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

[HazzRat]

Just seeing what your views on this are. I'm only seventeen so I miss out on the vote by a year. The actual proposed question is "A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?"

 

[Anaya R]

Just seeing what your views on this are. I'm only seventeen so I miss out on the vote by a year. The actual proposed question is "A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?"

I think the answer should be yes. This is another step toward true reconciliation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Hesitancy to support the Voice has come from opposition, whether that's from more conservative people or from those who want immediate and more 'empowering' solutions like Lidia Thorpe.

 

[carrotsss]

Yes, and I strongly dislike the group who let the perfect be the enemy of good and claim “it doesn’t go far enough”

 

[mmmmmmmmaaaaaaa]

Yes, and I strongly dislike the group who let the perfect be the enemy of good and claim “it doesn’t go far enough”

Quite a few first nations representatives say that it's not enough, or as you say 'it doesn't go far enough'

 

[carrotsss]

Quite a few first nations representatives say that it's not enough, or as you say 'it doesn't go far enough'

The majority think that’s a good idea though. Some people forget that the whole idea came from the uluru statement from the heart

 

[Anaya R]

Quite a few first nations representatives say that it's not enough, or as you say 'it doesn't go far enough'

Interesting thing you mention that, here's an article from ABC in that regards:

There are 11 First Nations MPs and senators. Here's what they think of a Voice to Parliament

The 2022 federal election delivered record results for First Nations representation in parliament. Ahead of the referendum, the ABC contacted the 11 politicians to hear directly from them what they think about a constitutionally enshrined Voice to Parliament.

www.abc.net.au

 

[mmmmmmmmaaaaaaa]

The majority think that’s a good idea though. Some people forget that the whole idea came from the uluru statement from the heart

I never said that, there is just a better way to go about it if what they want is a Voice to parliament.

Interesting thing you mention that, here's an article from ABC in that regards:

There are 11 First Nations MPs and senators. Here's what they think of a Voice to Parliament

The 2022 federal election delivered record results for First Nations representation in parliament. Ahead of the referendum, the ABC contacted the 11 politicians to hear directly from them what they think about a constitutionally enshrined Voice to Parliament.

www.abc.net.au

I had to do something related to this for an assignment so I would say I know a bit about the topic.

 

[SylviaB]

I think the answer should be yes. This is another step toward true reconciliation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Hesitancy to support the Voice has come from opposition, whether that's from more conservative people or from those who want immediate and more 'empowering' solutions like Lidia Thorpe.

This will do absolutely fuck all to change anything lmao

 

[mmmmmmmmaaaaaaa]

This will do absolutely fuck all to change anything lmao

Agreed especially when the terms of what’s going to happen is quite vague as well, interpretation can go many ways

 

[Image.jpg]

Look. Don't get me wrong, I think it should def go ahead, but heaps of people think that ATSI people are being put on a pedestal. I think voice to parliament is a good idea, but I think again. Did you see the news abt Lidia Thorpe recently? with the club stuff. Like idk maybe someone else could represent ATSI better in parliment

 

[enoilgam]

I'm strongly leaning towards a Yes vote as I don't see any harm in the proposal. I think arguments around it being divisive, lacking in detail or constitutionally dangerous don't hold any real weight.

That said, I don't think the Voice will make any tangible difference towards closing the gap, improving Aboriginal welfare or creating true reconciliation. I would be shocked if anything has changed in 10 years. If you look back across the last 50 years, there have been several bodies like the Voice which have all been failures (NAC, NACC and ATSIC).

Unfortunately, the debate on Aboriginal issues is extremely limited and unless you subscribe to the view that Aboriginal issues are all the fault of the evil white man, then you are a racist. The reality is, whilst Australia has historically treated Indigenous Australians poorly (it really is a blight on the nation's history), Indigenous culture has many negative elements (like any other culture around the world) which are actively holding them back. Unfortunately, the culture is very patriarchal and their norms around ownership of property are just completely at odds with modern society. Add in their somewhat justified reluctance to interact with White Institutions and you have a culture stuck in the past with no way of improving or moving forward. As much as I dislike his politics, Tony Abbott made an excellent point that "If Indigenous Australians want to achieve Australian outcomes, they must embrace Australian standards". Unfortunately, if any one in or around government were to say this they would be branded a racist and probably shot at dawn for their transgressions.

To spout some more cliches, "You cant change what you don't acknowledge" and "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and expecting a different result". I think the Voice will just give a bigger platform for the same tired solutions that haven't been working for the last 30 years.

 

[Image.jpg]

I'm strongly leaning towards a Yes vote as I don't see any harm in the proposal. I think arguments around it being divisive, lacking in detail or constitutionally dangerous don't hold any real weight.

That said, I don't think the Voice will make any tangible difference towards closing the gap, improving Aboriginal welfare or creating true reconciliation. I would be shocked if anything has changed in 10 years. If you look back across the last 50 years, there have been several bodies like the Voice which have all been failures (NAC, NACC and ATSIC).

Unfortunately, the debate on Aboriginal issues is extremely limited and unless you subscribe to the view that Aboriginal issues are all the fault of the evil white man, then you are a racist. The reality is, whilst Australia has historically treated Indigenous Australians poorly (it really is a blight on the nation's history), Indigenous culture has many negative elements (like any other culture around the world) which are actively holding them back. Unfortunately, the culture is very patriarchal and their norms around ownership of property are just completely at odds with modern society. Add in their somewhat justified reluctance to interact with White Institutions and you have a culture stuck in the past with no way of improving or moving forward. As much as I dislike his politics, Tony Abbott made an excellent point that "If Indigenous Australians want to achieve Australian outcomes, they must embrace Australian standards". Unfortunately, if any one in or around government were to say this they would be branded a racist and probably shot at dawn for their transgressions.

To spout some more cliches, "You cant change what you don't acknowledge" and "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and expecting a different result". I think the Voice will just give a bigger platform for the same tired solutions that haven't been working for the last 30 years.

Well said. Pretty much summed it up here

 

[cosmo 2]

it wont do anything

it really doesn't matter either way though its a hand out to a few grifter organisations

this is how itll work in reality

someone will propose a dumb law about requiring wheel chair ramps at government office buildings or some shit

the voice will come in and propose that abos are are more likely to be in wheel chairs than non abos

so onto the law therell be some tacked on hand out to some abo consultancy group that will paint the wheel chair ramps with abo art to be more culturally inclusive, and theyll get paid a million bucks for it

shit like that


it will be a massive PITA at worst bc think about how hard it is to pass legislation currently

now imagine what itll be like if every bill has to be scrutinised by aunty margaret from indamoo

 

[enoilgam]

it wont do anything

it really doesn't matter either way though its a hand out to a few grifter organisations

this is how itll work in reality

someone will propose a dumb law about requiring wheel chair ramps at government office buildings or some shit

the voice will come in and propose that abos are are more likely to be in wheel chairs than non abos

so onto the law therell be some tacked on hand out to some abo consultancy group that will paint the wheel chair ramps with abo art to be more culturally inclusive, and theyll get paid a million bucks for it

shit like that


it will be a massive PITA at worst bc think about how hard it is to pass legislation currently

now imagine what itll be like if every bill has to be scrutinised by aunty margaret from indamoo

Crudely put, but not far from reality. There are a lot of great organisations out there helping Indigenous people, but there are also many who really milk the system and provide nothing of value to the community. Ive worked on a large infrastructure project and the amount of money that was spent on Indigenous organisations/issues was outrageous when put into context of the project's interaction with Indigenous peoples. At no point were we shown how any of that money would go to local indigenous communities to help them with things like education, healthcare etc. All I saw was a bunch of consultants getting large fees for making sure the project was "culturally safe".

That leads into another major concern of mine regarding the Voice. I fear much like the RBA and ICAC, it will be seen as being beyond legitimate criticism and scrutiny which is a bad combination in any democracy. I feel the line "It's part of the constitution" or "That's racist" will be thrown around every time the body comes under scrutiny. How will the public hold the Voice to account if it proves dysfunctional or it fails to have an impact on closing the gap? Will there be an independent oversight body or a parliamentary committee to hold them to account (like with almost every other agency). Something tells me independent oversight would be deemed racist.

someone will propose a dumb law about requiring wheel chair ramps at government office buildings or some shit

As an unrelated sidenote, all new houses built from May this year now need to be wheelchair compliant. Of course, this all comes at the owners cost. Dont get me wrong, I fully support initiatives aimed at the disabled community, but why the hell should I foot the bill to make these adjustments to my house when I am not disabled?

 

[cosmo 2]

even private houses?

 

[SylviaB]

hahahah

making houses more expensive to build and flooding the country with foreigners

houses are going to be so affordable now that the 'labor' party is in power

 

[carrotsss]

hahahah

making houses more expensive to build and flooding the country with foreigners

houses are going to be so affordable now that the 'labor' party is in power

A minor increase in building costs has a negligible impact on house prices. As for foreigners, I think they generally have a net benefit to Australian society, although I do think that the temporary working visa system needs to be reworked, the focus on low wage jobs just harms Australian workers and wages.

The labor party tried to propose the true solution to housing affordability in 2019 (removing the CGT discount and negative gearing), but voters clearly didn’t want those changes and so there isn’t really much that can be done unfortunately. In the long term reducing vacancy rates and building more houses will help to resolve this, but due to the skills shortage (contributed to by TAFE cuts), that isn’t so easy.

 

[SylviaB]

you mean the same labor party that made it much, much easier for foreign 'investors' to buy australian properties?

 

[SylviaB]

i don't get what's wrong about foreigners or any people given they provide value/are experts in their field

Weird how many "experts in their fields" are doing uber eats delivery lmao

 

[carrotsss]

you mean the same labor party that made it much, much easier for foreign 'investors' to buy australian properties?

Foreign investment is very important economically to an extent but yes, there is too much foreign investment in property at the moment