Should there be an Aboriginal voice to parliament? (1 Viewer)

[carrotsss]

I might vote no bc albo has been very vague about it

he hasn’t been vague about it, there’s plenty of information out there about it, it’s just that the information hasn’t been reaching people

the long and short of it is that they will get a diverse group of indigenous people from throughout Australia, and they will provide simple (non-binding) advice to the government when in order to assist with drafting effective legislation for closing the gap and improving the lives of indigenous people (you can look at the statistics if you want, the gap is pretty massive rn and there’s a reason it’s necessary)

 

[liamkk112]

what happens if the gubbernment ignores it and so the voice take it to the high courts or some crap and the voice gets more power and more say

na all it is is an advisory body, its freedom of choice to ignore their advice

 

[year10studentpreparin]

na all it is is an advisory body, its freedom of choice to ignore their advice

are u sure bro? do u hava a statement from them for this. it could happen bro

 

[carrotsss]

what happens if the gubbernment ignores it and so the voice take it to the high courts or some crap and the voice gets more power and more say

that’s a myth, and virtually all constitutional lawyers agree it’s impossible - the press have been intentionally amplifying a few people grifting about it, but think about it this way - why would the government install a body which can take them to the high court? it’s a ridiculous myth

 

[liamkk112]

are u sure bro? do u hava a statement from them for this. it could happen bro

" may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples " ; representations, so if the government doesnt want to follow through with their "representations" it doesnt matter, they dont officialy vote on legislation

 

[nsw..wollongong]

he hasn’t been vague about it, there’s plenty of information out there about it, it’s just that the information hasn’t been reaching people

the long and short of it is that they will get a diverse group of indigenous people from throughout Australia, and they will provide simple (non-binding) advice to the government when in order to assist with drafting effective legislation for closing the gap and improving the lives of indigenous people (you can look at the statistics if you want, the gap is pretty massive rn and there’s a reason it’s necessary)

my only concern is that how will we ensure that this "diverse group" is gonna represent voices from every tribe? there r so many ATSI groups and tribes all over Australia, some of them are bound to be left out

 

[Rattlehead15]

curious to see.
I really want to walk in the gate and have a bunch of people shout at me what to vote lol

When I voted there were equal amount of people campaigning yes and no.

 

[carrotsss]

my only concern is that how will we ensure that this "diverse group" is gonna represent voices from every tribe? there r so many ATSI groups and tribes all over Australia, some of them are bound to be left out

they will choose people from throughout australia? like no matter what it’s better than nothing, and even if a couple small tribes get left out the idea is that they will still have people from a very wide range of areas/groups

 

[liamkk112]

my only concern is that how will we ensure that this "diverse group" is gonna represent voices from every tribe? there r so many ATSI groups and tribes all over Australia, some of them are bound to be left out

yea but its still better than almost 0 representation, yes not every tribe would be included but the voice has clearly written in its design pricniples that there will be "specific remote representatives" that will aim to aid this issue

 

[nsw..wollongong]

they will choose people from throughout australia? like no matter what it’s better than nothing, and even if a couple small tribes get left out the idea is that they will still have people from a very wide range of areas/groups

no ur right i understand, im only questioning what happens when different tribes have conflicting opinions about decisions that affect atsi rights, and their voice wont be heard if they're not in this committee

 

[liamkk112]

yea but its still better than almost 0 representation, yes not every tribe would be included but the voice has clearly written in its design pricniples that there will be "specific remote representatives" that will aim to aid this issue

they also will select representatives from each state and territory so at least there is that

 

[year10studentpreparin]

they will choose people from throughout australia? like no matter what it’s better than nothing, and even if a couple small tribes get left out the idea is that they will still have people from a very wide range of areas/groups

but they wont have a voice from people like mundine and other aboriginals just because they disagreed with the vote

 

[year10studentpreparin]

" may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples " ; representations, so if the government doesnt want to follow through with their "representations" it doesnt matter, they dont officialy vote on legislation

and then maybe if they dont follow the representations there will be reparations from the government from society and the high court and this could potentially descend us to chaos and division which is what Mundine was talking about

 

[year10studentpreparin]

that’s a myth, and virtually all constitutional lawyers agree it’s impossible - the press have been intentionally amplifying a few people grifting about it, but think about it this way - why would the government install a body which can take them to the high court? it’s a ridiculous myth

ok thanks ill check more about that. Mundine tho bro

 

[carrotsss]

but they wont have a voice from people like mundine and other aboriginals just because they disagreed with the vote

over 80% of aboriginals supported the voice, just because mundine’s grifting got so much airtime doesn’t mean there’s actually a significant portion or aboriginal people like him

 

[carrotsss]

and then maybe if they dont follow the representations there will be reparations from the government from society and the high court and this could potentially descend us to chaos and division which is what Mundine was talking about

society - people barely support the voice, do you really think they’d give “reparations” to the government if it didn’t follow the voice’s advice. people don’t care that much about indigenous affairs
high court - as I’ve said virtually all constitutional lawyers agree that won’t be possible. you can take something to the high court if it breaks a law, “representations” is pretty damn clear language that it’s not binding

 

[Rattlehead15]

unsw changed their social media profile pictures (eg linkedin) to yes. honestly very conniving and unprofessional of them, considering most of their student body are generational immigrants/international students who have little to no stakes in this issue. its so obvious that its the white guilt from atilla brungs and the board of directors

Exactly my take. Also there is an argument to be made about a 99% unrelated population voting for a decision about a 1% minority. Seems like the fate of Aboriginals is always out of their hands.

 

[carrotsss]

no ur right i understand, im only questioning what happens when different tribes have conflicting opinions about decisions that affect atsi rights, and their voice wont be heard if they're not in this committee

at the end of the day it’s impossible to cover literally everyone, but it’s far better to hear most voices than no voices at all

 

[year10studentpreparin]

society - people barely support the voice, do you really think they’d give “reparations” to the government if it didn’t follow the voice’s advice. people don’t care that much about indigenous affairs
high court - as I’ve said virtually all constitutional lawyers agree that won’t be possible. you can take something to the high court if it breaks a law, “representations” is pretty damn clear language that it’s not binding

hmm ok u got a point. but what about the division the no campaigners are talking about. I can see how it may divide the country

 

[Rattlehead15]

hmm ok u got a point. but what about the division the no campaigners are talking about. I can see how it may divide the country

I just want equality between every person, every person should have equal opportunities. Propping up people based on the colour of their skin is not equality. (which is how I see it as divisive)