers telling me to vote “yes”, politicians the same. Why not explain to the people what is the referendum and let them f**** decide.

[Radoush]

No way I trust Albo

[Radoush]

It's about land rights and the government is just using the Aboriginal people

[Radoush]

They could just us legislation to get this done but want more

[Radoush]

They should have put all the information on the table then let people question it and have debates over the year then vote

[Radoush]

It's all on the Hush Hush and hiding things

[Radoush]

And Albo said he did not need to read the 28 pages of information that was recommended for him to read what a bad con man

[ABG4LYF]

Imagine this. You conquer a land its people. Now after some centuries, you gonna put a person to represent the people you conquered, to participate int he government you took away from them. For me, it sounds stupid and just a lip service. Indigenous People are already represented so I don’t really see the point of the Voice.

[John_Diaz]

If we do not vote will it count as a yes or no?

[personaa]

The general rhetoric is firm on stating that the representatives or the committee won't have veto rights on bills. If it stays within these boundaries which means it's for consultation purposes then all its all good. However, I am not sure what's between the lines, or if there is any.

[frisson]

Voice or no Voice, close the gap would be nice

[earl9122]

Referendums in Australia are a way for the people to have a direct say on proposed changes to the Constitution.
Decisions regarding referendums are a matter for the Australian public and are determined through the democratic process.
I'm out

[ColesBag]

Absolutely Not. This is a trojan horse for unelected & unfettered constitutional power. Vote No.

[fnmfnmfnm]

Personally hate being told what to do. And I care so little about it that patronising white pricks giving the “wrong side of history” lecture is enough to make me vote No out of spite. I really wish not-voting was an option

[JSteel96]

I just don't trust why we need to vote for something that has no details. Now whats first they want Australia day changed, next more land grabs, next what else they want the harbor bridge??? They can voice all this without a vote. If we voted yes that would be like giving a green light for them to change what ever the fuck they want. I think there has to be something in this for Albo to. Its a big fat no from me. Don't like being forced to vote on this kind of political BS.

[frisson]

Happy for the Voice to happen or not happen

As Warren Mundine, prominent indigenous No campaigner,
said at the Press Club today:

Most countries have had a difficult past. Many countries were invaded and wars fought

England also was invaded a few times including by the Germans. Invaded to the extent that the English language contains foreign influences
Why dont the English dwell and blame past invaders, and dwell on their past invasions? Because dwelling on the past solves nothing

[Ghost2hauntU]

I’ll vote for any party that can subsidise the high cost of punting and opens the gateway to our shores for fresh Asian new talent.

[GoldfishMan]

If we do not vote will it count as a yes or no?

It'll just be one less vote count in either way. That's actually one way to hold onto your principles, if you can stomach the fine that is.

[Onehunglo]

This is a Real Estate agents take on it that I received by email the other day

Well, I had a very interesting conversation with Elbow Easy this afternoon.
I rang him and asked him if he would like to buy some ground in the Kilcoy Paradise area.

This is how the convo went:-
ELBOW: Hello Elbow speaking

Me: Hello, it's Harold from Kilcoy Paradise here.
ELBOW: What can I do for you Harold.

Me: I have some land I thought you might be interested in but if you buy it there is no cooling off period. Once you sign the contract there is no going back or changing your mind.
ELBOW: how much land do you have ?

Me: I can't tell you that until you sign the contract.
Elbow: well how much do you want for it ?

Me: no, can't tell you that until you sign the contract.
ELBOW: Well how do I know what I'm getting or how much it's costing me ?

Me:Well you sign the contract and then I will tell you.
ELBOW: surely you don't expect me to sign something that I don't know what I am getting or how much it's going to cost me.

Your call!

[Double_Adapter]

It's funny how most blokes don't like being told what to do, but when a ML says "ok darling, please turn over", then everything goes out the window.

[Bunningsnag]

It’s a NO from me. Voting Yes will cost us more money in taxes for reparations no doubt. And with the cost of living these days it’s taxes we don’t need. Why should people not involved in the “invasion” be paying money to people that were also not involved in the “invasion” ?

[asiafever]

This is a Real Estate agents take on it that I received by email the other day

Well, I had a very interesting conversation with Elbow Easy this afternoon.
I rang him and asked him if he would like to buy some ground in the Kilcoy Paradise area.

This is how the convo went:-
ELBOW: Hello Elbow speaking

Me: Hello, it's Harold from Kilcoy Paradise here.
ELBOW: What can I do for you Harold.

Me: I have some land I thought you might be interested in but if you buy it there is no cooling off period. Once you sign the contract there is no going back or changing your mind.
ELBOW: how much land do you have ?

Me: I can't tell you that until you sign the contract.
Elbow: well how much do you want for it ?

Me: no, can't tell you that until you sign the contract.
ELBOW: Well how do I know what I'm getting or how much it's costing me ?

Me:Well you sign the contract and then I will tell you.
ELBOW: surely you don't expect me to sign something that I don't know what I am getting or how much it's going to cost me.

Your call!

This has been covered before and is a totally inaccurate representation, please stop spreading bullshit. Does it concern you that the details governing defence, currency and more are lacking, and are gilled in later through legislation? This is how it works, constitution provides the framework only, legislation fills in the details. If we worked as this moronic example above suggests by having all details first, we'd have no air force because flight wasn't invented when the constitution was written.
There will be no land grabs, the voice will have no power of its own, legislation will STILL work as it has previously, it is there to ensure that indigenous population can advise govt on matters that affect them. It's advice is non-binding BUT it ensures that it can't be disbanded like ATSIC was. It also ensures that the races power is s51 (I forget the subsection) can't be interpreted by the federal court to discriminate against indigenous people as it can currently.

If you don't know, donkey vote, simply voting no because you don't know what a yes means is stupid.

[tezzaman18]

We have prominent Indigenous people voicing their dissatisfaction about this referendum. The surprisingly lack of information provided to the voters is also a joke . And some much tax payers money is going into organising this ?



Happy for the Voice to happen or not happen

As Warren Mundine, prominent indigenous No campaigner,
said at the Press Club today:

Most countries have had a difficult past. Many countries were invaded and wars fought

England also was invaded a few times including by the Germans. Invaded to the extent that the English language contains foreign influences
Why dont the English dwell and blame past invaders, and dwell on their past invasions? Because dwelling on the past solves nothing

[rooter]

I am not losing sleep over it either way.
Yes is the most obvious answer - it's just a bit of recognition and housekeeping and an advisory body only.
But the no vote will definitely win.
As soon as Dutton and the Liberals said to vote No it was all over. The only way the Yes vote could win was with support from both parties.
Plus as soon as Aborigines were divided on the issue that was the final nail in the Yes coffin.
On the left you have got people like Lydia Thorpe who are just mad extremists with unrealistic goals. Then on the right you have privileged Aborigines like Warren Mundine and Jacinta Price who like their position as the the top blackfellas in White society. The status quo suits them and they will fight any change.
So when we wake up on October 15 and the No vote wins it will still be the same Australia.
But if by some miracle the Yes vote wins it will still be the same Australia. It will still be the best country on the planet to live in.
So don't stress. On October 14 go and vote whatever way you think is right, and then on the way back stop at your favourite shop for a punt, and tell the wife there was a long queue at the polling station :)
Enjoy!

[Nerius13]

Rooter .....A calm and lucid take on it.

[CanberraGuy]

And Albo said he did not need to read the 28 pages of information that was recommended for him to read what a bad con man

You should stop listening to Peta and Sky News. The Uluru statement is one page and it always has been.
https://www.niaa.gov.au/foi/agency-foi-disclosure-logs
https://www.referendumcouncil.org.au/sites/default/files/report_attachments/Referendum_Council_Final_Report.pdf

[fted]

It's a YES for me. It's limited to making 'representations' to parliament, so does not have any veto powers over laws.

"There are no details..." well, there are, but that's not the purpose of changing the constitution anyway. Laws are introduced via legislation, not the constitution.

I can only see it as a positive step towards closing the gap.

[andrewv]

Unfortunately, the people who pushed for a "Voice" are the city-slicker power brokers who live in cities, not the poor and massively disadvantaged Aborigines living in the outback and in poor circumstances in small towns across Australia. The Uluru statement was developed by the power brokers.
If they really wanted Australians to "listen" they could have done things about it that do not require a change in the Constitution.

Then there is the dishonesty of refusing to talk about anything other than "Voice" when their own Uluru Statement talks about "Truth" and "Treaty".

Very difficult to trust such people. I am voting "NO". I don't want to be treated like an idiot and live on a drip-feed of information they control.

[GoldfishMan]

I have so little knowledge about the impact of this, nor do I have any vested interest in this racial debate, that I will probably just flip a coin to decide which way I go.

I think this would be a "poetic" way to decide. I get to keep that coin and not have use it to pay the FINE for not voting.

[kpopcity]

If a so called voice can tackle fundamental problems plaguing the aboriginal community, then sure.

But the pollies never talk about solid metrics - if i vote yes, does this:

1. Lower aboriginal incarceration rates. And if so by how much
2. What health outcomes will it have
3. How does it solve the drug and alcohol abuse problems
4. How does it solve the violent youth problems
Etc

All of the important metrics they chose to ignore but come up with the self back patting voice in which is purely political brownie points.

[thefatness]

Voting no.

Plenty of ethnic groups that have migrated to Australia, were disadvantaged in the first generation and are successful by the second. It’s of the back of strong family values and hard work.

Race and skin colour have nothing to do with success. It’s about culture.

I also don’t agree with the idea that our constitution enshrines an advisory body to the government on the basis of race.

Reminds me of why Singapore exists and is so much more successful than Malaysia.

I would like to see the constitution recognise Aboriginal people as the first people of this country, and the gaps closed in standards of living between indigenous and non indigenous people. I just don’t think a race based voice is the right way to go about it. There’s an elitist mindset from the architects of the voice as well.

People can oppose things on the basis of principle, and not “racism and sheer stupidity”.

[Wank_Somemore]

Its a no from me.

I don't pretend to understand politics at all but I feel if something was replicated similar to NZ then I would be all for it. Every time I go to NZ, I feel their indigenous have better opportunities. How often have you seen an aboriginal work in a cafe or an office in Sydney? In my whole 20yrs of corporate life, I've only seen one that worked in an office environment. I've actually seen more maoris in corporate life here in Oz.

[Flasher]

Donkey vote for me I'm on neither side of Yes or No

[ReginaldBubbles]

Who’d have thought there’d be so much misinformation and ignorance on a punting forum!

[birch]

I find it amazing how quickly people can make a simple decision more complicated than they have the capacity to understand.

Blackfellas are a distinct minority in this country so despite representation in a democratic parliament they will never receive appropriate representation given their history on this land.

For this reason alone they deserve a slightly louder 'voice' than they have now.

Constitutional change is justified based on the need for longer term stability, we don't want polarised politics flip flopping on this.

[johnny]

According to data from the Productivity Commission's Indigenous Expenditure Report, which is a government report, the total government expenditure on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people per year is close to $40 billion. 40 BILLION DOLLARS!!
All from taxpayers!

[thefatness]

According to data from the Productivity Commission's Indigenous Expenditure Report, which is a government report, the total government expenditure on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people per year is close to $40 billion. 40 BILLION DOLLARS!!
All from taxpayers!

So much of that money I’m sure is just wasted on drugs, alcohol and tobacco. It’s very sad. I grew up in housing commission and whilst most families did their best to provide for their kids and take care of their homes, the most neglected homes were almost always those of aboriginal families. It’s sad because the children don’t have a chance, growing up with the wrong crowd and neglected by their parents which leads to a cycle of generational welfare dependency. Look at Alice Springs how bad things got when the alcohol ban was lifted. Call me racist and ignorant but I know what I saw growing up. The most vulnerable don’t need a voice to parliament headed up by the indigenous elites, they need a loving home, a good education and a meaningful job.

[asiafever]

Who’d have thought there’d be so much misinformation and ignorance on a punting forum!

Amazing, isn't it?

[dotcumdotinyou]

Big NO from me.

This has nothing to do with aboriginal rights, all it does is put a minority of wealthy educated aboriginals on the government payroll with taxpayer funded "study" trips and the most generous super payouts in the world. How's that going to help the poor blackfellas on the outskirts of Alice Springs?

[asiafever]

"Race and skin colour have nothing to do with success. It’s about culture."

You're joking, right? That is the most privileged statement I have read in a while.

You realise that until 1962 First Nations people had absolutely NO say in the running of the country, they weren't even allowed to vote, and it was in 1967 they were Igranted full citizen rights. It was not until 1984 that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were politically equal to other Australians under the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment Act 1983, so the migrants you mentioned that faced "difficulties" were at least recognised as humans with basic human rights like voting, they never had their children stolen out of their homes and sent to complete strangers (a policy that lasted until 1969), up to at least the 1940s Aboriginal men were still being captured and sent to circuses and zoos in Europe and North America, they were excluded from education policies - government schools actually had the right to refuse education to First Nations people until the 70s, again meaning the immigrants you mentioned could walk off a boat and in to a public school and be given an education that was not available to first nations people, that was government policy from 1902. Think about it. It's cultural, or it is a product of our treatment of them that has made us an international laughing stock every time we have the audacity to mention human rights abuses elsewhere?

[thefatness]

I grew up in housing commission, my family came here from war-torn Vietnam in the 80s probably around the same time Aborigines were granted suffrage.

I am privileged in the sense that I was born to a good family. My parents worked hard to provide for me and my siblings. We didn’t have much growing up but we had each other. There was strict discipline in our household with an emphasis on getting a university degree and pursuing a good career.

The way I see it is if my parents came here with nothing in their early 20s, after having their home and businesses taken away by a communist government, but still made something out of their lives then it’s possible for all in a country like Australia. And this isn’t an isolated story. Many of my friends that I grew up with of Vietnamese, Cambodian, Lao and even Iraqi Assyrian backgrounds have similar stories. Which goes to my point that I truly believe it’s a culture thing.

I don’t dispute that the historical treatment of our First Nations people is appaling. But reverse racism isn’t the way to go about it. Malaysia for example were adamant on affirmative action that would benefit the native Malays which is why Singapore exists.
The comparison I was trying to draw is that race based policies creates division which is why I don’t agree with the voice.

Look I’ve stated my arguments in a respectful manner. I know it’s controversial as all political matters are. But that doesn’t mean I don’t want to see our indigenous people be successful. We need to be honest with ourselves to get down to the root cause of the problem. Historical injustice is a terrible thing, but it’s no excuse to be a bad parent.

[fud]

I found this here https://www.pc.gov.au/ongoing/indigenous-expenditure-report/2017/ier-2017-indigenous-expenditure-report.pdf

Expenditure estimates in 2015-16

In 2015-16, total (Australian Government plus State/Territory governments) direct
expenditure was $556.1 billion.

The total direct expenditure on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians was
estimated to be $33.4 billion (6.0 per cent of the total) comprising:

• $6.0 billion on Indigenous specific expenditure
• $27.4 billion on mainstream expenditure.

The remainder ($522.7 billion) was expenditure on non-Indigenous Australians.

Noel Pearson (YES) spoke at the Press Club address while Warren Mundine (NO) spoke yesterday and Noel had some compelling arguments which I thought were more convincing than Mundine.

Pearson said that rheumatic heart disease kills 2 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people every week yet he looked up Hansard and not once did the Fed MP for the area (28 years holding that post) raised this matter. He hopes a Yes Voice will close the gap.

Also not one square inch of land was lost because of Mabo and Wick.

Also the Parliament has the power to make laws wrt to Aboriginal & TS Islander matters so that's where the detail is, to be decided by Parliament.

Worth watching/listening to both sessions on ABC iView

[GoldfishMan]

In all honesty, it's not right to be comparing migrants with the Aboriginals. Even if you were to compare the most disadvantaged type of immigrants, like refugees from war torn countries, it is not a fair comparison. One is a group of people who could be from any type of "original" situation that were suddenly forced to flee their countries, rich, poor, hardworking , bludgers, etc... it's a mixed bag.

The other is clearly a race that had been "vanquished" as a result of colonialism. They didn't go anywhere, they stayed where they were and had their lands taken away from them.

[johnny]

I found this here https://www.pc.gov.au/ongoing/indigenous-expenditure-report/2017/ier-2017-indigenous-expenditure-report.pdf

Expenditure estimates in 2015-16

In 2015-16, total (Australian Government plus State/Territory governments) direct
expenditure was $556.1 billion.

The total direct expenditure on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians was
estimated to be $33.4 billion (6.0 per cent of the total) comprising:

• $6.0 billion on Indigenous specific expenditure
• $27.4 billion on mainstream expenditure.

The remainder ($522.7 billion) was expenditure on non-Indigenous Australians.

Noel Pearson (YES) spoke at the Press Club address while Warren Mundine (NO) spoke yesterday and Noel had some compelling arguments which I thought were more convincing than Mundine.

Pearson said that rheumatic heart disease kills 2 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people every week yet he looked up Hansard and not once did the Fed MP for the area (28 years holding that post) raised this matter. He hopes a Yes Voice will close the gap.

Also not one square inch of land was lost because of Mabo and Wick.

Also the Parliament has the power to make laws wrt to Aboriginal & TS Islander matters so that's where the detail is, to be decided by Parliament.

Worth watching/listening to both sessions on ABC iView

And based on those figures that equates to $44k spent on each Aborigine/Torres Strait Islander and $22k on other Australians.

[thefatness]

They did have their lands taken away. This is something many South East Asian refugees can also relate to when our parents’ birth countries were overtaken by communist governments. Even though I know this is not the fairest comparison, you don’t have the right to call my story as privileged. If you saw how we made ends meet with what we had, you certainly wouldn’t call it privileged.

I respect all opinions on this debate, but I don’t appreciate yes voters labelling no voters as misinformed, ignorant and racist. I have my reasons and they are drawn from my lived experiences. I can assure you that many in the working class suburbs especially those that grew up in areas with a high concentration of housing commission estates have a similar opinion as mine and this is Labor heartland. We faced disadvantage and racism. But a victim mentality will keep you in that disadvantaged state. Perseverance and hard work will lift you out.

[GoldfishMan]

They did have their lands taken away. This is something many South East Asian refugees can also relate to when our parents’ birth countries were overtaken by communist governments. Even though I know this is not the fairest comparison, you don’t have the right to call my story as privileged. If you saw how we made ends meet with what we had, you certainly wouldn’t call it privileged.

I respect all opinions on this debate, but I don’t appreciate yes voters labelling no voters as misinformed, ignorant and racist. I have my reasons and they are drawn from my lived experiences. I can assure you that many in the working class suburbs especially those that grew up in areas with a high concentration of housing commission estates have a similar opinion as mine and this is Labor heartland. We faced disadvantage and racism. But a victim mentality will keep you in that disadvantaged state. Perseverance and hard work will lift you out.

Very well put, bro. Each to their own, after all that's why it's a referendum.

I am somewhat swayed by what has happened in the US. Black people having an easier time getting into college had a side effect of pushing out other minority groups from having a fair shot. It wasn't intentional, but it is a real side effect nonetheless. It boils down to being a battle between minority groups for the limited leeway provided to minority groups in general.

That said, I am not totally convinced either way yet.

[priapus1966]

Yes is the most obvious answer - it's just a bit of recognition and housekeeping and an advisory body only.
But the no vote will definitely win.


This:

Albanese is a patronising bastard on this issue. Dutton is just a bastard.

[Daffy]

This:

Albanese is a patronising bastard on this issue. Dutton is just a bastard.

I’m looking at some of the absolute creatures on the “no” side of the campaign and I have to vote yes.

Peta Credlin, Peter Dutton, John (I sold Commbank for less than it makes in a quarter) Howard and Anthony Mundine.

And now you have Sky News reporters admitting the Coalition are only campaigning for “No” because they want to score political points against Albanese.

[Double_Adapter]

The world and societies have gone nuts. We have transformed Charles Darwin theory on 'Survival of Fittest' into 'Surival of the Weakest'. All these fucked up movements like the voice, pride, cancel culture, feminists, gender diversity, climate change, capital punishment activists, vegans, me too, LGBTQI, gender pronouns, religious sects ad nauseam are changing the natural order of things. They think they are creating a better and safer world but that is far from it, in a few decades time we won't recognise society because it will be all screwed up.

So the weaker and smaller you are, the more power, more control, a greater voice, and more privileges and money you get. It's a joke and it's wrong! If there's ever a WW3, it won't be the fucken small, weak under represented minority groups taking arms and risking their lives for country.

It's fucked!!!...but it is what it is.
Sorry Charles Darwin's for screwing up your theory.

[frisson]

The world and societies have gone nuts. We have transformed Charles Darwin theory on 'Survival of Fittest' into 'Surival of the Weakest'. All these fucked up movements like the voice, pride, cancel culture, feminists, gender diversity, climate change, capital punishment activists, vegans, me too, LGBTQI, gender pronouns, religious sects ad nauseam are changing the natural order of things. They think they are creating a better and safer world but that is far from it, in a few decades time we won't recognise society because it will be all screwed up

Scary and accurate

One of the dirty secrets of the climate control and electric car religion is that there will not be enough rare metals and minerals to produce enough electric vehicles at the scale required internationally at an affordable price

Electric cars replacing internal combustion engines by 2030? It's a big lie

The majority of the climate control lobby can't do basic maths

[Keeping Up]

The RW media understands this referendum is to see if Dutton has any support. They are are pushing the NO as if there’s no tomorrow. If Dutton was to lose this the LNP would be finished as young voters would’ve made the difference. Young voters remember Dutton’s cruelty towards the zero risk Sri Lankan family. It’s basically turned into an election. The RW media has lost everything lately so this will be an interesting watch.

[Ayrifik]

The world and societies have gone nuts. We have transformed Charles Darwin theory on 'Survival of Fittest' into 'Surival of the Weakest'. All these fucked up movements like the voice, pride, cancel culture, feminists, gender diversity, climate change, capital punishment activists, vegans, me too, LGBTQI, gender pronouns, religious sects ad nauseam are changing the natural order of things. They think they are creating a better and safer world but that is far from it, in a few decades time we won't recognise society because it will be all screwed up.

So the weaker and smaller you are, the more power, more control, a greater voice, and more privileges and money you get. It's a joke and it's wrong! If there's ever a WW3, it won't be the fucken small, weak under represented minority groups taking arms and risking their lives for country.

It's fucked!!!...but it is what it is.
Sorry Charles Darwin's for screwing up your theory.


The faggots and petrol sniffers want to run this country ….. into the fucking ground. And they will

[ReginaldBubbles]

The world and societies have gone nuts. We have transformed Charles Darwin theory on 'Survival of Fittest' into 'Surival of the Weakest'. All these fucked up movements like the voice, pride, cancel culture, feminists, gender diversity, climate change, capital punishment activists, vegans, me too, LGBTQI, gender pronouns, religious sects ad nauseam are changing the natural order of things. They think they are creating a better and safer world but that is far from it, in a few decades time we won't recognise society because it will be all screwed up.

So the weaker and smaller you are, the more power, more control, a greater voice, and more privileges and money you get. It's a joke and it's wrong! If there's ever a WW3, it won't be the fucken small, weak under represented minority groups taking arms and risking their lives for country.

It's fucked!!!...but it is what it is.
Sorry Charles Darwin's for screwing up your theory.

Do you seriously think that those categories you list have more power than the average middle aged white man?

[frisson]

Do you seriously think that those categories you list have more power than the average middle aged white man?

Yes. The term White privilege has mocked the opinion of a broad range of male citizens

Why do you think the NO campaign have preferred not having white men at the forefront of their campaign?

Social media and the woke virus has given false legitimacy to keyboard warriors and virtue signallers

[fted]

The RW media understands this referendum is to see if Dutton has any support. They are are pushing the NO as if there’s no tomorrow. If Dutton was to lose this the LNP would be finished as young voters would’ve made the difference. Young voters remember Dutton’s cruelty towards the zero risk Sri Lankan family. It’s basically turned into an election. The RW media has lost everything lately so this will be an interesting watch.
Totally. Dutton really does have ‘all the empathy of a rock’ and this is just to show he has support for the next election.

[ReginaldBubbles]

Yes. The term White privilege has mocked the opinion of a broad range of male citizens

Why do you think the NO campaign have preferred not having white men at the forefront of their campaign?

Social media and the woke virus has given false legitimacy to keyboard warriors and virtue signallers

Why would white men be at the forefront of a campaign about Aboriginal issues? Wow, if you really feel oppressed as a white man you need to look elsewhere for your oppressor.

[bung72]

I'm a hard no. Legislate it if you must, as long as other similar bodies are folded up to not duplicate funding. Not in the constitution thanks.

[Assandlegs]

I assume this is a fun and safe question to ask here

And this is where you fucked up...

There's no such thing as a serious debate/conversation on this forum unless it involves sex. Just read some of the answers and there's far too much "I reckon.." and almost zero facts...

Of course I will vote yes because it's the right thing to do... but this should only be the start.

As for Dutton lovers out there, the fact that he supports no is the biggest indication that it's the right thing to do.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Soccerfan]

Through my work and various sporting events, most of the welcome to country speeches have been some of the most inspiring I’ve heard. It’s a yes for me. I just hope they get the right people.

[Jamit]

Nice to see that people are actually thinking about it and taking it seriously.

One thing to think about constitutions are that they were kept simple but contain anachronisms, even by omission, that really ought to be corrected.

Eg the US Constitution right to bear arms is not fit for purpose.

The fact is that the Australian constitution was written when Aboriginal people were being stolen from, couldn't vote and weren't citizens. Surely some recognition to acknowledge the injustice of that time.

The outcome will be symbolic in the end. Plenty of fear mongering before the native title act and the apology, ie huge compensation claims, that never eventuated.

[treason]

Just vote YES to take a other reason away.

Billions of dollar spent, special minister in cabinet looking after portfolio, countless policy interventions....when will everyone realise it's a cultural problem. You can't help people that don't want to help themselves. Even if you gave them each $1m, I guarantee that a lot of them would still work out a way to squander it and fuck things up. Money doesn't fix culture.

Immigrants come here poor and in one generation go from being poor to rich. They've had several generations. Fine you had a shitty start in history, but guess what my father grew in poverty in a sleeping village and before that my grand parents were persecuted under Mao. You can make up excuses about the past, we probably all can. But what does that get you?

[kingwally]

I have lived and worked in remote communities that has massive disadvantages amongst the indigenous community, and I would dearly love those people to have their lives changed for the better. There is enormous amounts of money being poured into these communities, however it is being hijacked along the way by people at the top of these communities, and the really desperate people get fuck all. Those at the top of the pile are virtual "warlords" . The city indigenous people get equal if not slightly more favourable opportunities as any other white/ Asian/ Middle Eastern etc heritage Australians, it is the indigenous in the remote areas that are really suffering. I want to see audits on all the finances of all the organizations (possibly 3000+) to find out where the money is going. All these organizations have a direct voice to the Minister of Aboriginal affairs (Linda Burney) as well as other Indigenous ministers...and all those cunts are NOT listening. Why won't she listen ???

I think that the useless cunt called Albanese is just trying to go down in history as the "Australian Nelson Mandela" however he will go down as the Australian "Nero".

Alcohol is a major issue among those remote communities....I played footy with some champion junior players, but by early 20s they were alcoholics, and most I believe now are dead from complications from too much grog.

A massive NO from me, but I do want to see these peoples lives improved and cannot see that this Voice plan will change anything except make more millionaires out of the already millionaires living in big cities, and the "warlords" living in the remote areas. I DO want audits on all those Indigenous organizations to see where all the money is going.

[frisson]

There is enormous amounts of money being poured into these communities, however it is being hijacked along the way by people at the top of these communities, and the really desperate people get fuck all. Those at the top of the pile are virtual "warlords"
I want to see audits on all the finances of all the organizations (possibly 3000+) to find out where the money is going


Hard to argue with this
You obviously had lived experience

Over 95% of city dwellers rarely if ever come in direct contact with indigenous people. They have little real world experience about how little the system helps the most disadvantaged

[ColesBag]

I have lived and worked in remote communities that has massive disadvantages amongst the indigenous community, and I would dearly love those people to have their lives changed for the better. There is enormous amounts of money being poured into these communities, however it is being hijacked along the way by people at the top of these communities, and the really desperate people get fuck all. Those at the top of the pile are virtual "warlords" . The city indigenous people get equal if not slightly more favourable opportunities as any other white/ Asian/ Middle Eastern etc heritage Australians, it is the indigenous in the remote areas that are really suffering. I want to see audits on all the finances of all the organizations (possibly 3000+) to find out where the money is going. All these organizations have a direct voice to the Minister of Aboriginal affairs (Linda Burney) as well as other Indigenous ministers...and all those cunts are NOT listening. Why won't she listen ???

I think that the useless cunt called Albanese is just trying to go down in history as the "Australian Nelson Mandela" however he will go down as the Australian "Nero".

Alcohol is a major issue among those remote communities....I played footy with some champion junior players, but by early 20s they were alcoholics, and most I believe now are dead from complications from too much grog.

A massive NO from me, but I do want to see these peoples lives improved and cannot see that this Voice plan will change anything except make more millionaires out of the already millionaires living in big cities, and the "warlords" living in the remote areas. I DO want audits on all those Indigenous organizations to see where all the money is going.

This is my problem with it.

This is all about enlarging empire building bureaucracies whilst subverting democracy as a cherry on top.

This has absolutely nothing to do with Aboriginal people no matter how it is sold.

And remember any product that has to be sold this much isn't that much of a product. Think about it.

Vote No.

[ReginaldBubbles]

I have lived and worked in remote communities that has massive disadvantages amongst the indigenous community, and I would dearly love those people to have their lives changed for the better. There is enormous amounts of money being poured into these communities, however it is being hijacked along the way by people at the top of these communities, and the really desperate people get fuck all. Those at the top of the pile are virtual "warlords" . The city indigenous people get equal if not slightly more favourable opportunities as any other white/ Asian/ Middle Eastern etc heritage Australians, it is the indigenous in the remote areas that are really suffering. I want to see audits on all the finances of all the organizations (possibly 3000+) to find out where the money is going. All these organizations have a direct voice to the Minister of Aboriginal affairs (Linda Burney) as well as other Indigenous ministers...and all those cunts are NOT listening. Why won't she listen ???

I think that the useless cunt called Albanese is just trying to go down in history as the "Australian Nelson Mandela" however he will go down as the Australian "Nero".

Alcohol is a major issue among those remote communities....I played footy with some champion junior players, but by early 20s they were alcoholics, and most I believe now are dead from complications from too much grog.

A massive NO from me, but I do want to see these peoples lives improved and cannot see that this Voice plan will change anything except make more millionaires out of the already millionaires living in big cities, and the "warlords" living in the remote areas. I DO want audits on all those Indigenous organizations to see where all the money is going.

This is the kind of paternalism the voice is trying to avoid.

[frisson]

This is my problem with it.

This is all about enlarging empire building bureaucracies whilst subverting democracy as a cherry on top.

This has absolutely nothing to do with Aboriginal people no matter how it is sold.

And remember any product that has to be sold this much isn't that much of a product. Think about it.

Vote No.

The PM is a big picture person with no idea about reality
PM didn't know the interest rate last year and should have lost the election based on that ignorance, but Scomo would have lost to a statue last election

PM tried to sell this this referendum with no details and expected the public to vote now and know the details later. Like any contract, don't agree to anything unless all the details are on the table

[GoldfishMan]

I have lived and worked in remote communities that has massive disadvantages amongst the indigenous community, and I would dearly love those people to have their lives changed for the better. There is enormous amounts of money being poured into these communities, however it is being hijacked along the way by people at the top of these communities, and the really desperate people get fuck all. Those at the top of the pile are virtual "warlords" . The city indigenous people get equal if not slightly more favourable opportunities as any other white/ Asian/ Middle Eastern etc heritage Australians, it is the indigenous in the remote areas that are really suffering. I want to see audits on all the finances of all the organizations (possibly 3000+) to find out where the money is going. All these organizations have a direct voice to the Minister of Aboriginal affairs (Linda Burney) as well as other Indigenous ministers...and all those cunts are NOT listening. Why won't she listen ???

I think that the useless cunt called Albanese is just trying to go down in history as the "Australian Nelson Mandela" however he will go down as the Australian "Nero".

Alcohol is a major issue among those remote communities....I played footy with some champion junior players, but by early 20s they were alcoholics, and most I believe now are dead from complications from too much grog.

A massive NO from me, but I do want to see these peoples lives improved and cannot see that this Voice plan will change anything except make more millionaires out of the already millionaires living in big cities, and the "warlords" living in the remote areas. I DO want audits on all those Indigenous organizations to see where all the money is going.

Really appreciate the insights into the situation. I am genuinely clueless about it. Let me pose a question or a problem to you then.

Suppose if the Yes vote had won and the constitutional changes went ahead, would you think that it would prove to be detrimental to the fixing of the real problems as you mentioned above?

Perhaps the government could then say that "we've done our job, given you a Voice", and call it a day?

Or is it possible that having the Voice in place could be the first major step taken towards fixing those real problems?

[Double_Adapter]

I have lived and worked in remote communities that has massive disadvantages amongst the indigenous community, and I would dearly love those people to have their lives changed for the better. There is enormous amounts of money being poured into these communities, however it is being hijacked along the way by people at the top of these communities, and the really desperate people get fuck all. Those at the top of the pile are virtual "warlords" . The city indigenous people get equal if not slightly more favourable opportunities as any other white/ Asian/ Middle Eastern etc heritage Australians, it is the indigenous in the remote areas that are really suffering. I want to see audits on all the finances of all the organizations (possibly 3000+) to find out where the money is going. All these organizations have a direct voice to the Minister of Aboriginal affairs (Linda Burney) as well as other Indigenous ministers...and all those cunts are NOT listening. Why won't she listen ???

I think that the useless cunt called Albanese is just trying to go down in history as the "Australian Nelson Mandela" however he will go down as the Australian "Nero".

Alcohol is a major issue among those remote communities....I played footy with some champion junior players, but by early 20s they were alcoholics, and most I believe now are dead from complications from too much grog.

A massive NO from me, but I do want to see these peoples lives improved and cannot see that this Voice plan will change anything except make more millionaires out of the already millionaires living in big cities, and the "warlords" living in the remote areas. I DO want audits on all those Indigenous organizations to see where all the money is going.


Like you, I travel all over the place including far remote northern towns across WA, NT, SA, and FNQLD and the $33bn per annum (and some will debate the amount) that is allocated to help indigenous peoples/communities never reaches 'em. Most of the money is chewed up by beurecratic fat lard arse politicians, and beurecratic moronic government departments that are fucking next to useless.

Which brings me to my next point - what ever happened to that fucken band aid, we are the world, feed the world, we are the world, feed Africa bullshit ?
Four fucken decades have passed since that noble movement kicked into gear and as far as I know Africa is just as poor and just as hungry as it was back in 1980! So where has all the aid and all the money gone?

There are good and noble causes all around us, but human nature will always fuck it up in the end.

A big fucken NO from me, and the government can shove their $100m-$300m referendum up their arse.

[ReginaldBubbles]

Like you, I travel all over the place including far remote northern towns across WA, NT, SA, and FNQLD and the $33bn per annum (and some will debate the amount) that is allocated to help indigenous peoples/communities never reaches 'em. Most of the money is chewed up by beurecratic fat lard arse politicians, and beurecratic moronic government departments that are fucking next to useless.

Which brings me to my next point - what ever happened to that fucken band aid, we are the world, feed the world, we are the world, feed Africa bullshit ?
Four fucken decades have passed since that noble movement kicked into gear and as far as I know Africa is just as poor and just as hungry as it was back in 1980! So where has all the aid and all the money gone?

There are good and noble causes all around us, but human nature will always fuck it up in the end.

A big fucken NO from me, and the government can shove their $100m-$300m referendum up their arse.

Again, this is the type of paternalism the voice is trying to avoid. The "I've met Aboriginal people and this is how it is and I know better than them what they need so fuck letting 24 aboroginal people just tell government things from their perspective" Curious to know if you or anyone else here has any actual Aboriginal friends?

[cgi]

How does a voice fix anything? But what exactly are their problems anyway? Just leave them alone they can handle their lives better than you do.

[ReginaldBubbles]

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/report-calls-out-mistruths-on-40b-spend-on-indigenous-australians-20230928-p5e8fl.html

[kingwally]

Again, this is the type of paternalism the voice is trying to avoid. The "I've met Aboriginal people and this is how it is and I know better than them what they need so fuck letting 24 aboroginal people just tell government things from their perspective" Curious to know if you or anyone else here has any actual Aboriginal friends?

Of course...I played footy with several Indigenous guys and I have 2 cousins that married Indigenous guys, and they are lovely people. I met up with one last weekend in Brisbane and he (the Indigenous one) is a definite NO voter because he knows that it will achieve nothing. This bloke was a top footballer in his day and played for one of my old clubs, he is a dedicated family man who ran a successful business for many years, supported his immediate family and also several of his sisters families.

[M0rfl1ng]

Its a no for me - too many uncertainties about the scope

[LuvAsianPuss]

I'll vote NO. There's already a minister for aboriginal affairs so why is there a need for more? There is no need for a change to the constitution. It is well within the capability of the minister for aboriginal affairs to establish an advisory group to provide advice. Also, if there is a "voice" established within the constitution, how can it just be advice, surely, the government would have to follow the constitutional advice, regardless. What next, will we have a voice for immigrants, a voice for gays and how about the poor old white Australian male? I don't trust the bastards to change the constitution. Why can't they tell us any detail of the change, they've had plenty of time to think it through?

[frisson]

I'll vote NO. Why can't they tell us any detail of the change, they've had plenty of time to think it through?

True. The Voice lobby groups have had over 5-8 years discussing the Voice

No doubt many of the lobby would have preferred to present an actual model to Australia. I suspect the model doesn't stand up to scrutiny, as it just duplicates what already exists. As a result Australia is being asked to vote for something that hasn't been properly explained

As John Farnham sang:
You're the Voice. Try to understand it

Do you understand it?
Without the details provided?

[schloong]

My fuckwit next door neighbour, who I generally avoid, said to me recently "I'm voting yes as you can't give the Aboriginies enough. How are you voting?".
I said "well, you're an idiot & none of your fucking business anyway!" and just went back inside.

[cgi]

Go back to where you come from, oh wait maybe where your ancestors come from. I'll vote yes for this

[cgi]

It's not about aboriginal people it's never been about aboriginal people it's all about left showing their moral superiority

[JJBlows]

It's a YES for me. It's limited to making 'representations' to parliament, so does not have any veto powers over laws.

"There are no details..." well, there are, but that's not the purpose of changing the constitution anyway. Laws are introduced via legislation, not the constitution.

I can only see it as a positive step towards closing the gap.

See the high court decides constitutional matters and by voting yes and allowing a voice to parliament in the constitution means that any decision made in parliament that is against the wishes of this "voice" means it can be fought in the high court as it's a constitutional issue.

I know someone who has worked with the aboriginal community in the past and even some elders who are level headed are upset with their own community. Even thought on paper and the media they are united as one nation, behind the scenes they are a very divided community along clan and tribal lines and do not get along - classic example was that smoking ceremony where the other aboriginal confronted that other aboriginal employed to do the ceremony about how he cant carry out the ceremony as it was not his land (clans and tribes) They always want money to fix their issues and usually spend it on them selves and not fix their issues, they are very nepotism based community, another example is council wanting to plant trees on aboriginal land and they hit them up for money to do it.

There have always been an advisory body to the government about aboriginal issues but every change of goverment it is dissolved and replaced, so the whole issue of the voice is to have a permanent advisory body that can't be dissolved, but the reason it is always dissolved by new governments is because the previous ones weren't doing anything beneficial for the community and essentially became a money pit because they always say "we just need money to fix this issue". The Australian government already spends on average $35,000 per aboriginal person per year.

This is a slippery slope as yes they should have a say but at the same time if you give them a solid and permanent foundation that can't be challenged, it can cause problems for everybody because they will fight amongst themselves but also some but not all will try and lay claim to every issue. Aboriginal police officers who obviously know their own culture and practices and who are better suited to being a police officer rather than a white person when dealing with the community and crimes are subjected to abuse by members of their own community as being a traitor when they are just trying to help their own people.

Unfortunately there is still some communities that still promote a culture of hating the white fella and also even members of their own community who try to do the right thing are referred to as "coconuts" - black on the outside but white on the inside.

The whole change to the youth crime incarceration is just hiding the issue for them and doesn't fix the issue, banning alcohol or limiting its supply is a good thing to a certain degree but not foolproof because I've been told stories of long haul truckies buying alcohol at major centres and then driving across the outback and trading bottles of grog for sex with aboriginal girls as young as 13.

[bevis90]

Probably no for me

[ReginaldBubbles]

See the high court decides constitutional matters and by voting yes and allowing a voice to parliament in the constitution means that any decision made in parliament that is against the wishes of this "voice" means it can be fought in the high court as it's a constitutional issue.




This is nonsense. the government doesn't have to act on anything the voice to parliament says.

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/donaghue-shows-legal-case-against-voice-is-nonsense-20230421-p5d2bz

[ReginaldBubbles]

My fuckwit next door neighbour, who I generally avoid, said to me recently "I'm voting yes as you can't give the Aboriginies enough. How are you voting?".
I said "well, you're an idiot & none of your fucking business anyway!" and just went back inside.

You don't sound like a fuckwit neighbour though.

[JJBlows]

This is nonsense. the government doesn't have to act on anything the voice to parliament says.

https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/donaghue-shows-legal-case-against-voice-is-nonsense-20230421-p5d2bz

Yes that is true but what people are forgetting is that if they go against advice etc from the voice, the voice cant change but challenge it in parliament and still be ignored, the law gets passed and then the voice can challenge it latter in the high courts.

It's the fine print. The high courts can't intervene and influence parliament with a law that's being proposed and passed in parliament as its was passed via a democratic vote in the senate - "the high court will not intervene in the INTERNAL WORKINGS of parliament" which means its cant do anything whilst the change is being proposed during its representation, after its introduced in legislation then it can be challenged in the high court where its states on the yes side of the pamphlet.

The two main points are:

1- high court challenges regarding representations to the parliament which are ignored by the voice in parliament will not have the high court intervene. Ie, discussing the law internally and ignoring the voices advice whilst making it a proposal for legislation

2- high court challenges regarding representations to the executive that ignored the voice or refused its representations may have the high court direct the executive to reread everything relevant to the decision and remake the decision.

Parliament makes the legislation, executive enforces the legislation and the judicial interprets the legislation.

The voices can simply challenge a law after its introduced, passed and then enforced in the high court and change the outcome of the law, but they can do the exact same thing whilst the law is being proposed in parliament and still fail but can't have the high court intervene in that process.

[Sharphorse]

I’m still keen to listen to both sides but some of the reasons coming out of the NO don’t even make sense. One of my relatives was talking about a land tax being passed. I mean aren’t politicians some of the richest property investors in the country? Why would they tax themselves? I do think the NO vote will win though. Even though they are lying more, they’re fighting harder, spending more money on ads and the general public isn’t intelligent enough to know the difference whereas I don’t think the YES campaign is selling it hard enough. Sometimes to win you gotta fight dirty and that’s what the NO campaign is doing

[ColesBag]

My fuckwit next door neighbour, who I generally avoid, said to me recently "I'm voting yes as you can't give the Aboriginies enough. How are you voting?".
I said "well, you're an idiot & none of your fucking business anyway!" and just went back inside.

Piss on his plants so that they all die.

[ReginaldBubbles]

Yes that is true but what people are forgetting is that if they go against advice etc from the voice, the voice cant change but challenge it in parliament and still be ignored, the law gets passed and then the voice can challenge it latter in the high courts.

It's the fine print. The high courts can't intervene and influence parliament with a law that's being proposed and passed in parliament as its was passed via a democratic vote in the senate - "the high court will not intervene in the INTERNAL WORKINGS of parliament" which means its cant do anything whilst the change is being proposed during its representation, after its introduced in legislation then it can be challenged in the high court where its states on the yes side of the pamphlet.

The two main points are:

1- high court challenges regarding representations to the parliament which are ignored by the voice in parliament will not have the high court intervene. Ie, discussing the law internally and ignoring the voices advice whilst making it a proposal for legislation

2- high court challenges regarding representations to the executive that ignored the voice or refused its representations may have the high court direct the executive to reread everything relevant to the decision and remake the decision.

Parliament makes the legislation, executive enforces the legislation and the judicial interprets the legislation.

The voices can simply challenge a law after its introduced, passed and then enforced in the high court and change the outcome of the law, but they can do the exact same thing whilst the law is being proposed in parliament and still fail but can't have the high court intervene in that process.

Where does it say on the yes pamphlet anything about high court challenges?

I have no idea what you’re trying to say in point 1.

And the executive only has to listen to representations, not act on them so what would be the point of forcing them to listen again when they don’t have to do anything. They can’t “simply challenge a law after it’s introduced and change the outcome of the law”.

The following is a collection of senior legal figures and organisations that have come out publicly in support of the proposed Indigenous Voice to Parliament. I think I’ll take my legal advice from them.

Australia’s Solicitor-General, Stephen Donaghue
https://theconversation.com/solicitor-general-confirms...
Shadow Attorney-General Julian Leeser
https://www.abc.net.au/.../liberal-frontbencher.../102207614
Former High Court chief justice Robert French.
https://www.afr.com/.../voice-is-low-risk-but-high-return...
Former High Court Chief Justice Murray Gleeson
https://insidestory.org.au/why-i-support-a-voice-to.../
Former High Court Chief Justice Kenneth Hayne
https://www.abc.net.au/.../kenneth-hayne-backs.../102153848
Former Chief Justice of NSW James Spigelman
https://amp.smh.com.au/.../as-a-former-chief-justice-i...
Former Judge of the High Court of Australia Mary Gaudron
Former President of the Supreme Court of Western Australia Court of Appeal Carmel McLure
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal Stephen Charles
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal David Harper
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of NSW Court of Appeal, former President of the Anti-Discrimination Board Paul Stein
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of NSW Court of Appeal Anthony Whealy
Former Commissioner of the Victorian Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission (IBAC), former Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal Robert Redlich
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of Queensland Court of Appeal Margaret White
https://australiainstitute.org.au/.../leading-judges.../
Law Council of Australia
https://lawcouncil.au/.../voice-to-parliament-is-legally...
Law Society NSW
https://www.lawsociety.com.au/.../180823%20Council%20of...
Queensland Law Society
https://www.qls.com.au/.../Statement-on-the-Voice-to...
The Law Institute of Victoria
https://www.liv.asn.au/.../In_support_of_the_Voice.aspx
Law Society of South Australia
https://www.lawsocietysa.asn.au/.../Aboriginal_and_Torres...
Law Society of Western Australia
https://www.lawsocietywa.asn.au/voice-to-parliament/...
Law Society of Northern Territory
https://lawsocietynt.asn.au/.../1721-media-release...
ACT Law Society
https://www.actlawsociety.asn.au/.../statement-on-the...
.

[JJBlows]

Where does it say on the yes pamphlet anything about high court challenges?

I have no idea what you’re trying to say in point 1.

And the executive only has to listen to representations, not act on them so what would be the point of forcing them to listen again when they don’t have to do anything. They can’t “simply challenge a law after it’s introduced and change the outcome of the law”.

The following is a collection of senior legal figures and organisations that have come out publicly in support of the proposed Indigenous Voice to Parliament. I think I’ll take my legal advice from them.

Australia’s Solicitor-General, Stephen Donaghue
https://theconversation.com/solicitor-general-confirms...
Shadow Attorney-General Julian Leeser
https://www.abc.net.au/.../liberal-frontbencher.../102207614
Former High Court chief justice Robert French.
https://www.afr.com/.../voice-is-low-risk-but-high-return...
Former High Court Chief Justice Murray Gleeson
https://insidestory.org.au/why-i-support-a-voice-to.../
Former High Court Chief Justice Kenneth Hayne
https://www.abc.net.au/.../kenneth-hayne-backs.../102153848
Former Chief Justice of NSW James Spigelman
https://amp.smh.com.au/.../as-a-former-chief-justice-i...
Former Judge of the High Court of Australia Mary Gaudron
Former President of the Supreme Court of Western Australia Court of Appeal Carmel McLure
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal Stephen Charles
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal David Harper
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of NSW Court of Appeal, former President of the Anti-Discrimination Board Paul Stein
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of NSW Court of Appeal Anthony Whealy
Former Commissioner of the Victorian Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission (IBAC), former Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria Court of Appeal Robert Redlich
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of Queensland Court of Appeal Margaret White
https://australiainstitute.org.au/.../leading-judges.../
Law Council of Australia
https://lawcouncil.au/.../voice-to-parliament-is-legally...
Law Society NSW
https://www.lawsociety.com.au/.../180823%20Council%20of...
Queensland Law Society
https://www.qls.com.au/.../Statement-on-the-Voice-to...
The Law Institute of Victoria
https://www.liv.asn.au/.../In_support_of_the_Voice.aspx
Law Society of South Australia
https://www.lawsocietysa.asn.au/.../Aboriginal_and_Torres...
Law Society of Western Australia
https://www.lawsocietywa.asn.au/voice-to-parliament/...
Law Society of Northern Territory
https://lawsocietynt.asn.au/.../1721-media-release...
ACT Law Society
https://www.actlawsociety.asn.au/.../statement-on-the...
.

All the links you posted don't work, and obviously senior figures like these will have to support it otherwise they would be ostracised, that's common sense. Look at what happened to Israel folau, he wasn't a dick he just said it didn't line up with his religion.

You asked me about the yes pamphlet and where it says it and that's the thing, it does not say absolutely anything about the technical details of how it works which is why so many people are critical of it, it's a generalisation thay has a major impact and people want to know specifics on how it works. It's say they will not have Veto power which is true but every law can be challenged in the high courts in regards to constitutional issues, a law passed could infringe on aboriginal human rights and can be challenged.

The point i was making about point 1 is a law can still be passed in parliament with out bi partisan support and the voice can argue it but cant override it or stop it from being made law, once it goes into law, then from a constitutional aspect it can be argued and the high courts can force parliament to adjust the law or stop it from being law.

[Sharphorse]

Israel Falou 🤣🤣 he’s still learning the saying “You get what you give”. Preach intolerance then don’t be shocked or cry when you receive it in return

[dotcumdotinyou]

Isn't fun to have the looney left here in the shape of Mr Bubbles to muddy the waters and try to confuse everyone. He even uses his looney left mates in the legal fraternity to back him up. These are the same idiots who give "slap on the wrist sentences" to murderers and rapists, the same idiots who let criminals out on "good behaviour bonds" only for them to go straight out and offend again! I'd hate to be a cop, arrest an offender only to see him let off by a looney left magistrate and continue on his crime spree.
Me thinks Mr Bubbles is Schloongs neighbour. It wouldn't surprise me if his next post is "some prick's pissed on my plants".

At least Mr JJBlows has put down his reasons eloquently and in terms that are easy to understand. Something the yes campaign still hasn't been able to do and won't do as they DON'T WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE VOTING FOR.

[carmen farquis]

https://youtu.be/o76q3C5URco?si=nJGsj60XXcErpCT8

[Sharphorse]

Sky News, the news channel were you can’t understand what they’re saying because Murdoch’s balls are slapping on their chin too loudly

[Sharphorse]

Isn't fun to have the looney left here in the shape of Mr Bubbles to muddy the waters and try to confuse everyone. He even uses his looney left mates in the legal fraternity to back him up. These are the same idiots who give "slap on the wrist sentences" to murderers and rapists, the same idiots who let criminals out on "good behaviour bonds" only for them to go straight out and offend again! I'd hate to be a cop, arrest an offender only to see him let off by a looney left magistrate and continue on his crime spree.
Me thinks Mr Bubbles is Schloongs neighbour. It wouldn't surprise me if his next post is "some prick's pissed on my plants".

At least Mr JJBlows has put down his reasons eloquently and in terms that are easy to understand. Something the yes campaign still hasn't been able to do and won't do as they DON'T WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE VOTING FOR.

Are there any citations on that the voice will be able to use the high court to enforce its suggestions? Sounds dubious at best to the objective mind. I would agree that the yes campaign could sell it better but why would Albanese, who has an investment property portfolio of over $5 million now, be keen to pass something so reckless that would screw him over in such a devastatingly personal manner? I’m interested in hearing facts that can be backed up, not name calling like loony left. Those terms are best left in tabloids prints owned by out of touch billionaires

[Sharphorse]

For example, one of the more extreme examples of something the NO campaign is saying is the voice will suggest a land tax on all properties with the funds raised going back to them. Parliament would laugh that out of the room and the suggestion that the voice could then take something like that to the high court and therefore suggesting even Labor politicians, who own hoards of investment properties themselves, hadn’t already thought of this and is something that’s hard to take serious unless there’s something to back it up? I don’t think the voice will bring about such drastic change. The main issue with the yes campaign is they’re not selling hard enough but that’s given the opportunity for the no campaign to come in and spread their usual “they’re coming for you” paranoia fear campaign with the usual Murdoch funded tropes and name calling. Newscorp seems desperate to fund a win after losing the federal and now a number of state elections but so far it hasn’t been honest either

[fud]

And now Palmer's kicking in $2mil to support the NO campaign, crikey!
https://www.crikey.com.au/2023/09/29/clive-palmer-2m-no-camp-voice

[fud]

And now Palmer's kicking in $2mil to support the NO campaign, crikey!
https://www.crikey.com.au/2023/09/29/clive-palmer-2m-no-camp-voice

Lol, tweet from

Dr Monique Ryan MP
@Mon4Kooyong

If Clive Palmer is a No, I’m voting Yes.

[Sharphorse]

Makes you wonder how these billionaires stay billionaires when they throw money around so recklessly. How does he not slam his head against the wall whenever he thinks about how much money he shat down the drain during the last federal election 🤣

[Double_Adapter]

I really did try and read through Bubbly's post, but the thread has more broken links than fucken escorts & babes. Anyway for what it's worth if you really wanna know what the long term outcome for AU will be, do a little research on the NZ experience ie Waitangi Tribunal. The Waitangi Tribunal started off as an advisory body, exactly the same as our Voice to Parliament is supposed to be, but after a series of governmental and legal/judicial fuckups it has now made the NZ Parliament subservient to the Māori Voice. The country has been fucked and hamstrung by the tribunal and you only need to ask the kiwi's in NZ to understand this. Either way trusting what a politician says is like trusting a monkey with a sharp razor blade....they're both fucken dangerous and unpredictable.

[Vader]

Basically, Albo is asking you to sign a blank cheque. Would you sign a blank cheque? There is your answer. A big NO

[ReginaldBubbles]

All the links you posted don't work, and obviously senior figures like these will have to support it otherwise they would be ostracised, that's common sense. Look at what happened to Israel folau, he wasn't a dick he just said it didn't line up with his religion.


Yeah the site I copied the links from didn't include the full links in the text but I doubt anyone here would read them anyway. And saying that pretty much all the top legal experts bodies have decided to give incorrect legal advice for fear of being ostracised seems to be the opposite of common sense. Lucky we have great legal minds like you to give frank and fearless advice!



asked me about the yes pamphlet and where it says it and that's the thing, it does not say absolutely anything about the technical details of how it works which is why so many people are critical of it, it's a generalisation thay has a major impact and people want to know specifics on how it works. It's say they will not have Veto power which is true but every law can be challenged in the high courts in regards to constitutional issues, a law passed could infringe on aboriginal human rights and can be challenged.

The point i was making about point 1 is a law can still be passed in parliament with out bi partisan support and the voice can argue it but cant override it or stop it from being made law, once it goes into law, then from a constitutional aspect it can be argued and the high courts can force parliament to adjust the law or stop it from being law.

If you've read anything about the voice I'm sure you must've read that most things in the constitution don't have fine detail, that's for the government of the day to work out which means it can be changed like all legislation and it's not set in stone. I think Labor has been pretty clear that it's just a small body of non government advisors that don't have any power to introduce or alter any legislation. If the LNP gets in they can make it smaller or whatever, the only thing in the constitution is that a body gets to make representation to government. That's it. Nothing to worry about.

It almost sounds like you think we shouldn't have any laws at all in case they're challenged in court!

[ReginaldBubbles]

Isn't fun to have the looney left here in the shape of Mr Bubbles to muddy the waters and try to confuse everyone. He even uses his looney left mates in the legal fraternity to back him up. These are the same idiots who give "slap on the wrist sentences" to murderers and rapists, the same idiots who let criminals out on "good behaviour bonds" only for them to go straight out and offend again! I'd hate to be a cop, arrest an offender only to see him let off by a looney left magistrate and continue on his crime spree.
Me thinks Mr Bubbles is Schloongs neighbour. It wouldn't surprise me if his next post is "some prick's pissed on my plants".

At least Mr JJBlows has put down his reasons eloquently and in terms that are easy to understand. Something the yes campaign still hasn't been able to do and won't do as they DON'T WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE VOTING FOR.

Very eloquent argument mr cuminyou. Especially your nuanced opinions on "law and order". The Murdoch press gets a lot of clicks from confecting such outrage.

[ReginaldBubbles]

I really did try and read through Bubbly's post, but the thread has more broken links than fucken escorts & babes. Anyway for what it's worth if you really wanna know what the long term outcome for AU will be, do a little research on the NZ experience ie Waitangi Tribunal. The Waitangi Tribunal started off as an advisory body, exactly the same as our Voice to Parliament is supposed to be, but after a series of governmental and legal/judicial fuckups it has now made the NZ Parliament subservient to the Māori Voice. The country has been fucked and hamstrung by the tribunal and you only need to ask the kiwi's in NZ to understand this. Either way trusting what a politician says is like trusting a monkey with a sharp razor blade....they're both fucken dangerous and unpredictable.

Hopefully this link works. Compiled by an ex federal police officer who worked in counter-terrorism. https://www.facebook.com/realcarrickryan/posts/pfbid0SPpR5RoCiND7jM5DtjG3qBXaMbfuaP1arSc4zAsh3Ksv 9EBPotqWauhzmuEEiNpCl Any actual examples about NZ being fucked and hamstrung and being subservient to the Maoris? I'd be interested in reading about it.

[tkicks]

I’m still keen to listen to both sides but some of the reasons coming out of the NO don’t even make sense. One of my relatives was talking about a land tax being passed. I mean aren’t politicians some of the richest property investors in the country? Why would they tax themselves? I do think the NO vote will win though. Even though they are lying more, they’re fighting harder, spending more money on ads and the general public isn’t intelligent enough to know the difference whereas I don’t think the YES campaign is selling it hard enough. Sometimes to win you gotta fight dirty and that’s what the NO campaign is doing


Sorry but you have got one of your facts totally wrong. The YES campaign is far better funded. Just westpac cba and bhp alone kicked in 6 mio. Also tried to make donations to yes tax deductible but not donations to no until the threat of legal action made him back down.

[JJBlows]

Yeah the site I copied the links from didn't include the full links in the text but I doubt anyone here would read them anyway. And saying that pretty much all the top legal experts bodies have decided to give incorrect legal advice for fear of being ostracised seems to be the opposite of common sense. Lucky we have great legal minds like you to give frank and fearless advice!




If you've read anything about the voice I'm sure you must've read that most things in the constitution don't have fine detail, that's for the government of the day to work out which means it can be changed like all legislation and it's not set in stone. I think Labor has been pretty clear that it's just a small body of non government advisors that don't have any power to introduce or alter any legislation. If the LNP gets in they can make it smaller or whatever, the only thing in the constitution is that a body gets to make representation to government. That's it. Nothing to worry about.

It almost sounds like you think we shouldn't have any laws at all in case they're challenged in court!

Bro what do you mean the constitution doesn't have fine details (it has 8 chapters with a 128 subsections outlining how it works), its the law that basically has specific details to separate all branches of government to ensure their is a equal distribution of power in Australia - you have to be specific in details inorder for it to work here like it does and what roles the senate, parliament, executive, states and judiciary have.

And what the fuck do you mean "that's for the government of the day to work out which means it can be changed like all legislation and it's not set in stone"????? - For a start this the exact thing why people vote no is because they are trying to sell us something that they say will work for the better but at the same time have no fucking idea how it's going to work at the same time, look at what happened with the carbon tax, people thought it was a great idea until they figured out how to do it and then it stung a lot of business financially and made problems to the point they had to scrap it, that was legislation and could be easily reversed but to have the same naive view about doing the same thing with a constitution is ridiculous because the constitution is extremely hard to change or revert decisions for the fact its there to keep power sharing etc equal amongst all branches, once it's in the constitution it's extremely hard to change it back.

And yes as I stated before it's they can't alter or introduce legislation BEFORE but when it becomes law, as per the constitution the voice can argue the law passed in the high courts which can delay or hamstring laws from being enacted from litigation.

[ReginaldBubbles]

Bro what do you mean the constitution doesn't have fine details (it has 8 chapters with a 128 subsections outlining how it works),

I mean that it says stuff like, "this is what the government can make laws about" but it doesn't outline the specific detail of those laws because like you said if the finer details are in the constitution it's very difficult to change. Which is why it's better to leave those things up to parliament so the details can evolve over time. It's quite obvious here for example. Where's the detail??

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Constitution/chapter1/Part_V_-_Powers_of_the_Parliament#chapter-01_part-05_51

And Australia would be much better off with a price on carbon and we would've transitioned to renewables much more easily using market forces. John Howard supported it (the supposed party of market forces) until Labor did and then he used it as a political tool as they often do. They supported cutting franking credits until Labor did too.


as per the constitution the voice can argue the law passed in the high courts which can delay or hamstring laws from being enacted from litigation

People can do this already, the voice to parliament will make no difference to this right.

[Double_Adapter]

Any actual examples about NZ being fucked and hamstrung and being subservient to the Maoris? I'd be interested in reading about it.

Here you go bro.There's more articles on various NZ sites, and I'll post them if you're still interested.

https://ipa.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/The-New-Zealand-Maori-Voice-to-Parliament-and-what-we-can-expect-for-Australia.pdf

In short, the decisions made in that time have been a smorgasbord of social justice activism, the results of which have been to divide New Zealanders by race. The research finds that the Voice, if it follows the precedent established through decades of Waitangi Tribunal cases, will suffer from serious flaws. The Waitangi Tribunal shows:
• the scope of the Voice will expand greatly over time;
• the Voice will possess a veto over certain legislation;
• the Voice will engage in divisive racial politics; and
• the Voice will create new types of Indigenous rights, which means extra rights for one group of Australians based on their race

[ReginaldBubbles]

Here you go bro.There's more articles on various NZ sites, and I'll post them if you're still interested.

https://ipa.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/The-New-Zealand-Maori-Voice-to-Parliament-and-what-we-can-expect-for-Australia.pdf

In short, the decisions made in that time have been a smorgasbord of social justice activism, the results of which have been to divide New Zealanders by race. The research finds that the Voice, if it follows the precedent established through decades of Waitangi Tribunal cases, will suffer from serious flaws. The Waitangi Tribunal shows:
• the scope of the Voice will expand greatly over time;
• the Voice will possess a veto over certain legislation;
• the Voice will engage in divisive racial politics; and
• the Voice will create new types of Indigenous rights, which means extra rights for one group of Australians based on their race

FFS dude, the Institute of Public Affairs?? Far right "think tank" funded by the likes of Gina Rinehart and various tobacco and fossil fuel companies. Not an independent source of unbiased information by any means. Keen to hear from other sources though.

[pornonporn]

Vote no

It's a waste of money

[ReginaldBubbles]

Vote no

It's a waste of money

Definitely not a reason to vote no. The amount of money it will cost is insignificant in the federal budget.

[ReginaldBubbles]

Basically, Albo is asking you to sign a blank cheque. Would you sign a blank cheque? There is your answer. A big NO

This is not true at all. It's a voice to tell the government first hand what Indigenous people actually need rather than governments who have no idea making the decisions. The government of the day can listen to the voice and tell them to fuck off if they want. Nothing to worry about

[pornonporn]

This is not true at all. It's a voice to tell the government first hand what Indigenous people actually need rather than governments who have no idea making the decisions. The government of the day can listen to the voice and tell them to fuck off if they want. Nothing to worry about

We already have indigenous senators and members in parliament why do we need a voice

[ReginaldBubbles]

We already have indigenous senators and members in parliament why do we need a voice

Because it's about hearing about stories on the ground and genuine community representation, without political party affiliation. Government can totally ignore it so nothing to worry about. You're not going to have your backyard taken away from you, or pay a land tax and it's not a declaration of war on the "Australian way of life" but it is certainly a good opportunity for Dutton, Sky et al to create division for the sake of partisanship.

[pornonporn]

Yeah but how much money has been spent on advertising and the yes campaign as well as the cost of the voice establishment.
How much in total is that going to cost.

Would that money be spent to Aboriginal's living on slabs on concrete.
We already know what indigenous people need, they need housing, medical needs, education, community services.

[Sharphorse]

Sorry but you have got one of your facts totally wrong. The YES campaign is far better funded. Just westpac cba and bhp alone kicked in 6 mio. Also tried to make donations to yes tax deductible but not donations to no until the threat of legal action made him back down.

I’m not wrong, I only mentioned money spent on ads. Sure, the yes campaign has got plenty of corporate sponsorship because companies love to virtue signal these days but the no campaign has received a lot of money too, generally more so from individual billionaires than companies themselves, and anyway as I said I was referring to money spent on advertising, not who has the most sponsors or donors

[wasabi10]

The yes vote isn't very clear about what exactly they want... so it's a no...

[kingwally]

Because it's about hearing about stories on the ground and genuine community representation, without political party affiliation. Government can totally ignore it so nothing to worry about. You're not going to have your backyard taken away from you, or pay a land tax and it's not a declaration of war on the "Australian way of life" but it is certainly a good opportunity for Dutton, Sky et al to create division for the sake of partisanship.

That is what Linda Burney is there for as well as the other 3000+ organizations for Indigenous people solely. I genuinely believe that the only way for the poor sad Indigenous doing it really tough in remote and regional areas to rise up to the standard of living of ordinary Australians is to have a countrywide alcohol ban. I know it will never happen , and I enjoy having beers, but this is in my opinion the ONLY solution.

[AHLUNGOR]

If the Australian Government is genuinely wanting to help the indigenous community to live a better life moving forward, may be they can learn a few things from China:

The World Bank logo

Who We Are
This page in: English
PRESS RELEASEAPRIL 1, 2022

Lifting 800 Million People Out of Poverty – New Report Looks at Lessons from China’s Experience.

[Soccerfan]

Clive Palmer will spend millions ensuring the No vote gets up, I wonder why? This is the guy who refused to pay his own workers while jet setting around the world and falling asleep in parliament. The majority of the politicians voting No are self serving liberals with no moral or ethical compass. They’re all about me me me me me. The No argument is headed by some of the nastiest people in Australia. That in itself should says enough.

Imagine being guests in a house and wishing ill on the people who live there? Unbelievable we we all agree we have won the lottery of life that we’re in Australia yet we can’t allow the original inhabitants the opportunities that are not provided to them. Change needs to happen, it will take generations but it has to start somewhere and education is key.

This is just an advisory group looking out for their best interests and there’s nothing wrong with that. Canberra is full of lobby groups wanting to impart us from our money. I’m guessing the indigenous people will likely have decent ideas of where the money should go and how it should be spent.

People saying that Mundine and Price should be listened to? Your kidding!! They are Libs through and through and are just following the party playbook. They’re already receiving their payoffs.

The people talking about the lack of detail, how many of you have checked out the yes23 website? Plenty of detail on there.
Imagine having the opportunity to improve the lives of one of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people in our country, let alone the original inhabitants that give us our own unique cultural identity, and not taking it.

When people talk about the challenges in remote communities, all I see are reasons to vote Yes.

[pornonporn]

Have you seen Kamahl's reason why he changed to no

[Sharphorse]

Have you seen Kamahl's reason why he changed to no

Why are people so unkind?

[Soccerfan]

Have you seen Kamahl's reason why he changed to no

Didn’t Kamahl go from No to Yes then back to No?
I don’t rely on him for informed opinions, so no, I don’t know his reasons.
But I believe the No vote will win, even with their scare campaigns. The lack of compassion in the community is widespread and quite shocking. But we’ll cheer them on in the GF.

[kingwally]

Clive Palmer will spend millions ensuring the No vote gets up, I wonder why? This is the guy who refused to pay his own workers while jet setting around the world and falling asleep in parliament. The majority of the politicians voting No are self serving liberals with no moral or ethical compass. They’re all about me me me me me. The No argument is headed by some of the nastiest people in Australia. That in itself should says enough.

Imagine being guests in a house and wishing ill on the people who live there? Unbelievable we we all agree we have won the lottery of life that we’re in Australia yet we can’t allow the original inhabitants the opportunities that are not provided to them. Change needs to happen, it will take generations but it has to start somewhere and education is key.

This is just an advisory group looking out for their best interests and there’s nothing wrong with that. Canberra is full of lobby groups wanting to impart us from our money. I’m guessing the indigenous people will likely have decent ideas of where the money should go and how it should be spent.

People saying that Mundine and Price should be listened to? Your kidding!! They are Libs through and through and are just following the party playbook. They’re already receiving their payoffs.

The people talking about the lack of detail, how many of you have checked out the yes23 website? Plenty of detail on there.
Imagine having the opportunity to improve the lives of one of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people in our country, let alone the original inhabitants that give us our own unique cultural identity, and not taking it.

When people talk about the challenges in remote communities, all I see are reasons to vote Yes.
The nastiness comes pretty much from the YES side of the argument...have you heard the shit coming out of Marcia Langtons and Noel Pearsons gobs...they are seriously nasty cunts.

As for Anthony Mundine...agreed, he is a fuckwit but Jacinta Price is living amongst the most suffering and trying her best to improve things but the current government will not listen to her , just in spite. Langton lives in Melbourne in a very comfortable unit, Pearson somewhere in Cairns. Price begged Albanese to go to Alice Springs to see what was going on there and the little cunt spent 3 or 4 hours there, much against his will. He did not want to know about what was going on there. Prices heart is with her people, Pearson and Langton want a bigger slice of the public purse for themselves and their empires.

As for us looking up what the Voice is all about....if Albanese or the others cannot spend 15 minutes to tell the public all the details, why should the public have to look it up. If he was genuine, he should fucking be a man and tell the nation. The cunt has been everywhere (soccer, football, concerts , overseas etc) except telling us all the details and implications.

[ReginaldBubbles]

The nastiness comes pretty much from the YES side of the argument...have you heard the shit coming out of Marcia Langtons and Noel Pearsons gobs...they are seriously nasty cunts.

As for Anthony Mundine...agreed, he is a fuckwit but Jacinta Price is living amongst the most suffering and trying her best to improve things but the current government will not listen to her , just in spite. Langton lives in Melbourne in a very comfortable unit, Pearson somewhere in Cairns. Price begged Albanese to go to Alice Springs to see what was going on there and the little cunt spent 3 or 4 hours there, much against his will. He did not want to know about what was going on there. Prices heart is with her people, Pearson and Langton want a bigger slice of the public purse for themselves and their empires.

As for us looking up what the Voice is all about....if Albanese or the others cannot spend 15 minutes to tell the public all the details, why should the public have to look it up. If he was genuine, he should fucking be a man and tell the nation. The cunt has been everywhere (soccer, football, concerts , overseas etc) except telling us all the details and implications.

What did Marcia Langton and Noel Pearson say? Jacinta Price said Aboriginal people benefited from colonialism and Warren Mundine said the voice is a declaration or war.
And what does it matter that Marcia Langton lives in “a comfortable unit”? She’s worked and fought her whole life for Aboriginal issues and not for the money. Where do you think Jacinta Price lives? Plenty of people in the Aboriginal people have come out saying she doesn’t speak for them.

[hornedbeast]

Can't say I have ever encountered an aborigine or Islander WL.

[Smartmover]

It's okay to say no.

Plenty of yes campaign, I wonder why there isn't a No campaign to keep things balanced

[pornonporn]

I just don't like the lies of the government
For example saying 80% of indigenous people agree with the voice from a survey.
I don't know a single aboriginal that was surveyed.

[ReginaldBubbles]

It's okay to say no.

I wonder why there isn't a No campaign to keep things balanced

You cannot be serious

[pornonporn]

I know of a lot of Aboriginal organisations that don't agree with the voice but are only agreeing with the voice because the government is giving them money and if they say no they won't receive money

[xeniba]

Yes voters want racism enshrined into the constitution. Ask yourself this, would aboriginal people ever agree to give YOU special privileges? No? Then why would you offer them such privileges? Because you're a virtue signalling beta cuck?

[ReginaldBubbles]

I know of a lot of Aboriginal organisations that don't agree with the voice but are only agreeing with the voice because the government is giving them money and if they say no they won't receive money

Which organisations?

[pornonporn]

Which organisations?

I can't say

But for those who are strong for yes
Let me ask you what have you done for Indigenous people besides campaigning for a yes vote

I have spent every weekend volunteering in Redfern and have not met anyone who wants a yes

[Soccerfan]

I can't say

But for those who are strong for yes
Let me ask you what have you done for Indigenous people besides campaigning for a yes vote

I have spent every weekend volunteering in Redfern and have not met anyone who wants a yes

……..sure you have

[pornonporn]

sure you have as well

[ReginaldBubbles]

I can't say

But for those who are strong for yes
Let me ask you what have you done for Indigenous people besides campaigning for a yes vote

I have spent every weekend volunteering in Redfern and have not met anyone who wants a yes

Every weekend volunteering in Redfern lol! I find that hard to believe but ok good for you.

I know a lot of Aboriginal people and my extended family has worked with Aboriginal education organisations over many years and I've done plenty of helping. I might even be Aboriginal for all you know.
There is nothing to lose from a yes vote. There's no fine print, racism, special privileges or whatever the fuck.

But Dutton has done a masterful job of running the negative campaign and "If you don't know, vote no" is a masterful slogan for the lazy and ignorant.
Australia was built on racism and it remains large in our culture to this day.
Except now it's apparently more offensive to point out racism than it is to actually have opinions and actions that further historic institutional racism.

Apologies for the big words.

[kingwally]

What did Marcia Langton and Noel Pearson say? Jacinta Price said Aboriginal people benefited from colonialism and Warren Mundine said the voice is a declaration or war.
And what does it matter that Marcia Langton lives in “a comfortable unit”? She’s worked and fought her whole life for Aboriginal issues and not for the money. Where do you think Jacinta Price lives? Plenty of people in the Aboriginal people have come out saying she doesn’t speak for them.

Marcia Langton said anyone who supports the NO side is racist and stupid, Pearson has called Price all sorts of belittling names and saying she is punching down on blackfellas...really stupid stuff and not at all helping the YES side.

Jacinta Price is living right at the coal face of poverty and abuse at Alice Springs, and sees it all unfold daily. Langton and Pearson are far removed from the troubles by living in the cities. Pearson is in control of various Indigenous organizations in far North Queensland that has had in excess of $550 million paid to them over the years yet the people up there still live in squaller...where has the money gone? Certainly not to the people who need it.

I have had experience of living in and near places in FNQ where houses have been built for the local Indigenous people, paid for by the taxpayer to various Indigenous organizations, and these places have been ruined within months of completion by the people living in them...the cause of the problem is and always will be alcohol...the inhabitants start drinking, the fights start, then the places get smashed to pieces.

Dont be fooled by this government, it is all about Albanese and his ego...he wants to think he is Australias Nelson Mandela. the Labor governments are all about big ideas but has no idea of how to deliver practical solutions. A good start would be to ban alcohol all over the nation to everyone, but as a beer drinker who descended from hungry penniless impoverished Irish migrants in the 1860s, I know that will never happen.

FYI...some contacts of mine in FNQ tell me that the YES campaign are offering people $1000 to vote YES...I suppose they have to do something with the $200 million that the corporates are giving them. The NO side has nothing like this sort of money.

[Vader]

You have nailed it Kingwally. Also Jacinta Price has offered to debate Albo, Pearson, Burney Mayo, Parkin etc but no takers yet. I wonder why? All that will come out of Albo's and Labors mess is that down the track Jacinta Price will become PM.

[hornedbeast]

But Albo gwoo up in a council fwat!

[Double_Adapter]

Kingwally for PM!... a bukake party is in order if he runs for parliament.

[Sharphorse]

I have a close relative who is a social worker in the NT. Says Jacinta just comes out for the Sky News cameras and is motivated by coal money from Gina and Clive. Ultimate aunt Jemima but can’t blame her as there’s good money in being a brown person being paid by white billionaires to say what they want you to say. Just ask Candace Owens

[dotcumdotinyou]

Funny thing about you looney lefts if you can't baffle people with the bullshit you and you like dredge up then you try to attack the person who brings up the accurate facts. Greenies 101.

[Soccerfan]

Yeah, like $1000 to vote yes is actually happening? All the lies and personal attacks are coming from the No side?!?!

Do you know why? The No side doesn’t have an argument. It has to make shit up, otherwise their straight up racists.

[Sharphorse]

Claims personal attacks then proceeds to label anyone who questions the financial backing of the NO side a looney lefty 🤣🤣 I didn’t attack anyone on this forum but I’ll cop a bit of name calling I guess because I’m not fragile. Would be good to cop an insult that’s original though and isn’t just an echo of Sky News after dark hosts who are drunk on Rupert Murdoch’s c*m 🤣🤣🤣

[ReginaldBubbles]

Marcia Langton said anyone who supports the NO side is racist and stupid, Pearson has called Price all sorts of belittling names and saying she is punching down on blackfellas...really stupid stuff and not at all helping the YES side.

Jacinta Price is living right at the coal face of poverty and abuse at Alice Springs, and sees it all unfold daily. Langton and Pearson are far removed from the troubles by living in the cities. Pearson is in control of various Indigenous organizations in far North Queensland that has had in excess of $550 million paid to them over the years yet the people up there still live in squaller...where has the money gone? Certainly not to the people who need it.

I have had experience of living in and near places in FNQ where houses have been built for the local Indigenous people, paid for by the taxpayer to various Indigenous organizations, and these places have been ruined within months of completion by the people living in them...the cause of the problem is and always will be alcohol...the inhabitants start drinking, the fights start, then the places get smashed to pieces.

Dont be fooled by this government, it is all about Albanese and his ego...he wants to think he is Australias Nelson Mandela. the Labor governments are all about big ideas but has no idea of how to deliver practical solutions. A good start would be to ban alcohol all over the nation to everyone, but as a beer drinker who descended from hungry penniless impoverished Irish migrants in the 1860s, I know that will never happen.

FYI...some contacts of mine in FNQ tell me that the YES campaign are offering people $1000 to vote YES...I suppose they have to do something with the $200 million that the corporates are giving them. The NO side has nothing like this sort of money.

Marcia Langton did not say that at all, she said some of the tactics of the no campaign are racist but of course the ring wing media jumped on it and said "look theyre calling you all racists!

As for everything else you said, it's basically racially stereotyping and rumour mongering and I can't argue with it rationally.

[rooter]

The Voice Referendum will fail just like the Republic Referendum failed.
That's just the way Australia is.
it's a 100% guarantee the YES will fail.
Don't get angry about it, don't get smug about it, don't get depressed about it, don't get happy about it.
it's just the way it is.
Accept it and move on and Enjoy! Always Enjoy!

[ReginaldBubbles]

Fuck Nathan Cleary is voting yes now! I can’t work out if he’s a looney left virtue signaller or if someone gave him $1000

[kingwally]

Claims personal attacks then proceeds to label anyone who questions the financial backing of the NO side a looney lefty ���� I didn’t attack anyone on this forum but I’ll cop a bit of name calling I guess because I’m not fragile. Would be good to cop an insult that’s original though and isn’t just an echo of Sky News after dark hosts who are drunk on Rupert Murdoch’s c*m ������

I have not called you any names. It is funny that Rupert Murdoch cops the blame for everything, I suppose that he must have been with Captain Cook when he landed at Botany Bay, maybe he shot JFK, did he light the flame under Joan of Arc?

[GoldfishMan]

I have not called you any names. It is funny that Rupert Murdoch cops the blame for everything, I suppose that he must have been with Captain Cook when he landed at Botany Bay, maybe he shot JFK, did he light the flame under Joan of Arc?
No, but he is one hell of a tall poppy.

[rooter]

The history of the world and of humanity is one of conquest and war and genocide and rape and murder.
Australia is no exception.
It's just the way it is.
It's not pretty but that's just the way it is.

[GoldfishMan]

Starting to get the feeling that this referendum is going to impact everyone else with a vested interest EXCEPT the indigenous people.

How about we have a legislation that prohibits anybody to support which way a referendum goes? Keep money and self interest out of the fricking picture and just do it for what it is.

[Ziggurat]

In the event of failure, I volunteer to be the Voice. Just give me the phone numbers of the boss man or woman from every remote community and I'll ring them every couple of months and ask what they most need to improve their lives. For equipment I'll only need a notebook and pen beside the phone to make a checklist.

So that I am a literal Voice I'll record the results on a cassette deck and post it registered to parliament every couple of months - geared to self-destruct in five seconds. But don't worry if you don't get it all down because there will be a new updated cassette in a couple of months and there is bound to be plenty of repetition on them anyway.

For the rest of it I'll collect my 500K a year salary, and save them the odd 400 mill it will otherwise cost.

[Jesus666]

I won't say my opinion, but hasn't it been a great distraction from the Petrol price rises. That is what people should be mobilizing against

[ReginaldBubbles]

I won't say my opinion, but hasn't it been a great distraction from the Petrol price rises. That is what people should be mobilizing against

If only we could do more than one thing at a time.

[faruk]

No.

There's a reason this is being pushed down our throats, and those reasons are usually not in our best interests, usually for someone else's interests. So just F them.

[Bunningsnag]

It's okay to say no.

Plenty of yes campaign, I wonder why there isn't a No campaign to keep things balanced
Absolutely. It's a referendum. Both sides should have their time to promote. Not just one.
Secondly that clown Albanese shouldn't be spending his whole time promoting a side. He should be doing his job and fixing this mess of a country and remaining impartial.

[Bunningsnag]

No.

There's a reason this is being pushed down our throats, and those reasons are usually not in our best interests, usually for someone else's interests. So just F them.

End of the day if YES wins it will cost us the taxpayers more money. There no doubt will be reparation taxes on things like rates etc. No doubt.
We the ones not involved in the colonialisation will be paying money to people also not involved in the colonisation. And with the huge living costs going on we all cannot afford it.

[Axeman123]

It's just so Latrell Mitchell can get the Bunnies captaincy.

[faruk]

It's okay to say no.

Plenty of yes campaign, I wonder why there isn't a No campaign to keep things balanced

There is a no campaign. But they get shut down as being haters. Anyone else who publicly says they will vote no is also labelled as some sort of hater or racist.

[Double_Adapter]

There is a no campaign. But they get shut down as being haters. Anyone else who publicly says they will vote no is also labelled as some sort of hater or racist.

You can blame social media, government disinformation, and the fucken cancel and woke cultures for all that shit.

[frisson]

I won't say my opinion, but hasn't it been a great distraction from the Petrol price rises. That is what people should be mobilizing against

Great post

We will soon know just how much Australia wants to change their constitution to create another commitee

By the way, the person or persons, in this debate, including citizens and politicians, who needed to use "Left" "Right", "Racist" or other names have lost the debate straight away

The final referendum vote will show which name callers from which camp, the YES or NO most shot themselves in the foot

Australians will ultimately make the correct decision

[Ziggurat]

It's like that adage "the first person to bring up Hitler" automatically loses. :shout:

[4647]

I don’t like people telling me what to do. TV Ad say vote “yes”, people on the street giving flyers telling me to vote “yes”, politicians the same. Why not explain to the people what is the referendum and let them f**** decide.

Moron you can't work it out yourself

[4647]

I assume this is a fun and safe question to ask here since we are almost just anonymous here. What are you going to vote for this referendum about the First Peoples of Australia?

Good to see Australia is as racist as ever in 2023 you c#nt make me sick and I'm Anglo. Racist dog are here

[GoldfishMan]

You know this forum has a lot of trolls. They're as obnoxious as you can possibly imagine a human being can be. It's as if, when they found this forum that allows them to create an account without needing anything like an email address to proof that they were a unique person, whoa, boy, they go crazy. The heavens open up, a warm glow falls over their nutcase faces and they just go to town being as obnoxious as possible to anybody on here.

Now, many of these trolls often come here, post shit all day everyday taking all cummers, then they just disappear. For a long time, you don't hear a peep from them.

I honestly think, when that happens, that those trolls probably died somehow in real life because they must've trolled the wrong people out there in real life.

But nooo, some trolls just keep cumming back. Now those *must* be timid little mice out there in real life. Probably jumps at a shadow. A complete no balls coward. They'd only put on their tough guy shit here, cos if they did this out there they'd be dead by now somewhere in the gutter.

[Jamez11]

Good to see Australia is as racist as ever in 2023 you c#nt make me sick and I'm Anglo. Racist dog are here

This could be a good opportunity to explain or help people who are voting no because they don’t know what they are voting yes to better understand.

The biggest issue from what I can tell, is people really have no idea about the specifics of the “voice”, there are indigenous senators/members of parliament/indigenous minister, maybe hundreds of government and non government organisations for indigenous people , how specifically is the voice specifically going to change the current system, what are specific policies that the current system is lacking that the new system will fix and why is it absolutely essential to change the constitution when we already have so many advisory boards.

I’m sure racism has something to do with it for the minority of no voters, but you got to remember early this year it was 51% yes, 34% no and 15% undecided so if the polls are anything to go by, all of the 15% undecided have decided no and even original yes voters have changed to no. So were they not racist early in the year and all of a sudden have become racist?

[ReginaldBubbles]

Not everyone who will vote no is racist, but everyone who is racist will vote no.
Part of the problem is actually it's so simple and really not a big deal so people think there must be some underlying hidden ulterior motives and it's very easy for people like Dutton to use that fear and uncertainty for political purposes.

[ReginaldBubbles]

The history of the world and of humanity is one of conquest and war and genocide and rape and murder.
Australia is no exception.
It's just the way it is.
It's not pretty but that's just the way it is.

Easy to say for a middle aged white guy with the funds and fortunate geographic location to fuck multiple Japanese teenagers every week! :shout:

[frisson]

It's like that adage "the first person to bring up Hitler" automatically loses. :shout:

Well said, exactly right

[ReginaldBubbles]

Well said, exactly right

Only because of politically correctness. You're not allowed to compare anything to the holocaust. It's even considered anti-semitic to criticise Israel's atrocities.
Suggesting someone's actions might have underlying racist psychology isn't the same as bringing up Hitler or even name calling though.

[GoldfishMan]

Easy to say for a middle aged white guy with the funds and fortunate geographic location to fuck multiple Japanese teenagers every week! :shout:

If you're trying to win people over to the Yes side, can you please quit attacking the "middle aged white guy"? That's racist as fuck. It makes it look like you want to vote Yes in spite of the white people, rather than for the good of the indigenous people.

[ColesBag]

Voting early today.

I'm Voting No.

[kingwally]

If you're trying to win people over to the Yes side, can you please quit attacking the "middle aged white guy"? That's racist as fuck. It makes it look like you want to vote Yes in spite of the white people, rather than for the good of the indigenous people.

Well said, that is exactly what this referendum is all about.

[cassius]

As a group I would have thought that tolerance and understanding others point of view was a good idea. Just my 2cents.

[James_jones]

That's racist as fuck.

So is the racial separation that is being proposed by the voice.

Voting no tomorrow.

[Jamez11]

Not everyone who will vote no is racist, but everyone who is racist will vote no.
Part of the problem is actually it's so simple and really not a big deal so people think there must be some underlying hidden ulterior motives and it's very easy for people like Dutton to use that fear and uncertainty for political purposes.

Not necessarily, there a lot of people who think white people are degenerate colonisers who are all voting yes.

You can blame racism and Dutton all you want, the fact you ignored everything in my previous post and went to racism is the problem. You’re one of the reasons why people are voting no.

I’ll ask you directly;

The biggest issue from what I can tell, is people really have no idea about the specifics of the “voice”, there are indigenous senators/members of parliament/indigenous minister, maybe hundreds of government and non government organisations for indigenous people , how specifically is the voice specifically going to change the current system, what are specific policies that the current system is lacking that the new system will fix and why is it absolutely essential to change the constitution when we already have so many advisory boards.

[frisson]

Just voted prepoll

Recommend voting prepoll to avoid the queues

If you see a lot of referendum lobbyists, in a shopping mall or centre, you know you are close to an AEC polling booth

Very straightforward

One big box

Write either YES or NO

Done

Don't listen to anyone. You are a grown up
Vote according to what your heart tells you. Australians don't like to be told how to vote

NOONE HAS THE RIGHT TO MAKE YOU FEEL GUILTY OR NOT OK. What you feel is just as valid as the next guy

[Double_Adapter]

Just voted prepoll

Recommend voting prepoll to avoid the queues

If you see a lot of referendum lobbyists, in a shopping mall or centre, you know you are close to an AEC polling booth

Very straightforward

One big box

Write either YES or NO

Done

Don't listen to anyone. You are a grown up
Vote according to what your heart tells you. Australians don't like to be told how to vote

NOONE HAS THE RIGHT TO MAKE YOU FEEL GUILTY OR NOT OK. What you feel is just as valid as the next guy

Is there a check box for 'middle age white racist guy' ? It might help Mr Bubbles

[dotcumdotinyou]

Is the yes box on the left of the ballot paper?

It'll confuse Reggie if it isn't.

[frisson]

There is a single box

Write YES or NO

How about everyone trying not to be rude to other anonymous friends on a forum. So unnecessary and just creates a bad vibe for the day

Vote and it's done. Then return focus to the economy challenges we all face

[Soccerfan]

Not necessarily, there a lot of people who think white people are degenerate colonisers who are all voting yes.

You can blame racism and Dutton all you want, the fact you ignored everything in my previous post and went to racism is the problem. You’re one of the reasons why people are voting no.

I’ll ask you directly;

The biggest issue from what I can tell, is people really have no idea about the specifics of the “voice”, there are indigenous senators/members of parliament/indigenous minister, maybe hundreds of government and non government organisations for indigenous people , how specifically is the voice specifically going to change the current system, what are specific policies that the current system is lacking that the new system will fix and why is it absolutely essential to change the constitution when we already have so many advisory boards.

Go to the yes23 website where it’s explained pretty well. But there’s no need to get too deep. It’s an advisory group for issues that affect them. They won’t have a say on mortgage rates etc.

[fted]

It can be quite difficult to find information on what the voice actually is. I found this link helpful.
https://gprivate.com/6716j

[fud]

It can be quite difficult to find information on what the voice actually is. I found this link helpful.
https://gprivate.com/6716j

There is a lot of info on the ABC site:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/voice-to-parliament-referendum

[Soccerfan]

Hey, take your informed decisions elsewhere /s

[Vincent888]

Will a resounding No vote seal Albo’s fate?

[GoldfishMan]

Will a resounding No vote seal Albo’s fate?

A pollie can stick around at most 8 years. That's a very optimistic 8 years he'll be around to annoy you if you hate him so much.
A constitutional change is permanent for all intents and purposes.

Are you really sure you want to waste you decision just to take him down? He might get ousted before next year even if this goes his way, looking at how Aussie politics is going!

Put all those other motives aside and focus on the referendum itself.

[ReginaldBubbles]

If you're trying to win people over to the Yes side, can you please quit attacking the "middle aged white guy"? That's racist as fuck. It makes it look like you want to vote Yes in spite of the white people, rather than for the good of the indigenous people.

Not attacking, just pointing out to a self drscribed "middle aged white guy" that it's easy for someone with the opportunity to enjoy the spoils of colonialism to just dismiss it all as just something happens evrywhere, always has. always will so just enjoy.

And it's not even approaching racism but I'd be genuinely interested in hearing why you think it is. As a middle aged white guy myself I don't really believe it's possible to be racist against white people in white dominated countries like Australia because it has no effect on me in the slightest. I don't have time to get into it but here's a good explanation.

https://www.vu.edu.au/about-vu/news-events/news/what-is-reverse-racism-and-whats-wrong-with-the-term

https://www.aclrc.com/myth-of-reverse-racism

[frisson]

If the referendum isn't passed, will the PM just legislate the Voice? He has the numbers in Parliament to do so
If it's a good policy then proceed

[ReginaldBubbles]

Not necessarily, there a lot of people who think white people are degenerate colonisers who are all voting yes.


Huh? I said not everyone who votes no is racist.


You can blame racism and Dutton all you want, the fact you ignored everything in my previous post and went to racism is the problem. You’re one of the reasons why people are voting no.


Interesting that you think I have more influence on the no vote than the leader of the opposition. People like Dutton are the ones who have made it about "race", it's actually about recognition of indigeneity and trying to right institutional disadvantage.


The biggest issue from what I can tell, is people really have no idea about the specifics of the “voice”, t

The issue of "specifics" is a straw man argument created to confuse the public. As I've stated previously, the constitution doesn't contain the specific detail of legislation, it just provides the government of the day the power to make laws about certain things. See link below to the actual constitution.

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_procedures/Constitution/chapter1/Part_V_-_Powers_of_the_Parliament

There are no specifics about any legislation here. And it's simple so there's not much to know. It's just a small representative group that can make representations to parliament on issues that affect them. the government can completely ignore it and is not compelled to do anything. simple


there are indigenous senators/members of parliament/indigenous minister, maybe hundreds of government and non government organisations for indigenous people , how specifically is the voice specifically going to change the current system, what are specific policies that the current system is lacking that the new system will fix and why is it absolutely essential to change the constitution when we already have so many advisory boards.

The idea is to have people who aren't politicians who are beholden to partisan party policy. It's good to have diverse representation in parliament but outside bipartisan input is also necessary. There are lots of current NGAs but a lot of them have little Aboriginal involvement and probably don't listen to what people actually need and instead decide for them. There's also probably duplication and inefficiency in a lot of instances and perhaps auditing is necessary. a national voice will make these things easier. Having it in the constitution just means it's specific legislation can be changed by successive governments but it will always be there. It's also important symbollically for Australia going forward to recognise in our founding document how our present good fortune was obtained.

Well I actually put a bit of time into that and I know I probably haven't changed anybody's mind and probably used some words some people will find triggering but I thought I'd put in one final effort. It's not gonna pass anyway so fuck it. We'll still be regarded as a racist, ignorant backwater by most of the world.

[Daffy]

There is a heap of misinformation coming from the no side in this thing.

As others have said the push for details is absolute garbage when talking about the constitution. The specifics are in the legislation. The whole part about Tax in the constitution is that the government has the right to collect it. That’s it. The specifics all come from legislation.

That $40 billion figure you also see them parading around is also garbage. First it’s a figure taken from a few years ago then inflated. It’s actually $34 billion and only a fraction of it was on specific indigenous expenditure. So from the total National expenditure of $560 billion it comes out to less than 1% spent on about 3% of our total population. The rest was all on general expenditure that any Australian could benefit from.

And if you are really taking the whole “it’s wasting money” approach then the voice to parliament will actually help make recommendations to make expenditure on indigenous issues more efficient. So it will actually save money.

[Thickman]

The yes vote it's a corporate take over disguised as indigenous humanitarianism.. you vote yes and they have every right to take your family home from under you, under the guize of the voice.. (UN/WEF) I know we agree to disagree but don't fall for it..

[ReginaldBubbles]

The yes vote it's a corporate take over disguised as indigenous humanitarianism.. you vote yes and they have every right to take your family home from under you, under the guize of the voice.. (UN/WEF) I know we agree to disagree but don't fall for it..

Jesus Christ dude. Please give me at least one verifiable fact to back this up. Because I heard the voice is actually a government take over of our anuses so that Aboriginal people can insert didgeridoos into us whenever they want!

[Sharphorse]

The yes vote it's a corporate take over disguised as indigenous humanitarianism.. you vote yes and they have every right to take your family home from under you, under the guize of the voice.. (UN/WEF) I know we agree to disagree but don't fall for it..

Everyone is entitled to their vote of yes or no but this is the most laughable no reason I’ve heard yet. Politicians are some of the richest people around with massive property investment portfolios. Thinking they are just planning all this to give up properties or pull land taxes out of their anus is ridiculous and won’t happen. Username Thickman suits..

[Vincent888]

A pollie can stick around at most 8 years. That's a very optimistic 8 years he'll be around to annoy you if you hate him so much.
A constitutional change is permanent for all intents and purposes.

Are you really sure you want to waste you decision just to take him down? He might get ousted before next year even if this goes his way, looking at how Aussie politics is going!

Put all those other motives aside and focus on the referendum itself.

I don’t hate anyone, it’s a wasted energy.

[GoldfishMan]

Not attacking, just pointing out to a self drscribed "middle aged white guy" that it's easy for someone with the opportunity to enjoy the spoils of colonialism to just dismiss it all as just something happens evrywhere, always has. always will so just enjoy.

And it's not even approaching racism but I'd be genuinely interested in hearing why you think it is. As a middle aged white guy myself I don't really believe it's possible to be racist against white people in white dominated countries like Australia because it has no effect on me in the slightest. I don't have time to get into it but here's a good explanation.

https://www.vu.edu.au/about-vu/news-events/news/what-is-reverse-racism-and-whats-wrong-with-the-term

https://www.aclrc.com/myth-of-reverse-racism
How does it matter where you are, as long as you do something based on discrimination against a particular group based on race, that's racism.

If you go to India and be racist against Indians there, does that make you not a racist?

The trouble with a lot of people is they never understand that our actions result in a swinging pendulum. There's momentum in either direction. If we do not learn from our past mistakes, we will simply be swinging from one extreme to the other. While we once discriminated against Aboriginals, we could very easily one day find ourselves doing the same thing against white people if we're not careful.

And I also find it strange that you felt the need to tell us your heritage. Being black/white/yellow/brown does not automatically make it fine for you to discriminate against people of your own skin colour.

[ReginaldBubbles]

How does it matter where you are, as long as you do something based on discrimination against a particular group based on race, that's racism.

If you go to India and be racist against Indians there, does that make you not a racist?

The trouble with a lot of people is they never understand that our actions result in a swinging pendulum. There's momentum in either direction. If we do not learn from our past mistakes, we will simply be swinging from one extreme to the other. While we once discriminated against Aboriginals, we could very easily one day find ourselves doing the same thing against white people if we're not careful.

And I also find it strange that you felt the need to tell us your heritage. Being black/white/yellow/brown does not automatically make it fine for you to discriminate against people of your own skin colour.

Read the links dude. I can't explain it to you better than that. You seem really caught up on race though.

"While we once discriminated against Aboriginals, we could very easily one day find ourselves doing the same thing against white people if we're not careful."
And once discriminated? Have you read the statistics? But you're more worried about white people being discriminated against if Aboriginal people get a voice.

[ReginaldBubbles]

Being black/white/yellow/brown does not automatically make it fine for you to discriminate against people of your own skin colour.

Also please tell me how I was being racist towards white people.

[GoldfishMan]

Read the links dude. I can't explain it to you better than that. You seem really caught up on race though.

"While we once discriminated against Aboriginals, we could very easily one day find ourselves doing the same thing against white people if we're not careful."
And once discriminated? Have you read the statistics? But you're more worried about white people being discriminated against if Aboriginal people get a voice.

Haha, I give up. You are one formidable keyboard warrior, I'll give you that. And no, I'm not going to read those links. I don't need internet articles to tell me what's right or wrong. I have my own moral compass and I plan to stick to it.

Over and out.

[ReginaldBubbles]

And no, I'm not going to read those links. I don't need internet articles to tell me what's right or wrong. I have my own moral compass and I plan to stick to it.

Over and out.

Point is that you can learn a lot from other people's experiences and perspectives. And you asked so I posted some links... But yeah ok.

Unless you wanna tell me how I was racist towards white people cos I really wanna know!

[kingwally]

Point is that you can learn a lot from other people's experiences and perspectives. And you asked so I posted some links... But yeah ok.

Unless you wanna tell me how I was racist towards white people cos I really wanna know!

You could also learn from my experiences as well...lived experiences in FNQ...check out my previous posts a few days ago.

[Double_Adapter]

That Regbubbles bloke has his blinkers on and any facts, pov's, or articles that you provide he'll dismiss and won't even bother to fucken read or consider it. He's lost cause and wasting time trying to influence a group of white middle aged horny men - and in a fucken sex forum the only VOICE that a bloke wants to hear is from an Asian lady saying 'daaarling....please turn over' .

[ReginaldBubbles]

That Regbubbles bloke has his blinkers on and any facts, pov's, or articles that you provide he'll dismiss and won't even bother to fucken read or consider it. He's lost cause and wasting time trying to influence a group of white middle aged horny men - and in a fucken sex forum the only VOICE that a bloke wants to hear is from an Asian lady saying 'daaarling....please turn over' .

Seems like I was the only one providing links, facts, articles etc. I read lots of first person anecdotal shit though. "I lived in FNQ one of the most racist places in the world and aborigines should just go back to where they came from etc etc..."

Gimme some links to facts I have ignored. Please.

But yeah about the sex forum degenerates...

[Jamez11]

I don’t agree with you or how you misquoted me but no point banging on like pork chops about it.

Me personally, if it wasn’t compulsory I probably wouldn’t vote, but because it is ill vote yes. Not sure why exactly.

Just like if the federal election results were blinded no body would even know who won based on the effect of their daily lives. The people voting no wouldn’t have a clue if ended up going through.

Good intentions, but bad execution… not that my opinion means much lol.

[bdjc]

don't even know how to vote on this rubbish.
will I be fined if I skip voting?
that's all I want to know.
if I do vote, I will say no, just out of protest to the idiots who cooked this shit up

[HardCockInSyd]

Through my work and various sporting events, most of the welcome to country speeches have been some of the most inspiring I’ve heard. It’s a yes for me. I just hope they get the right people.

I dislike "Welcome to country" speeches. I was born in Australia, so were my parents, so were my grand parents, so were my great grand parents. It's *my* country as much as anyone else who is alive today, Aboriginal or not. I don't like the idea that I need to be welcomed to my own country. Where else do I belong?

On the referendum - it's a no from me. I think they should have created it via legislation first so we could have an idea how it would work, then put up a constitutional amendment to make it permanent. As it stands, it all looks like it will end-up being very un-democratic and exclusive, if the referendum get's up.

[Jamez11]

I dislike "Welcome to country" speeches. I was born in Australia, so were my parents, so were my grand parents, so were my great grand parents. It's *my* country as much as anyone else who is alive today, Aboriginal or not. I don't like the idea that I need to be welcomed to my own country. Where else do I belong?

On the referendum - it's a no from me. I think they should have created it via legislation first so we could have an idea how it would work, then put up a constitutional amendment to make it permanent. As it stands, it all looks like it will end-up being very un-democratic and exclusive, if the referendum get's up.

I think it’s more of a ceremonial thing and respect/recognising for people/communities who were here 65,000 years before your great grandparents, great great grandparents got off the boat from Great Britain.

Technically you’re more British, than “Australian” when looking at lineage.

[Assandlegs]

I don’t agree with you or how you misquoted me but no point banging on like pork chops about it.

Why not... Kind of what Dutton and his goon show are continuing to do?

Never bring an intellectual discussion to forum whose main purpose is the satisfaction of cock relief.

Maybe everyone here should go to a REPUTABLE source of information instead of banging on about what you "reckon" will happen if we say yes to an ADVISORY body that the government will CONSULT with when dealing with legislation that DIRECTLY affects indigenous Australians.
This body has NO POWER whatsoever and is not a third chamber in parliament.

But that's just me.....


Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

[Jamez11]

Why not... Kind of what Dutton and his goon show are continuing to do?

Never bring an intellectual discussion to forum whose main purpose is the satisfaction of cock relief.

Maybe everyone here should go to a REPUTABLE source of information instead of banging on about what you "reckon" will happen if we say yes to an ADVISORY body that the government will CONSULT with when dealing with legislation that DIRECTLY affects indigenous Australians.
This body has NO POWER whatsoever and is not a third chamber in parliament.

But that's just me.....


Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Thanks mate, appreciate it.

[Hidden Python]

I just checked the mail box and found a flyer on the yes vote, top 10 myths about the Voice to Parliament Debunked.
And then on the reverse side it goes on to explain it self.
They are really trying to push this agenda, and no matter what the majority of the votes are, i have a feeling it will be passed through as the government has spent millions of tax payers dollars on this campaign.
It’s just going to be like the marriage equality vote of 2017 where a majority of the country voted against it but it still passed.

[Jamez11]

I just checked the mail box and found a flyer on the yes vote, top 10 myths about the Voice to Parliament Debunked.
And then on the reverse side it goes on to explain it self.
They are really trying to push this agenda, and no matter what the majority of the votes are, i have a feeling it will be passed through as the government has spent millions of tax payers dollars on this campaign.
It’s just going to be like the marriage equality vote of 2017 where a majority of the country voted against it but it still passed.

Just make sure to wear your tin foil hat when voting and make sure your not connected to 5G and you’ll be sweet mate.

Also destroy the flyer ASAP it could be bugged!!!

[faruk]

don't even know how to vote on this rubbish.
will I be fined if I skip voting?
that's all I want to know.
if I do vote, I will say no, just out of protest to the idiots who cooked this shit up

Yes you will be fined if you don't vote without a legitimate excuse.


I think it’s more of a ceremonial thing and respect/recognising for people/communities who were here 65,000 years before your great grandparents, great great grandparents got off the boat from Great Britain.

Technically you’re more British, than “Australian” when looking at lineage.

It's an empty gesture, no point in continuing it without any real action. If we're really sorry for what we did, just give the country back and everyone leave the country. If we're not willing to do that, then just stfu about it.

[ColesBag]

Vote No.

I did today, early voting is great, don't have to waste a precious Saturday standing in line.

[Jamez11]

Yes you will be fined if you don't vote without a legitimate excuse.



It's an empty gesture, no point in continuing it without any real action. If we're really sorry for what we did, just give the country back and everyone leave the country. If we're not willing to do that, then just stfu about it.

Observing traditional cultures, native ceremonies, dance or whatever is not an empty gesture imo, it’s actually done all over the world. I think if someone lacks their own culture, tradition, language, identity etc… it might be seen as an empty gesture, which is understandable.

I’m assuming you see the Hakka as an empty gesture, plenty are facinated and humbled by it.

When other people are celebrating these, you can always just put some headphones in and listen to Alan Jones, Andrew Bolt or just read or educate yourself even more (if that’s possible) by catching up on the latest AR’s on this forum then everyone can be happy.

[frisson]

Continue the discussions, very interesting

Can I daydream for one minute

I wish there could be discussion about important issues without once anyone mentioning the following words

Right
Left
Far right
Far left
Fascist
Labor
Liberal
Communist
Socialist
Albo
Dutton
White privilege, white middle aged or other variations
Racist
Dickhead
Ignorant
Tin foil hat (awful cliche from the US)
(Feel free to pick out the other useless words used in this thread from both sides)

It's really easy to dumb down discussions by using these words or a combination of them

Watch any US news and get really bored with hearing these terms which are an excuse to avoid actually discussing the issue

Healthy vibrant exchange of ideas stops once you use these words

Instead, confirm someone's point of view, discuss that point of view, and you're done. Don't belittle people, it's fine for someone to have an opposing opinion

Don't just justify your own opinion by exclaiming 'Albo is a dickhead' or any of the other combinations above

Ignore the daydream
Back to the discussion

[dt333]

An interesting perspective on what the Voice agenda is really about: https://rumble.com/v3n2eak-grandmother-mulara-and-maria-zeee-on-infowars-the-un-takeover-disguised-as-.html

[ReginaldBubbles]

An interesting perspective on what the Voice agenda is really about: https://rumble.com/v3n2eak-grandmother-mulara-and-maria-zeee-on-infowars-the-un-takeover-disguised-as-.html

Alex Jones?? The dude who also had the interesting perspective that school shootings in the US were a hoax and the families were all actors pretending their kids were killed? Then sold dodgy health supplements and other crap to his conspiracy theory loving audience and made millions?
I would probably look for other sources of information.

[ReginaldBubbles]

Continue the discussions, very interesting

Can I daydream for one minute

I wish there could be discussion about important issues without once anyone mentioning the following words

Right
Left
Far right
Far left
Fascist
Labor
Liberal
Communist
Socialist
Albo
Dutton
White privilege, white middle aged or other variations
Racist
Dickhead
Ignorant
Tin foil hat (awful cliche from the US)
(Feel free to pick out the other useless words used in this thread from both sides)

It's really easy to dumb down discussions by using these words or a combination of them

Watch any US news and get really bored with hearing these terms which are an excuse to avoid actually discussing the issue

Healthy vibrant exchange of ideas stops once you use these words

Instead, confirm someone's point of view, discuss that point of view, and you're done. Don't belittle people, it's fine for someone to have an opposing opinion

Don't just justify your own opinion by exclaiming 'Albo is a dickhead' or any of the other combinations above

Ignore the daydream
Back to the discussion

Lol it's the discussion police!

[dt333]

Alex Jones?? The dude who also had the interesting perspective that school shootings in the US were a hoax and the families were all actors pretending their kids were killed? Then sold dodgy health supplements and other crap to his conspiracy theory loving audience and made millions?
I would probably look for other sources of information.

But what exactly in the video do you disagree on though?
Can't even have a civilised discussion if you're just going to smear people with the typical "conspiracy theorist" response. That's just a typical gaslighting tactic from a narcissist.

[ReginaldBubbles]

But what exactly in the video do you disagree on though?
Can't even have a civilised discussion if you're just going to smear people with the typical "conspiracy theorist" response. That's just a typical gaslighting tactic from a narcissist.

I'm not going to watch an Alex Jones video because I know from watching previous ones that they are devoid of truth and I don't know why you would select him as a source of information. Shit it's not like I called you a gaslighting narcissist :shout: Frisson is gonna have to add a few words to his discussion ban list.

[keebab]

An interesting perspective on what the Voice agenda is really about: https://rumble.com/v3n2eak-grandmother-mulara-and-maria-zeee-on-infowars-the-un-takeover-disguised-as-.html

Wow, that's an abysmal fucking argument. So the UN is utilizing the AEC as part of a global conspiracy to force citizens to conform to voting standards they don't agree with?

I'll cut you a break, watch this video as a counter-argument. It's 37mins shorter and makes more sense - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAqIypjk-5A

[fud]

But what exactly in the video do you disagree on though?
Can't even have a civilised discussion if you're just going to smear people with the typical "conspiracy theorist" response. That's just a typical gaslighting tactic from a narcissist.

Re: If someone votes at two different polling places within their electorate, and places their formal vote in the ballot box at each polling place, their vote is counted.

It's a complete furphy, there in no way the AEC will allow this and it is committing electoral fraud. That's why we're always asked at the polling station if we had voted before in any election (or referendum).

The AEC’s “Enrolment Fraud and Multiple Voting” document quotes the Referendum Act which states that a person is guilty of a criminal offence if they intentionally vote more than once in the same referendum. The penalty is 6 months imprisonment for each illegal vote.

https://www.aec.gov.au/About_AEC/Publications/backgrounders/fraud-and-multiple-voting.htm

[Dweebles]

"Fine" if you don't vote, great, I won't vote... LOL!

Personally I'm voting no, because other interest groups and lobby groups are also calling for similar voice rights. Where does it end? We all have a voice now, this creates privileged access to minorities. Don't get me wrong, I do support aid and targeted programs to assist those in need, and those should be done with the involvement and buy in of those people. But this Voice is a road too far. My own opinion only.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[Dweebles]

Re: If someone votes at two different polling places within their electorate, and places their formal vote in the ballot box at each polling place, ...

Their double registration is noted and they'll likely be fined.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

[GoldfishMan]

An interesting perspective on what the Voice agenda is really about: https://rumble.com/v3n2eak-grandmother-mulara-and-maria-zeee-on-infowars-the-un-takeover-disguised-as-.html

I'd be more concerned about the agenda of the guys making that video, bro.

[Jamez11]

An interesting perspective on what the Voice agenda is really about: https://rumble.com/v3n2eak-grandmother-mulara-and-maria-zeee-on-infowars-the-un-takeover-disguised-as-.html

An interesting perspective on song lines, harmonic resonance, energy fields, earths memory codes, consciousness grids and the effect on wars, famine, sickness, and not feeling well by dt333 new cult leader Grandmother Mulara.

https://youtu.be/3KsU6BxoHgk?si=23iqTVd6Hz-RCoic


Spewing she didn’t mention how corporations actually choose our parliament and rig elections and how there are actually two constitutions like in other videos.

If you want to vote no because you think the negatives outweigh the positives, then vote no,
If you think the positives outweigh the negatives vote yes… It’s that simple.

[Vincent888]

I’m trying to find on YouTube the Bhagwan’s thoughts on this conundrum.

[fted]

An interesting perspective on what the Voice agenda is really about: https://rumble.com/v3n2eak-grandmother-mulara-and-maria-zeee-on-infowars-the-un-takeover-disguised-as-.html
I didn't watch the video (seems pretty long), but it's interesting to see that it's really just clickbait to sell you stuff from their survivalist / gold bullion / cyber paranoia / supplement sponsors.

[Soccerfan]

https://youtu.be/SAqIypjk-5A

Sound familiar?

[Jamez11]

Haha, too familiar.

[Jamez11]

The voice isn’t a lobby or interest group.

The Voice would be an advisory body, offering advice in the form of ‘representations’, often in response to a request from the government or Parliament. Its advice would be formal and public. Government and Parliament would acknowledge when they were acting in response to a representation. The Voice would differ from a lobby group in all these ways.

https://www.unimelb.edu.au/voice/faqs/law-questions/isnt-a-voice-to-parliament-just-a-constitutionally-enshrined-lobby-group

Just out of interest what other interest groups/lobby groups are calling for similar voice rights? I’m genuinely interested to know!

[Jamez11]

"Fine" if you don't vote, great, I won't vote... LOL!

Personally I'm voting no, because other interest groups and lobby groups are also calling for similar voice rights. Where does it end? We all have a voice now, this creates privileged access to minorities. Don't get me wrong, I do support aid and targeted programs to assist those in need, and those should be done with the involvement and buy in of those people. But this Voice is a road too far. My own opinion only.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

The voice isn’t a lobby or interest group.

The Voice would be an advisory body, offering advice in the form of ‘representations’, often in response to a request from the government or Parliament. Its advice would be formal and public. Government and Parliament would acknowledge when they were acting in response to a representation. The Voice would differ from a lobby group in all these ways.

https://www.unimelb.edu.au/voice/faqs/law-questions/isnt-a-voice-to-parliament-just-a-constitutionally-enshrined-lobby-group

Just out of interest what other interest groups/lobby groups are calling for similar voice rights? I’m genuinely interested to know!

[fud]

Today the National Press Club of Australia had Robert French AC, Former Chief Justice of Australia speak on "The Voice – Filling a Long Constitutional Silence".
It's worth watching/listening to clear the myths, misinformation surrounding this debate.
The benefits from a Yes will outweigh any risks he said
https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NS1413V001S00

There's also an article on his speech in the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/06/former-chief-justice-slams-no-campaigns-core-argument-against-voice-as-resentful

[rooter]

Today the National Press Club of Australia had Robert French AC, Former Chief Justice of Australia speak on "The Voice – Filling a Long Constitutional Silence".
It's worth watching/listening to clear the myths, misinformation surrounding this debate.
The benefits from a Yes will outweigh any risks he said
https://iview.abc.net.au/video/NS1413V001S00

There's also an article on his speech in the Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/oct/06/former-chief-justice-slams-no-campaigns-core-argument-against-voice-as-resentful

Brilliant speech from a very intelligent, ethical, and moral Australian, and the ultimate expert and authority on the Australian Constitution (think hard and do some serious fucking research before you challenge this dude - he was the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia)
Basically he destroyed every single argument put forward to vote NO and made the very obvious point that voting YES really is the only rational, reasonable, logical, sensible, and moral thing to do.
He even quoted John Howard former Liberal Prime Minister and darling of the conservative Right who spoke in favour of the Voice way back in the early 2000s when he was Prime Minister.
But we all know that the NO vote will still win, because as another legendary Aussie Ray Martin pointed out there are "dickheads and dinosaurs" out there preaching hate and fear and lies and deliberately misleading people.
Anyway it's all good, on the 15th October Australia will still be an awesome country to live in.
All of us should be thankful that we or our parents or grandparents or great grandparents immigrated to this Great Southern Land. We are truly blessed. it's the best country in the world.
It would be nice if we could find it in our hearts to accept and acknowledge and respect and to put it in writing that there were people here 60,000 years (thats 2,500 generations) before us here and that today most of those people are not enjoying the same quality of life that we are and that maybe a good start to fixing that would be for those people to have an official advisory say in how to fix that.
But it seems like the majority of Australians are so full of fear and denial, and anger and insecurity and hate that they won't vote for that.
It's sad but that's just the way it is.
Anyway enjoy the privileged life you have in this very privileged country.
All good. Enjoy! I certainly will! I had a fucken great day today.

[Ziggurat]

Observing traditional cultures, native ceremonies, dance or whatever is not an empty gesture imo, it’s actually done all over the world. I think if someone lacks their own culture, tradition, language, identity etc… it might be seen as an empty gesture, which is understandable.

It's the hypocrisy of it. It isn't a welcome, it's a political point being made every time. It's a welcome wrapped up in a sly dig at the people involuntarily subject to it. Hypocritical passive aggression designed to make you feel less Australian - if not completely Stateless. Or more "British" as you say. Some "welcome." I don't feel British at all. If I want to go back 50,000 years too nor do I feel particularly Cro-Magnon either. :miao:

[wilisno]

Brilliant speech from a very intelligent, ethical, and moral Australian, and the ultimate expert in the field (think hard and do some serious fucking research before you challenge this dude - he was the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia)
Basically he destroyed every single argument put forward to vote NO and made the very obvious point that voting YES really is the only rational, reasonable, logical, sensible, and moral thing to do.
He even quoted John Howard former Liberal Prime Minister and darling of the conservative Right who spoke in favour of the Voice way back in the early 2000s when he was Prime Minister.
But we all know that the NO vote will still win, because as another legendary Aussie Ray Martin pointed out there are "dickheads and dinosaurs" out there preaching hate and fear and lies and deliberately misleading people.
Anyway it's all good, on the 15th October Australia will still be an awesome country to live in.
All of us should be thankful that we or our parents or grandparents or great grandparents immigrated to this Great Southern Land. We are truly blessed. it's the best country in the world.
It would be nice if we could find it in our hearts to accept and acknowledge and respect and to put it in writing that there were people here 60,000 years (thats 2,500 generations) before us here and that today most of those people are not enjoying the same quality of life that we are and that maybe a good start to fixing that would be for those people to have an official advisory say in how to fix that.
But it seems like the majority of Australians are so full of fear and anger and insecurity and hate that they won't vote for that.
It's sad but that's just the way it is.
Anyway enjoy the privileged life you have in this very privileged country.
All good. Enjoy! I certainly will! I had a fucken great day today.

That’s a brilliant speech.

[rooter]

https://youtu.be/SAqIypjk-5A

Sound familiar?

Briggs is awesome.

[ReginaldBubbles]

It's the hypocrisy of it. It isn't a welcome, it's a political point being made every time. It's a welcome wrapped up in a sly dig at the people involuntarily subject to it. Hypocritical passive aggression designed to make you feel less Australian - if not completely Stateless. Or more "British" as you say. Some "welcome." I don't feel British at all. If I want to go back 50,000 years too nor do I feel particularly Cro-Magnon either. :miao:

Ah yes the thousands of years old tradition of passive aggression! I have to put up with being welcomed at the football, I'm practically stateless!
You're obviously a very sensitive soul!

[Ziggurat]

Being welcoming to visitors is a universal custom, it's not restricted to aborigines. Whatever former polite practice of former times it was theatrically re-invented by Ernie Dingo 30 years ago, and in today's context it operates only as political. Hence it's not a welcome at all.

It is two sides of the same political coin as the acknowledgment of the country, which happens at the opening of any envelope these days.:what:

[dotcumdotinyou]

We may as well go back further and acknowledge that this great land once belonged to the dinosaurs and have their decedents (birds and reptiles) welcome us to country.

[fted]

We may as well go back further and acknowledge that this great land once belonged to the dinosaurs and have their decedents (birds and reptiles) welcome us to country.
There are still dinosaurs around, apparently.

[woodland]

I am voting yes but it doesn't matter. Australia will vote no.

[Jamez11]

It's the hypocrisy of it. It isn't a welcome, it's a political point being made every time.

It was a ceremony done long before any settlers got here, the Welcome Ceremony wasn’t a political statement 1000’s of years ago. Again, countries all over the world have their own culture, ceremonies, dance, language etc.. that is celebrated. As I stated before, most people are fascinated and humbled by the Haka. I loved seeing the Fiuji singing their the “Mosu Masu” at the league World Cup, the hymn separates them from all other nations… Divisive? Maybe, if you have an inferiority complex.


It's a welcome wrapped up in a sly dig at the people involuntarily subject to it.

The only reason why it may be seen as a “sly dig” is because it may remind them of the atrocities of the invasion, but the ceremony itself was practiced before then as a sign of respect and humility. I personally believe it is been done in good faith, but I also understand it in it's full context and complexities.



Hypocritical passive aggression designed to make you feel less Australian - if not completely Stateless. Or more "British" as you say. Some "welcome." I don't feel British at all. If I want to go back 50,000 years too nor do I feel particularly Cro-Magnon either. :miao:

My comment was to someone referring to how his great, great, grandparents were born here so by virtue that makes him more Australian to others, otherwise, he would have just said “I’m born here, so I’m Australian”, so by his own definition he is 0.0003 as Australian as Indigenous Australians i.e "less Australian". I was also pointing out the fact that the person doing the ceremony, has connections to Australian land spanning 65,000 years before his great, great, great parents got here. And the fact he felt the ceremony was racist or he was being excluded seemed very strange to me.

Ps, you may not feel particularly Cro-Magnon but I’m sure there are many in your personal life who would disagree. :grimace:

[Ziggurat]

...I also understand it [the welcome to the country] in it's full context and complexities.

You make my own point. If only the rest of the Voice debate could go so smoothly. The ceremony is solely political. It is either a welcome or it is political but it can't be both. Enact it at Speaker's Corner in the Domain every Sunday then and piss it off from the football or wherever where we don't want politics shoved down our throats. Whatever commonplace polite niceties were performed for thousands of years - which were only like visa entries that all countries have - they bear no relation or relevance to the 30 year old dressed up version invented by Ernie Dingo. It has become a sly dig instead.

Apart from that Jamez 11 - and I'm not pissing in your pocket - I do like your reasoned discussion. :D
Ps. I haven't started on smoking ceremonies yet. :shout:

[GoldfishMan]

I consider the political benefits/damage some parties might be able to reap from the Yes or No vote going through to be collateral. It's a necessary evil and merely a side effect of the real purpose of the Voice (or no Voice if you don't want it). Don't let that side-show distract you from doing what you think is the right thing.

If you vote No to spite Albo et al, you're a fool. If you vote Yes to spite Dutton et al, you're a fool.

[rooter]

The NO vote will win and that's really sad.
Us Aussies are better than that.
We are not perfect, but we are good people.
A really sad day for Australia if NO wins.

[frisson]

The following information will soon be recorded history, not an opinion

The effective 'Vote No if you don't know/understand' community message will defeat this referendum. Sorry

Everyone knows, you don't sign a contract without first reading the fine print

The PM really needed to get this right by giving the public clearer information. The Australian Electoral Commission AEC reports running this referendum will cost taxpayers $450 million

Here is a Voice from the disadvantaged and homeless throughout Australia:
What a f- waste of money

How many black and white and other homeless could have an emergency bed and a meal for how many years with that money? $450 million. Shame

The PM should have legislated the Voice first, or provided a clear model and structure of the Voice

Australians are very capable voters, and would definitely vote YES if they saw how this Voice committee actually works
Many past committees drained taxpayers funds into bureaucrats pockets, so no actual progress

The PM, has proven himself a poor master of details in general

He famously didn't know the actual interest rate before a major election, (he avoided high profile technical roles such as opposition treasurer during his career), and admits he didn't read the full Uluru paperwork

[Vader]

I hope the No vote wins as the majority of Australians are not racist and want everyone to be treated equally. The way way Aldo has sold the Yes vote has divided the country.

[fud]

This is a good read
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-10-07/bitter-politics-voice-debate-another-ugly-chapter-history/102941070

Whatever your views on the idea of the Voice, it is not just the ugly racism exposed by the debate about it — which has seen Indigenous people on both sides of the debate subjected to abuse and death threats — it is the spectacular failure, hypocrisy and opportunism that has been on display on occasions among our politicians that has already marked it as another ugly chapter in our history.

The willingness of some sections of the media to perpetuate misinformation, and of other sections of the media to get lost in attempts at false balance, has made nigh on impossible a reasonably rational debate about what a permanent advisory body to the parliament and executive, whose actual remit would be defined and controlled by the parliament, might mean both symbolically and practically to Indigenous Australians.

[GoldfishMan]

Is it $55 bucks for not voting?

[dotcumdotinyou]

Yes it is GFM, I haven't voted in years but I'm voting in this one

[Ziggurat]

The NO vote will win and that's really sad.
Us Aussies are better than that.
We are not perfect, but we are good people.
A really sad day for Australia if NO wins.

Don't be sad, because two out of three ain't bad..

It's just sense. People are objecting to the utter permanence of it in the constitiution. It's a total overreach. Trial it out first and if it lives up to all the claims yes makes for it everyone in this discussion will be celebrating. If it turns out to be yet another dud expensive body like all the other bodies we aren't stuck with it for eternity. It's mere commonsense. :grimace2: