Voice to Parliament Referendum Megathread

With the Voice to Parliament Referendum date announced to be October 14 2023, this thread will run in the lead up to the date for general discussions/queries regarding the Voice to Parliament.

The Proposed Constitutional Amendment

Chapter IX Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples

129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice

In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:

there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice; the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.

Past Discussions

Here are some previous posts in this community regarding the referendum:

Common Misinformation

"The Uluru Statement from the Heart is 26 Pages not 1" - not true

Government Information

Referendum question and constitutional amendment
voice.gov.au - General information about the Voice

Amendments to this post

If you would like to see some other articles or posts linked here please let me know and I'll try to add it as soon as possible.

Added the proposed constitutional amendment (31/08/2023)
Added Common Misinformation section (01/07/2023)

Discussion / Rules

Please follow the rules in the sidebar and for aussie.zone in general. Anything deemed to be misinformation or with malicious intent will be removed at moderators' discretion. This is a safe space to discuss your opinion on the voice or ask general questions.

Please continue posting news articles as separate posts but consider adding a link to this post to encourage discussion.

326

You're viewing a single thread.

326 comments

The idea that the voice is some sort of useless idea is seriously flawed. Policy institutes and Parliamentary hearing and committee are the biggest drivers of policy in this country. Media attention and petitions aren't nearly as effective in this regard. The voice will likely not be integrated as a Parliamentary comittee is, due to its being a separate body, but will still offer valuable representation to Parliament to those who came before these institutions and this country. Aboriginals had their own traditions, nations and sovereignty on land that was not ceded. We have accepted their legal and unique history with this land, this is merely saying that within the framework of Australia as a country, that Aboriginals deserve access to our legislature and executive on matters that affect them.

The popular argument by resident no voter @whirlybird@aussie.zone seems to be that this is virtue signalling and that this would be the end of social justice for Aboriginals, that resistance would develop in trying to advance a cause further. They seem to suggest that we would be better off doing something of substance, as to not foment resistance and resentment. I would hope that on the first point, its been made clear that there is real benefit to having a Voice, and the second is irrelevant, the Australian population will tire after a no vote, and after a yes vote. Its the jobs of those politically active, the media, the Voice itself, politicians, and those non apathetic people to push for more when the time comes.

A second argument I hear, and the most factually true argument I hear is lack of detail. It is true that there is a lack of official detail from those legislators who will be advancing bills if the referendum finishes in the affirmative. It is also understandable to want to know in substance what the fruits of your vote would be. Id encourage those who would like to learn to listen to ideas from the referendum working group and those associated with the yes campaign on rough ideas of a Voice if this is the case. Its important to remember that we are voting on the amendment though, not the bill itself. There are significant measures that must go into establishing the voice in substance:

Will the voice exist entirely under its own weight, legislated by Parliament and run by itself, or will the bureaucratic arm of the voice exist in the Australian Public Service

How will the voice be elected? How will regional voices be represented? Is a federal model (each nation receives x representatives), a state based model (each state receives x amount of reps) or a unitary, population based model more effective?

All of these questions take significant time. If you can focus on the amendment, and whether support those ideas outside of what a future voice may look like, it will help.
- The idea that the voice is some sort of useless idea is seriously flawed.
  
  That's your opinion. It's not mine or plenty of other peoples, including lots of indigenous people.
  
  this is merely saying that within the framework of Australia as a country, that Aboriginals deserve access to our legislature and executive on matters that affect them.
  
  Yeah, they just don't actually get any power over it. Gee aren't we nice for giving them the ability to say "hey nah we don't like this" before we say "tough shit, we're doing it" and there's nothing they can do.
  
  I would hope that on the first point, its been made clear that there is real benefit to having a Voice
  
  It hasn't, no matter how many times you want to say it has.
  
  Id encourage those who would like to learn to listen to ideas from the referendum working group and those associated with the yes campaign on rough ideas of a Voice if this is the case
  
  I don't care about "rough ideas", I care about knowing the actual details of the things I'm being asked to put in our constitution. Why on earth should I vote to add something to it that we have no idea what it will look like, but we know that it can just change at the whim of the current party in power?
  
  All of these questions take significant time. If you can focus on the amendment, and whether support those ideas outside of what a future voice may look like, it will help.
  
  Then they should have taken that time before asking us to vote on it. This didn't need to be rushed through. Any issues of timelines are caused by the people pushing for the referendum, thinking they can just bully everyone into voting yes by calling them racists, when all we want is to actually have details on what the voice will look like and what it can do. The referendum should not have been pushed without these details, and it would likely be a dramatically different result if we had what we are asking for but being told we can't have unless we vote yes.
  
  including lots of indigenous people.
  
  Who? All polling suggests an overwhelming majority (>80%+ Yes, <15% No) of Indigenous Australians support the Voice. Provide some evidence or stop making this baseless claim. And no, more boring anecdotes about your "Indigenous friends" is not sufficient evidence.
  
  Any issues of timelines are caused by the people pushing for the referendum, thinking they can just bully everyone into voting yes by calling them racists
  
  It wouldn't be a Whirlybird comment without some more crying about hurt feelings. Are you ever going to grow up and get a real argument? Maybe provide some evidence to back up anything you say? Or is this really the best you've got? Just another completely irrelevant sob story about how some imaginary Yes campaigner was mean to you online.
  
  Never mind the actual hard, documented evidence of racism within the No campaign - the real problem (according to you) is that once upon a time a mythical Yes campaigner misidentified your ignorance as racism and you found that so incredibly offensive and life altering that you now feel the need to remind us of it in every single comment. Get over it already.
  
  All polling suggests
  
  Ah yes, the infamous “over 80% support it” based on a poll of 700 indigenous people 😂.
  
  I’m assuming you’re the same person that said I had “hurt feelings” like this last time? My feelings aren’t hurt at all, though I have to wonder about yours considering how upset you seem to be getting. I’m stating facts - a big part of the yes supporters tactics are just say that anyone who doesn’t vote yes is racist. I’m sure you’ve done it plenty of times already, since you just did it to me 😂
  
  The way you’re just making stuff up to try and attack me is exactly what I’m saying. You just try and bully people into your beliefs. Like I said, when you do that you shouldn’t expect people to side with you, but to turn even more against you. That’s how it has worked all throughout history.
  
  More deflection. Where's your evidence for your claim?
  
  What claim? What deflection?
  
  You’re just calling me racist and claiming my feelings are hurt, literally proving my point.
  
  including lots of indigenous people.
  
  Source?
  
  You think I need a source to say lots of indigenous people are voting no? 😂
  
  Permanently Deleted
  
  Is 20% not “lots”? If 20% of our population died would you not say a lot of people died?
  
  Permanently Deleted
  
  @Whirlybird @Ilandar Uh yes. You do.
  
  You claimed "lots of Indigenous people" think the Voice is a useless idea. Where is your evidence?
  
  Yeah, and I’m shocked you’re actually asking for a source on that because that’s ridiculous.
  
  The source you’re quoting was a poll of 700 indigenous people 😂
  
  Yeah, and I’m shocked you’re actually asking for a source on that because that’s ridiculous.
  
  Why is it ridiculous? If you make a claim, back it up with evidence.
  
  The two polls I cited are evidence. Despite your faux scepticism, their accuracy was explained clearly to you by another user earlier this month. First you attempted to argue that they were inaccurate because Australia has a population of 5 million Indigenous Australians, and when it was pointed out to you that this figure is completely wrong and you have no idea what you're talking about, you proceeded to double-down and make baseless claims about the validity of the reults despite being unable to provide a single, statistical explanation of how they were "wildly and massively incorrect".
  
  Every time someone asks you to provide a source or some evidence, you crumble. You start strawmanning, or attempting to divert or deflect attention away from your obviously fake and flawed arguments to something completely irrelevant like your feelings. You have absolutely nothing of value to offer in this debate and it is painfully obvious for everyone to see.
  
  If you're a white person you really shouldn't be trying to represent the views of Indigenous Australians. I don't care how you're voting, we all need to reflect on and consider whose voices we're trying to represent here.
  
  So white people also shouldn’t be saying that “80%” of indigenous people support the voice either?
  
  I would argue that's different because these people are citing polling information not trying to represent Indigenous voices. By design, quantitative data does not represent qualitative data. If they were trying to represent qualitative experiences, then yes absolutely this applies. It's important that we all reflect on our positions in this debate, especially if we are claiming to represent the perspectives of Indigenous Australians.

You've viewed 326 comments.