The Voice

[Smurf1976]

This thread has many posters who have read nothing or understood little about what is readily available on the Voice.

I'll readily acknowledge my understanding of it is limited.

But.....

That goes for most people on any given subject. Pick anything from submarines to spectrum allocation and the bottom line is the overwhelming majority of the population has at most a passing interest and is relying on government via the media to communicate the important points.

The Voice is a somewhat extreme case of that given the whole thing is somewhat abstract to most and involves the major step of changing the constitution. It's not like, for example, a proposal to build a new bridge that pretty much everyone can easily understand as to what, why, where and so on.

From there it comes down to something quite simple:

Why is a Voice to parliament the best way to fix ATSI issues but not the best way to fix anything else?

Government's failing to sell a coherent argument as to why that is so to a population that won't necessarily have a firm view as such but which certainly will spot the inconsistency.

Personally I just want to see the whole issue sorted. Get the "gap" closed for those who wish to do so (since not all will) and move forward. The whole situation has gone on far too long, it needs to be sorted and brought to a close. Get the issues resolved, don't make a permanent industry of it.

 

[sptrawler]

I'll readily acknowledge my understanding of it is limited.

But.....

That goes for most people on any given subject. Pick anything from submarines to spectrum allocation and the bottom line is the overwhelming majority of the population has at most a passing interest and is relying on government via the media to communicate the important points.

The Voice is a somewhat extreme case of that given the whole thing is somewhat abstract to most and involves the major step of changing the constitution. It's not like, for example, a proposal to build a new bridge that pretty much everyone can easily understand as to what, why, where and so on.

From there it comes down to something quite simple:

Why is a Voice to parliament the best way to fix ATSI issues but not the best way to fix anything else?

Government's failing to sell a coherent argument as to why that is so to a population that won't necessarily have a firm view as such but which certainly will spot the inconsistency.

Personally I just want to see the whole issue sorted. Get the "gap" closed for those who wish to do so (since not all will) and move forward. The whole situation has gone on far too long, it needs to be sorted and brought to a close. Get the issues resolved, don't make a permanent industry of it.

That's our technical 'fix it mentality', it doesn't seem to fit in the lets make it a lifetime career mentality, that permeates in Canberra.

 

[Sean K]

Mrs Rove thinks she's an Aboriginal.

Just a taste of things to come with the Voice. Who actually is Aboriginal?

Lidia is about 6%. Stan is about 30%. Bruce is 0%.

Why do they get an extra vote?

Actor Tasma Walton has become embroiled in a legal stoush involving a large Aboriginal land claim over parts of Melbourne and Gippsland.
Ms Walton, who is the wife of TV personality Rove McManus, believes she has Indigenous ancestry after taking a DNA test.

She is among several people linked to the Frankston-based Bunurong Land Council who will give evidence in the Federal Court next week over a claim by another Aboriginal group.

The rival Boonwurrung Land and Sea Council is pursuing a land claim involving 13,000 sq/km of territory, but this is being challenged by Bunurong members, including Ms Walton.

The court will decide if Ms Walton and others are descended from Indigenous people who “at sovereignty, held rights and interests in any part of the land and waters” covered by the land claim application stretching from southeast Melbourne to Wilsons Promontory.

......

She has claimed that the Bunurong group is run by people from interstate who have no connection to Boonwurrung land.

In 2022, Ms Briggs slammed environmental body Trust for Nature over its intention to transfer a donated Phillip Island property owned by the family of late satirist John Clarke to the Bunurong council.

“Once again we have been ignored and decisions made for us by non-Indigenous people,” Ms Briggs said at the time.

Trust for Nature chair Gayle Austen said then that the donated land was private property, and as such was not affected by and nor did it affect the Boonwurrung’s land claim.

In May, it was reported that two former Bunurong Land Council executives were accused of a $150,000-plus fraud against the organisation. hahahaha ?

Both men denied the allegations.

Bunurong Land Council declined to comment on next week’s Federal Court case.

 

[SirRumpole]

Mrs Rove thinks she's an Aboriginal.

Just a taste of things to come with the Voice. Who actually is Aboriginal?

Lidia is about 6%. Stan is about 30%. Bruce is 0%.

Why do they get an extra vote?

View attachment 159290View attachment 159291

Actor Tasma Walton has become embroiled in a legal stoush involving a large Aboriginal land claim over parts of Melbourne and Gippsland.
Ms Walton, who is the wife of TV personality Rove McManus, believes she has Indigenous ancestry after taking a DNA test.

She is among several people linked to the Frankston-based Bunurong Land Council who will give evidence in the Federal Court next week over a claim by another Aboriginal group.

The rival Boonwurrung Land and Sea Council is pursuing a land claim involving 13,000 sq/km of territory, but this is being challenged by Bunurong members, including Ms Walton.

The court will decide if Ms Walton and others are descended from Indigenous people who “at sovereignty, held rights and interests in any part of the land and waters” covered by the land claim application stretching from southeast Melbourne to Wilsons Promontory.

......

She has claimed that the Bunurong group is run by people from interstate who have no connection to Boonwurrung land.

In 2022, Ms Briggs slammed environmental body Trust for Nature over its intention to transfer a donated Phillip Island property owned by the family of late satirist John Clarke to the Bunurong council.

“Once again we have been ignored and decisions made for us by non-Indigenous people,” Ms Briggs said at the time.

Trust for Nature chair Gayle Austen said then that the donated land was private property, and as such was not affected by and nor did it affect the Boonwurrung’s land claim.

In May, it was reported that two former Bunurong Land Council executives were accused of a $150,000-plus fraud against the organisation. hahahaha ?

Both men denied the allegations.

Bunurong Land Council declined to comment on next week’s Federal Court case.

If they keep fighting amongst themselves then we can ask "who will the Voice actually represent"?

 

[SirRumpole]

I will ask the Voice to consider four main priority areas: health, education, jobs and housing," Ms Burney said.

How about crime, substance abuse, domestic violence, truancy rates and child neglect ?

 

[orr]

Cart infront of the Horace oops horse.....
Sercuirty and stability lead to better outcomes

Your views are certianly horse ****.

 

[rederob]

Why is a Voice to parliament the best way to fix ATSI issues but not the best way to fix anything else?

Because the data on Closing the Gap reflects a discrete section of the population that has been failed by past policies. Which part of that wasn't obvious? Which other population group suffers systemic disadvantage that needs fixing?

Personally I just want to see the whole issue sorted. Get the "gap" closed for those who wish to do so (since not all will) and move forward. The whole situation has gone on far too long, it needs to be sorted and brought to a close.

Again, that's why the Voice was brought in to the referendum question.

 

[SirRumpole]

Because the data on Closing the Gap reflects a discrete section of the population that has been failed by past policies. Which part of that wasn't obvious? Which other population group suffers systemic disadvantage that needs fixing?

Again, that's why the Voice was brought in to the referendum question.

So what happens when the problems are 'sorted' ?

The Voice will find or create new problems to justify their existence.

That's why it should be a temporary body not a permanent one.

 

[rederob]

So what happens when the problems are 'sorted' ?

That won't be in our lifetimes, so what makes it an issue?

The Voice will find or create new problems to justify their existence.

That's on par with your other nonsensical statements.

That's why it should be a temporary body not a permanent one.

"Recognition" is not a temporary thing. Nor is representation.
You give true meaning to clueless.

 

[wayneL]

Cart infront of the Horace oops horse.....
Sercuirty and stability lead to better outcomes

Your views are certianly horse ****.

These are cultural imperatives. The question is who are responsible for these?

 

[basilio]

Isn't it a shame when so called satirical takes on political responses to The Voice offer more insight into the debate than so called proper responses.

Peter Dutton has led the charge of saying that The Voice, a proposed body that can only offer input to Government policy on issues dealing with First Nation issues, risks taking over politics. They could do anything ... At least that is the whistle than is being blown long and loud to undermine the referendum. And yet it was a Liberal Government that oversaw the extensive community involvement in developing teh framework for The Voice to Parliament.

This is the same Peter Dutton who was a key part of a Government that :

1) Promised to give First Nations people a voice and then failed to even get it onto the Parliamentary floor in it's 9 year period of office

2) Oversee an illegal 4 year Robo Debt con that terrorised 443,000 people with fake debts and drove many to despair and suicide

3) Was part of government where the PM secretly gave himself 5 ministries.

And we want to believe him ?

Former MP Ken Wyatt quits Liberals after party decides not to back Voice

The former Indigenous Australians minister, who lost his seat at the last election, quits the Liberal Party over its decision to formally oppose the government's plan to enshrine an Indigenous Voice to Parliament in the Constitution.

www.abc.net.au

Indigenous Voice Final Report now available

The Minister for Indigenous Australians, the Hon Ken Wyatt AM, MP, has today released the Indigenous Voice Co-design Process Final Report to the Australian Government and announced the next steps to establish Local & Regional Voices. Minister Wyatt said releasing the Final Report will enable...

www.niaa.gov.au

 

[rederob]

If you structure yourself in the constitution then you can sway policy to your advantage, and you can use information that most people won't be privy to for your own benefit.

Given the purpose of the Voice is to gather ideas from ASTI peoples which will be to sway policy to their advantage, how can that be other than beneficial? In fact it's a significant reason the Voice is being proposed!

Other minority groups will not have this advantage to help their cause.

What gap are we closing for these other groups?
Please explain.

The Voice is based on a group of people having different constitutional rights depending on their ancestry

This is completely untrue as the Constitution has no effect on the rights of any citizens.

if you can't understand that is discriminatory then I guess nothing will.

Given your statement is based on a false premise it is you who lacks understanding.
In fact you haven't got much right so far, so why not read more about the Voice instead of continually shooting yourself in the foot.

 

[wayneL]

 

[rederob]

FFS Rob, read my previous posts. Recognition is not the problem, the Voice being entrenched in the Constitution is the problem.

Explain this problem seeing is all you do is raise nonsensical points.
The Voice is the means of recognition.
You want to do a Dutton and offer up lame excuse after lame excuse, none of which cut the mustard.

 

[TimeISmoney]

Given the purpose of the Voice is to gather ideas from ASTI peoples which will be to sway policy to their advantage, how can that be other than beneficial? In fact it's a significant reason the Voice is being proposed!

What gap are we closing for these other groups?
Please explain.

This is completely untrue as the Constitution has no effect on the rights of any citizens.

Given your statement is based on a false premise it is you who lacks understanding.
In fact you haven't got much right so far, so why not read more about the Voice instead of continually shooting yourself in the foot.

There are plenty of non indigenous Australians that are living in poverty conditions, people that are illiterate, people with lifelong disabilities, and people with mental illness. Everyone one of these groups is competing for the same available govt funding. The Constitution is meant to make a fair governing body that doesn't consult in the favour of any one heritage. There's nothing that's been produced on govt sites that states the voice can't comment on non indiginous issues, it just gives the narrative of it would and should look like this and that.

 

[SirRumpole]

Explain this problem seeing is all you do is raise nonsensical points.
The Voice is the means of recognition.
You want to do a Dutton and offer up lame excuse after lame excuse, none of which cut the mustard.

You are an arrogant bore @rederob, repeating the same word salad and blind to other arguments.

No more response to your trolling from me.

 

[wayneL]

Not good

 

[sptrawler]

You are an arrogant bore @rederob, repeating the same word salad and blind to other arguments.

No more response to your trolling from me.

That's a shame, I've being enjoying it, it seems to be the only way that the issues are going to be air and people get comfortable with their decisions.
I'm surprised Albo hasn't re employed Rob, as he seems to have a better handle on the issue, than the Government and I'm not joking.

 

[rederob]

There are plenty of non indigenous Australians that are living in poverty conditions, people that are illiterate, people with lifelong disabilities, and people with mental illness.

But there are plenty more indigenous, as the data shows, and their plight is not improving.
Your "whataboutism" is a classic case of ignoring the big problem by raising a distraction.

The Constitution is meant to make a fair governing body that doesn't consult in the favour of any one heritage.

There is no change to who the government consults.

There's nothing that's been produced on govt sites that states the voice can't comment on non indiginous issues, it just gives the narrative of it would and should look like this and that.

There's nothing preventing the Voice from flying to the moon in government sites.
But if you took the time to read more about the Voice you would you know that proposed the Constitution's Chapter IX 129 (ii) states their advice is to be on... "matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples."

Your excuses are more lame than Dutton's.

 

[IFocus]

There are plenty of non indigenous Australians that are living in poverty conditions, people that are illiterate, people with lifelong disabilities, and people with mental illness. Everyone one of these groups is competing for the same available govt funding. The Constitution is meant to make a fair governing body that doesn't consult in the favour of any one heritage. There's nothing that's been produced on govt sites that states the voice can't comment on non indiginous issues, it just gives the narrative of it would and should look like this and that.

Were they the original inhabitants of Australia?
Were they thrown off their land after 10k plus years,
Do they have a unique culture of up to 60k years?
Were they murdered, massacred by police and settlers women and children?
Are they the most disadvantaged group in Australia?