The Voice

[SirRumpole]

Mundine says "the Voice is a step too far". Then much later (@3:30) he reiterated his point, but simply does not realise the Voice is nothing like he thinks.
He does not even know there is no overarching bureaucracy (@ 0:35) and that local voices will otherwise need to rely on the failed representation of the past. Furthermore, there is no "layer" over the top (@1:50 and afterwards) as he claims, and that's apart from exaggerated ideas about its cost.
His claims at 3:50 are outright lies.
His Twiggy Forrest example of a "voice" is based on existing legislation and actually has nothing to with what a Voice will set out to achieve.
Simply put, the interview showed Mundine to be ill informed and prone to dishonesty.

Clueless ?

Just shows you condemn anyone who doesn't agree with your precious position.

This man has been around the traps in both Liberal and Labor parties trying to do something for his people.



Are you Aboriginal yourself ?

 

[wayneL]

Clueless ?

Just shows you condemn anyone who doesn't agree with your precious position.

This man has been around the traps in both Liberal and Labor parties trying to do something for his people.

That you think you know more than him about the issues just shows your arrogance.

Are you Aboriginal yourself ?

Mundine probably hates blackfellas as much as Jacinta (and Anthony Dillon)

</tongueincheek>

 

[rederob]

Why don't you tell us ?

Because it confirms you have not understood anything written about the Voice, or are too lazy to inform yourself.
Your claims about ATSIC being corrupt are not supported, aside from you again presenting no evidence.

Just shows you condemn anyone who doesn't agree with your precious position.

Show where his claims are right.
For example, show where there is an overarching bureaucracy.
Or show how Mundine's idea about representation will work given it's the failed status quo.

That you think you know more than him about the issues just shows your arrogance.

I know more about the Voice than Mundine, and I gave examples.

I have a transfusion ready for you.

 

[SirRumpole]

For example, show where there is an overarching bureaucracy.

He is saying that is what the Voice will be.

 

[DaveTrade]

I know more about the Voice than Mundine

You must get very frustrated knowing more than everyone else when other people don't agree with your view exactly, so frustrating that it makes it OK to get angry at all the idiots out there that don't know what they are talking about. Mudslinging should whip them into shape.

 

[DaveTrade]

@rederob you more anyone should understand me lashing out in my last post. I got frustrated and a bit angry.

 

[wayneL]

I can't see said members post as thankfully, I have him blocked. But surely he is working for the NO case?

There can be no other explanation for such obnoxiousness?

 

[rederob]

He is saying that is what the Voice will be.

Except it is untrue!

@rederob you more anyone should understand me lashing out in my last post. I got frustrated and a bit angry.

All I do is point out what the Voice is supposed to be, based on what is published, and what can be verified.
Having worked in ATSIC, for example, I never came across anything close to corrupt conduct amongst employees. If people claim opposite, then they should be able to back-up their comments.

If you or anyone else can show where my comments are not supported by the Voice I welcome that.

 

[SirRumpole]

Except it is untrue!

All I do is point out what the Voice is supposed to be, based on what is published, and what can be verified.
Having worked in ATSIC, for example, I never came across anything close to corrupt conduct amongst employees. If people claim opposite, then they should be able to back-up their comments.

If you or anyone else can show where my comments are not supported by the Voice I welcome that.

Did you ever come across Geoff Clarke ?

Ok one rotten egg doesn't mean the rest were crooks but there was certainly corruption at the top.

 

[DaveTrade]

@rederob I had a bit of a go at you but you handled it well, after reading back what I wrote I thought you might lose it. I can see you are a passionate man and I like that in people and as I have indicated before I think you have made some good points in earlier posts. I'm still not 100% sure where I stand on my vote but in all this sometimes confusing debate on the topic I do feel more informed, so thanks for your part in that.

 

[JohnDe]

You must get very frustrated knowing more than everyone else when other people don't agree with your view exactly, so frustrating that it makes it OK to get angry at all the idiots out there that don't know what they are talking about. Mudslinging should whip them into shape.

I’m so very over his continual fallback of calling everyone a liar. Jeese, there are people willing to stand up and put their name to an opinion, while redrob hides behind a username and calls every second person a liar. ?

 

[rederob]

I’m so very over his continual fallback of calling everyone a liar.

The invitation is open to challenge my comments.
I have put that to you many times and you run and hide.

Your modus operandi is posting screeds of copypaste without explanation. Sheridan's hit piece was a classic... enough BS to power the economy. I instead review what is posted to see how it compares with the real world.

Having listened to Mundine numerous times it is clear he just makes up what he does not know. On the other hand Senator Price has an excellent understanding of local issues and why grass roots involvement is necessary. However she has never articulated how these voices get the level of representation they deserve, cannot point out how issues would be verified or costed, and has overlooked how they may be prioritised and best delivered.

Up to page 37 in this thread and I have yet to read a case for voting no that stack up. The best outcome for no voters is that we get what we already have. Is that "progress"?

 

[Sean K]

I can't see said members post as thankfully, I have him blocked. But surely he is working for the NO case?

There can be no other explanation for such obnoxiousness?

Don't even have to unblock to see that.

 

[JohnDe]

I can't see said members post as thankfully, I have him blocked. But surely he is working for the NO case?

There can be no other explanation for such obnoxiousness?

He is actually swaying me to choose the opposite of what he is for, now, rather than trying to see both sides and make up my own mind when the day comes.

 

[IFocus]

Rob has already extensively covered most of this but worth a read.

As for the likes of Mundine and the continued stream of falsehoods promulgated by the Australian they all keep saying what will happen stuff that's well outside of the stated intentions.

They should keep to picking lotto numbers because the arguments are floored until legislation is passed.



Why can’t we just establish the Voice to Parliament through legislation? A constitutional law expert explains

Why can’t we just establish the Voice to Parliament through legislation? A constitutional law expert explains

Legislation is an unsatisfactory way to institute a Voice to Parliament because, among other reasons, it would make the body insecure and vulnerable to the whims of different governments.

theconversation.com

 

[DaveTrade]

Why can’t we just establish the Voice to Parliament through legislation? A constitutional law expert explains

Legislation is an unsatisfactory way to institute a Voice to Parliament because, among other reasons, it would make the body insecure and vulnerable to the whims of different governments.

theconversation.com

Wow that read was an eye-opener, it really swayed me to the 'no' side for the vote. It highlights my concern about giving a minority group of Australian citizens more power than the rest of us, it doesn't seem right. Don't get me wrong I believe that our society should give help where it is needed and special help to special needs. Basically I think that every Australian citizen should have the same rights, there should be no distinction made depending if you were born here or overseas, no distinction between the number of generations that your family has been here. We are Australians, you have the same rights as me and I have the same rights as you.

 

[rederob]

Wow that read was an eye-opener, it really swayed me to the 'no' side for the vote. It highlights my concern about giving a minority group of Australian citizens more power than the rest of us, it doesn't seem right.

Can you explain what these extra powers are, given none are proposed.

We are Australians, you have the same rights as me and I have the same rights as you.

The Voice is not about "rights". Nobody's rights are affected should the Voice get up.
The Voice is about a counter to institutionalised disadvantage through better policies.

 

[DaveTrade]

Can you explain what these extra powers are, given none are proposed.

The Voice is not about "rights". Nobody's rights are affected should the Voice get up.
The Voice is about a counter to institutionalised disadvantage through better policies.

All can say Rob is read the article yourself, that's what I got from it. My post wasn't about expressing an opinion to sway others it was just expressing what I got from reading the article that was posted. I will try to highlight what I mean by the same or different rights by asking if an Australian citizen from an Asian, European, Eastern, Chinese, North or South American or English background or any other background will have a say backed by Constitutional Law.

 

[Sean K]

Wow that read was an eye-opener, it really swayed me to the 'no' side for the vote. It highlights my concern about giving a minority group of Australian citizens more power than the rest of us, it doesn't seem right. Don't get me wrong I believe that our society should give help where it is needed and special help to special needs. Basically I think that every Australian citizen should have the same rights, there should be no distinction made depending if you were born here or overseas, no distinction between the number of generations that your family has been here. We are Australians, you have the same rights as me and I have the same rights as you.

Agree, it just confirmed it to me. I was going to go through it piece by piece to highlight that it's actually supporting the no argument, but there's no point. You can't argue against 'the vibe'.

 

[IFocus]

Sigh... you cannot make this stuff up, but then again.