This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

The Voice

Jump to new
Yes she is a long way from it and as Mick and you both say there would be a lot of hurdles, mostly in her own party, the only way it would come about would be by public groundswell of support that couldn't be ignored, somewhat like what happened with Hawke when he rolled Hayden. The groundswell from the workforce was huge and it wasn't as though Hayden was disliked.

Whether Price would get that support is yet to be seen if ever at all, but if the media got behind her and if she was presenting a policy that had the support of the population, that would put the indigenous issue to bed, reduce the crime, reduce the substance abuse etc.
That is a huge amount of ifs and time will tell.
I'm ever the optimist, a big failing of mine, as it leads very often to disappointment.
 
Couldn't think of more polar opposites Hawke had extensive experience in the ACTU again he was highly regarded in building consensus when he could.

He was at the forefront of many of the big industrial disputes at the time and spoke with everyone.

With the Voice Hawke would have engaged all parties and maneuvered them into an agreement (building consensus) more than likely have achieved a stronger outcome for Aboriginal's, Price on the other hand ran a ideological divisive political campaign complete with falsehoods that achieved nothing and then walks away from all the issues.
 
In this day and age I feel that optimism is getting pushed into the background somwhat.
 
IFocus said:
With the Voice Hawke would have engaged all parties and maneuvered them into an agreement (building consensus) more than likely have achieved a stronger outcome for Aboriginal's,
Click to expand...
Hawke would have definitely been better prepared and presented a better case than was presented, that's for sure, but it would have been hard to have presented it worse than the voice was.
No one knew what it was, it was to be defined after the event, so it was impossible to sell it, as I said in the early days, pizz poor planning and pizz poor presentation, ended up with a pizz poor result, it was the fault of the presenters not the voters.


IFocus said:
Price on the other hand ran a ideological divisive political campaign complete with falsehoods that achieved nothing and then walks away from all the issues.
Click to expand...
The only ones who have walked away, have been those who presented it, there was no plan B and plan A was Shyte, then blame everyone else for the failure.
Classic, how could something, that was so important to Albo, as the indigenous plight, all of a sudden can be dumped like a stale bottle of Pizz,
That shows great conviction and commitment, doesn't it.
Sounds like someone who had a plane to catch and you say Price walked away from the issue, that is laughable, you really need a mirror and say this crap with a straight face.
I bet you can't, it is just too ridiculous, it was a massive stuff up from start to finish.
Let's be honest half way through the build up, he admitted he hadn't even read it, he had only read the executive summary, which he then said is someone else's interpretation and you blame Price, you're delusional IMO.
 
Last edited:
It was doomed to failure because Albo didn't know his armpit from his elbow
 
farmerge said:
It was doomed to failure because Albo didn't know his armpit from his elbow
Click to expand...
Well if I had used it as an election platform I would have known the document front to back, I would have workshopped it to find answers to obvious questions and I would have been well prepared, after all it was about changing the constitution not just a chook raffle down at the pub.
It would be somewhat like myself quoting a multi million dollar project, from a project overview, then wondering why the company went broke because the quote was nonsense and me turning around and blaming everyone else for the cost overruns.
 
sptrawler said:
The only ones who have walked away, have been those who presented it,
Click to expand...

You still don't get it once rejected you don't have a mandate its done, gone, its up to the no voters you (Price) to tell us plan "B"
 
SirRumpole said:
Not really. It's up to the people who actually want the Voice to do something else.
Click to expand...

The Voice was a compromise choice by Aboriginals, elite's like Mundine and Price, Dutton told all and sundry it was wrong they knew better and said No, fine they know better they are the ones to do something else.

No voters should never complain ever again about Aboriginal issues, I can tell you now they ain't getting better.
 
IFocus said:
You still don't get it once rejected you don't have a mandate its done, gone, its up to the no voters you (Price) to tell us plan "B"
Click to expand...
As two examples:

Pretty much all "progressive" causes were overwhelmingly at odds with mainstream opinion when first proposed but in due course, if the underlying issue has merit, acceptance grows.

Obvious examples being the issue originally known as gay rights and separately environmental conservation. Both of those went from being extremely at odds with mainstream society to a situation of general acceptance in the space of one generation.

Second is the GST. First suggested in Australia circa 1970, then again in 1985 and more seriously in 1993. It was finally implemented in the year 2000.

The same could be said of various physical things eg bridges, railways, dams, roads etc. If the underlying idea has merit then it tends to never die. It might be knocked back the first time, it might be knocked back a few times but eventually it gets done.

The Sydney Harbour Bridge was first proposed as far back as 1815 with the first serious work underway 111 years later albeit on a bigger and better bridge than that first proposed.

The Snowy Hydro scheme was first proposed in the late 1800's, actual construction commencing in 1949 although the scheme as built is substantially different from that originally proposed.

Plenty more like that including things that haven't been built but every now and then someone has another go and/or government has agreed to keep collecting data (eg weather, water flows, whatever is relevant) so as to inform any future decision.

If a broad concept has merit then some version of it, one that overcomes identified problems, ends up being implemented. It's the genuine duds that tend to die out permanently.
 
IFocus said:
No voters should never complain ever again about Aboriginal issues, I can tell you now they ain't getting better.
Click to expand...

Everyone wants to raise disadvantaged Aboriginals living standards and prospects in life. It's just that 60% of the population disagreed, or had doubts, that putting another layer of bureaucracy in Canberra, that no one knew how it would actually function, was probably not going to do the trick.

IFocus said:
You still don't get it once rejected you don't have a mandate its done, gone, its up to the no voters you (Price) to tell us plan "B"
Click to expand...

Have the Yes side given up? The No case didn't instigate this process, it's up to the Uluru Statement people, and Albo, to come up with a better plan to implement the Statement IN FULL. The No side quite clearly suggested that they would support recognition in the constitution as a start, but that was rejected.

And, the people have not voted to implement the Uluru Statement IN FULL. Only Albo has signed up to that.

A solution to Aboriginal disadvantage needs to be a total effort across Federal, State/Territory Governments and Aboriginal society in general, not just one side of politics.
 
IFocus said:
You still don't get it once rejected you don't have a mandate its done, gone, its up to the no voters you (Price) to tell us plan "B"
Click to expand...

You noticed how everything is always someone elses fault with you lot.
Albo made it front and centre, Albo did a useless job of presenting a half ar$ed policy and Albo said there is no plann B and cut the aboriginals adrift and now it is all because of other people.
I don't think the majority of Australians will see it that way, including the aboriginals he has dropped like a hot potato.
Hopefully I'm wrong, for Albo's sake.
But lets be honest it is the only initiative that Labor have introduced since attaining office and they stuffed it.
It isn't as though they have been overworked, they've fit plenty of travel in. Lol
 
Last edited:
Bang on the money Sean K
 
In my humble opinion I do not think the answer to Aboriginal disadvantage is political or bureaucratic. We've tried that thousand ways till Sunday and nothing has worked.

The only solution that could possibly have any chance that success is cultural. I do think that we had come a way in that regard but have now gone backwards because of race baiting and powermongering. The stupid referendum has caused nothing but further division.

It will take all of the communities that make up this country, including the indigenous, to effect a substantive change in attitude. Bloated bureaucracies, intersectionality and victim culture is just not going to work in that regard.

Unfortunately the current attitudes and agendas are so firmly entrenched that I think it would take generations to make that sort of change.

For instance people like @IFocus running around calling everybody racists isn't going to help, is it.... Except to highlight how ridiculously divisive the leftist attitude to these things are.

Somehow, everybody has to foster some goodwill towards each other otherwise this is just going to carry on ad infinitum with no result.
 

This wasn't your argument before the referendum, as for the added layers the Voice had the potential to remove significant layers bypassing the entrenched Aboriginal industry from which Mundine has raked in a fortune.

With the Coalition just repeating what has been said for the last 100 years (including yourself) there is no hope for the future but I do think Smurfs points have merit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Where will all the money come from to fund the stimulus?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
5K
tech/a
J Capital Research
Replies
1
Views
2K
greggles
N
The Australian Human Rights Commission: A national disgrace
3 4 5
Replies
85
Views
15K
Tisme
R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
R
The Financial Endgame
Replies
18
Views
9K
qldfrog
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...