The Voice

[macca]

I'd suggest that they were just locked up and not given any alternative options while they were there.

It's not the police's job to educate them, tafes and other educational systems need to go in there.

Yes, I would believe that. Parents letting their kids run around while the parents are in the pub. If kids under 15 are running around after dark the parents should be fined.

Instead of just locking up the kid we could give weekend detention to the kid and one parent, they could get to talk to each other and whinge about missing out on their fun.

That might cause a rethink on not taking it to extremes next time

 

[farmerge]

Some diverse views in this article about youth crime.

I reckon public protection comes first. Get them off the streets and teach them skills while they are doing the time, then see how that goes.

And make parents more responsible.

Marion Scrymgour accuses NT government of 'pussyfooting' around issue of youth crime

Labor MP Marion Scrymgour has hit out at her own party by criticising the NT government over its handling of youth crime.

www.abc.net.au

Sir R but if the parents did care what their precious darlings were up to then there wouldn't be this dilemma. I personally think that they don't give a rats what these scum are up to.

 

[farmerge]

Instead of just locking up the kid we could give weekend detention to the kid and one parent, they could get to talk to each other and whinge about missing out on their fun.

That might cause a rethink on not taking it to extremes next time

Certainly a good option but then that would be infringing on the elders rights and if a 1st people is involved then forget it.

 

[Smurf1976]

The problem with the justice system is communities want revenge urged on by politicians looking for votes compounding the problem further.

Personally if I were the victim then I wouldn't want revenge, just the consequences rectified in full at no cost to me.

It's a case where I think socialising the cost actually does have a lot going for it, since if government starts bleeding cash then that'll put pressure on the politicians to find better solutions.

What I wouldn't be happy with is incurring the cost personally, including by means of claiming on insurance given too many claims leads to premium rises and worst case ending up uninsurable.

Compensate for the damage, including consequential costs, and that shifts the focus from revenge to one where government sees it has no option other than to find real solutions.

 

[farmerge]

Personally if I were the victim then I wouldn't want revenge, just the consequences rectified in full at no cost to me.

It's a case where I think socialising the cost actually does have a lot going for it, since if government starts bleeding cash then that'll put pressure on the politicians to find better solutions.

What I wouldn't be happy with is incurring the cost personally, including by means of claiming on insurance given too many claims leads to premium rises and worst case ending up uninsurable.

Compensate for the damage, including consequential costs, and that shifts the focus from revenge to one where government sees it has no option other than to find real solutions.

I don't advocate revenge but more along the lines of "these citizens of the world" must be made to pay, pain and payment.
Perhaps a stint in the armed forces with an old school Sgt blowing in their ears would be a good start.

 

[Sean K]

Can someone please tell South Australia that we had a referendum on this last year and we said no...

 

[JohnDe]

This will probably be followed by the other Labour states and territories. Create another form f government, that only one race can be involved in and vote for.

I wonder whether other nationalities can start forming a similar representation.

SA candidates speak up for First Nations Voice​

More than 100 candidates have nominated for positions on Local First Nations Voices across South Australia, with elections to be held in March as part of the First Nations Voice to state parliament.

The Electoral Commission of South Australia on Monday held the Declaration of Nominations for the ballot, with 113 candidates putting their hands up for positions on six Local Voices.

ECSA said that 55 per cent of candidates were women and enough nominations were received for elections to be held for all six regions on Saturday, March 16, with early voting from Wednesday, March 6.

Each candidate will be an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander living in SA and be elected by First Nations people only from each region.

Five of the six Local Voice regions will have seven elected members, while the Central region, centred on Adelaide, will have 11 members due to the greater population, for a total of 46 positions.

The six Local First Nations Voice regions across South Australia.

The state government’s State First Nations Voice website says Local Voices will hear about issues that matter to local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, engage with local councils, government and other agencies and pass its views on to the State First Nations Voice.

Local Voices will also set up advisory committees comprising non-elected members, to hear the views of specific groups on issues such as Native Title and Stolen Generations.

Two presiding members from each Local First Nations Voice will represent their region on the State First Nations Voice, which will “form state-wide views and positions that represent the diversity of First Nations people in South Australia” and “present views and priorities to the South Australian Parliament, Ministers and government Chief Executives”.

The state government’s website says the elected body will meet with state Cabinet at least twice a year, but highlights that it “will not have any powers to veto legislation or stop Parliament undertaking its duties and functions”.

The government says the SA-based Voice, set up with legislation which passed parliament in March 2023, relates only to this state and is different to the federal model which failed at the October referendum.

The Malinauskas Government originally planned to hold the State Voice ballot on September 9 last year, but it was postponed for six months among speculation that confusion and politicking around the federal referendum was muddying the waters.

South Australia was considered a crucial swing state needed to get the federal Yes vote over the line but it recorded a 61.4 per cent No vote at the referendum, compared with 28.6 per cent for Yes.

Attorney-General and Aboriginal Affairs Minister Kyam Maher said after nominations were declared that the First Nations Voice to State Parliament was “a new way of doing things that we hope will lead to better outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in South Australia”.

“It’s clear that enforcing decisions from the top down, without meaningful input and discussion with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, hasn’t worked and does not help to address the disproportionate level of disadvantage experienced,” he said.

“Listening to what these communities have to say, and factoring that voice into our decision making, can lead to better outcomes not just for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, but for the broader South Australian community as a whole.”

Commissioner for First Nations Voice Dale Agius said that throughout the process he had “been impressed by the wide variety of people who are clearly passionate about improving the lives of Aboriginal South Australians”.

“I’d like to commend all of those who have chosen to nominate and wish them all the best as they campaign to be a part of this incredible, once-in-a-generation opportunity,” he said.

Opposition Aboriginal Affairs spokesman Josh Teague said the Liberal Party had opposed both the federal and state Voices last year and that the SA Voice “will cost taxpayers $1.5 million a year”.

Teague said that 113 nominations for 46 positions was “a disappointing result which could reflect Peter Malinauskas’ disinterest in the topic now” in the wake of the failed federal referendum.

“Many could be questioning whether Peter Malinauskas even has faith in his own legislation now and it could be that the number of nominations reflect this,” he said.

 

[sptrawler]

This will probably be followed by the other Labour states and territories. Create another form f government, that only one race can be involved in and vote for.

I wonder whether other nationalities can start forming a similar representation.

I would be surprised if it isn't unconstitutional and as you say wouldn't it be discriminatory, if other sectors can't have the same access to political process?

 

[mullokintyre]

I would be surprised if it isn't unconstitutional and as you say wouldn't it be discriminatory, if other sectors can't have the same access to political process?

It would only be unconstitutional if argued within the jurisdiction of the State constitution.
The Federal court and high court have always shown a reluctance to get involved in State matters.
Mick

 

[IFocus]

I would be surprised if it isn't unconstitutional and as you say wouldn't it be discriminatory, if other sectors can't have the same access to political process?

Cant see how there is no transfer of power it will be a representative body advising government on policy etc they won't quite have the same power as the zillion corporate professional lobbyists sitting around in ministers offices but who knows maybe someone will listen (doubt it).

 

[sptrawler]

Cant see how there is no transfer of power it will be a representative body advising government on policy etc they won't quite have the same power as the zillion corporate professional lobbyists sitting around in ministers offices but who knows maybe someone will listen (doubt it).

I think it will have to be Federal legislation, possibly State reps.

 

[farmerge]

Cant see how there is no transfer of power it will be a representative body advising government on policy etc they won't quite have the same power as the zillion corporate professional lobbyists sitting around in ministers offices but who knows maybe someone will listen (doubt it).

I still reckon it will be a case of "show me the money"!!!

 

[IFocus]

I still reckon it will be a case of "show me the money"!!!

TBH most of the elite Aboriginals backing the no vote have made massive amounts of $ from the industry there is little or no transparency a Voice that had to be transparent would have highlighted that.

Still good luck to SA who knows where it will go.

 

[sptrawler]

TBH most of the elite Aboriginals backing the no vote have made massive amounts of $ from the industry there is little or no transparency a Voice that had to be transparent would have highlighted that.

Or maybe the elite Aboriginals that were backing the Yes vote would have been making more, who knows, there are plenty of elite Aboriginals on both sides.
Not so many in the regions, as usual, nothing much changes, just the narrative.

 

[farmerge]

Or maybe the elite Aboriginals that were backing the Yes vote would have been making more, who knows, there are plenty of elite Aboriginals on both sides.
Not so many in the regions, as usual, nothing much changes, just the narrative.

One thing is a certainty, both sides, those that have the "smarts" knew how to increase their private wealth, while those in the country areas still live as they have over the decades.

 

[IFocus]

Or maybe the elite Aboriginals that were backing the Yes vote would have been making more, who knows, there are plenty of elite Aboriginals on both sides.
Not so many in the regions, as usual, nothing much changes, just the narrative.

The no voters (Mundine / Price) were ardently dead against transparency, Pearson who had up $700 mil pass through his hands for various projects wasn't bothered wonder who was worried about the skeletons.

BTW nothing to do with narrative IMHO at the moment there isn't one other than Price squealing from the sidelines.

 

[JohnDe]

The no voters (Mundine / Price) were ardently dead against transparency, Pearson who had up $700 mil pass through his hands for various projects wasn't bothered wonder who was worried about the skeletons.

BTW nothing to do with narrative IMHO at the moment there isn't one other than Price squealing from the sidelines.

Just because you said yes does not make you free of biasness. Instead of looking at the issue as them versus us, or yes vs no, how about looking at it as Australian's helping each other.

Greed is not just a white person's disease. And modern Australian Aborigines are just as diverse as the rest of the Australian population.

We should be one country under one federal government. The referendum showed that the majority of Australian's do not want to have another tier of government, especially one that they have no say in. The current federal and state governments have not accepted the peoples voice and are now trying to sneak in the change that was voted against.

The only disadvantage that Aboriginal people are going through at the moment is from poor planning and spending, from both sides. The Australian taxpayer already gives handsomely to health, education and infrastructure for aboriginals in the bush. On top of that there is mining royalties, land ownership, and large reserves of cash.

One country, one voice.

Barngarla Aboriginal people building $1bn empire in land deals

Australia’s first billionaire Aboriginal corporation is about to be created by reaping revenue from huge renewable energy, green iron and water supply projects – linchpins of the state’s economic agenda.
The Barngarla people, whose court action torpedoed a Kimba nuclear waste dump, control traditional Eyre Peninsula lands with several solar and wind energy projects planned for an area equivalent to one-third of Kangaroo Island.

They are striking deals for annual revenue streams worth $50m to $80m per year by taking stakes in these projects and are in talks with the state government over the $5bn Northern Water desalination plant and 600km pipe network.

Stakes in these developments, plus revenue streams from multibillion-dollar hydrogen and green iron projects around Whyalla, are expected to make the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation the first in Australia to be worth at least $1bn, particularly without any current government funding.

Barngarla people at Premier's Energy Awards. Picture: Brenton Edwards

Barngarla people – Sonja (Jonas) Dare (right) and Barngarla’s oldest Elder Maureen Atkinson (left). Picture: supplied

Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation Sonja (Jonas) Dare said the board worked hard to recognise the economic prospects for enterprises wanting to use their 44,480 sqkm land, spanning eastern and northwestern Eyre Peninsula.

“Our community decided that if companies were going to profit from using our Country, then we would demand a stake in the project through proactive and meaningful negotiation. No successful company gives away their profits, so why should we be expected to,” she said, in a column for The Advertiser.

“ … We now have shareholdings in major ports on our country. We are the landlords of the largest solar farm being developed on our country. We have Indigenous Land Use Agreements (ILUAs) with mining and utilities companies that have resulted in a strong monetary and asset base for all Barngarla people, whilst also contributing to a sustainable future for all South Australians.

“We are now starting to invest funds generated through these agreements in education, healthcare and housing. We hope to develop, in the near future, employment programs to connect Barngarla people with job and career opportunities in the region.”

The corporation has 400 adult members and the Barngarla people, including children, number more than 1000.

Pot of gold at end of the rainbow on Barngarla Country. Picture: supplied

Positioning the region as a linchpin of the state’s economic agenda, Premier Peter Malinauskas leaves on Sunday for a three-day major economic summit showcasing his bid to reindustrialise the Upper Spencer Gulf through becoming a world leader in green iron, copper and renewable hydrogen energy.

A business case released on Thursday for the Northern Water supply project, crucial for BHP’s bid to produce $6bn worth of copper annually, says native title agreements are among “key components” to inform a final investment decision.

The Barngarla land includes the proposed Cape Hardy desalination plant, near Tumby Bay, and much of the 600km pipeline to the state’s north.

Map showing the extent of Barngarla land. Picture: National Native Title Tribunal

The Barngarla’s legal representative Nick Llewellyn-Jones, the head of Adelaide law firm Norman Waterhouse’s native title, renewable energy and resources practice, said they had conducted half of all Indigenous Land Use Agreements in South Australia in the past five years.

Mr Llewellyn-Jones said the Barngarla people were now involved in about half of all the nation’s commercial negotiations for ILUAs, which are a voluntary agreement involving native title parties about the use and management of areas of land and waters.

“This is obviously a significant but worthwhile challenge. The economic impact of this is massive and represents generational wealth, making the challenge overwhelmingly worthwhile,” he said.

 

[sptrawler]

The no voters (Mundine / Price) were ardently dead against transparency, Pearson who had up $700 mil pass through his hands for various projects wasn't bothered wonder who was worried about the skeletons.

BTW nothing to do with narrative IMHO at the moment there isn't one other than Price squealing from the sidelines.

Just because they don't think the same way as you do, doesn't mean you have to constantly bad mouth them, a constructive way forward will never be found if everyone adopted that attitude.
I'm quite sure we can post up endless miss spent or lost funds associated with aboriginal ventures, but then it all becomes a finger pointing game of bad mouthing, which is exactly what we are trying to move away from.
All that has been shown so far is 40% of the population agreed with the constitutional path, 60% disagreed with it, another way forward needs to be found.
Having the 40% bad mouth the majority, does more damage than good IMO.
But it does appear to be the goto method of the left, on most issues ATM.
The My way, or the Highway, seems to be alive and well in the cult.

 

[farmerge]

Just because you said yes does not make you free of biasness. Instead of looking at the issue as them versus us, or yes vs no, how about looking at it as Australian's helping each other.

Greed is not just a white person's disease. And modern Australian Aborigines are just as diverse as the rest of the Australian population.

We should be one country under one federal government. The referendum showed that the majority of Australian's do not want to have another tier of government, especially one that they have no say in. The current federal and state governments have not accepted the peoples voice and are now trying to sneak in the change that was voted against.

The only disadvantage that Aboriginal people are going through at the moment is from poor planning and spending, from both sides. The Australian taxpayer already gives handsomely to health, education and infrastructure for aboriginals in the bush. On top of that there is mining royalties, land ownership, and large reserves of cash.

One country, one voice.

Hear, hear

 

[IFocus]

Just because you said yes does not make you free of biasness. Instead of looking at the issue as them versus us, or yes vs no, how about looking at it as Australian's helping each other.

Greed is not just a white person's disease. And modern Australian Aborigines are just as diverse as the rest of the Australian population.

We should be one country under one federal government. The referendum showed that the majority of Australian's do not want to have another tier of government, especially one that they have no say in. The current federal and state governments have not accepted the peoples voice and are now trying to sneak in the change that was voted against.

The only disadvantage that Aboriginal people are going through at the moment is from poor planning and spending, from both sides. The Australian taxpayer already gives handsomely to health, education and infrastructure for aboriginals in the bush. On top of that there is mining royalties, land ownership, and large reserves of cash.

One country, one voice.

What totally kills you argument is 3rd world conditions and the absolute dysfunction that exists within Aboriginal communities.

Reality is a real bitch.