Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

The Voice

Joined
28 May 2020
Posts
5,154
Reactions
9,590
It has come to my attention that the @Garpal Gumnut post about the voice in Australian Politics was not aimed at a certain low grade talent show on Channel 7, but indeed relates to the concept of there being a separate voice to parliament that is representing First nations people.
Hence, I think we should have a new thread to discuss it.
I should point out that initial readings suggest that those who oppose the concept, are obviously racist white supremacists lacking in moral and ethical thinking.
Notwithstanding that, I can see one problem already.
Invoking the mathematical set theory premise, who will determine which members of the superset Australian residents will constitute the subset of people who can be counted as first nations people?

Mick
 
Invoking the mathematical set theory premise, who will determine which members of the superset Australian residents will constitute the subset of people who can be counted as first nations people?

Anyone can claim (or identify) to be of indigenous descent so establishing qualification to be on T.V. (The Voice) could be difficult.

And how far is T.V. going to reach ?

e.g. if a council wants to put in a new housing estate will the have to consult T.V. ?

How long will they have to respond ? What if they say no ?

Too many unanswered questions at the moment.
 
Anyone can claim (or identify) to be of indigenous descent so establishing qualification to be on T.V. (The Voice) could be difficult.

And how far is T.V. going to reach ?

e.g. if a council wants to put in a new housing estate will the have to consult T.V. ?

How long will they have to respond ? What if they say no ?

Too many unanswered questions at the moment.
From what I have read, it seems that the majority of discussion is around the voice to Federal parliament, but as usual we will have to see the final wording asto whether it includes all forms of governemnt, and then the inevitable decisions by the High Court as o what it actually means.
Mick
 
From what I have read, it seems that the majority of discussion is around the voice to Federal parliament, but as usual we will have to see the final wording asto whether it includes all forms of governemnt, and then the inevitable decisions by the High Court as o what it actually means.
Mick

I've heard some of the proponents talking about local and regional voices also. At the moment I think we are being asked to vote on an "ideal" with the details being filled in later. I'm not sure that is acceptable to the majority of the population.
 
It has come to my attention that the @Garpal Gumnut post about the voice in Australian Politics was not aimed at a certain low grade talent show on Channel 7, but indeed relates to the concept of there being a separate voice to parliament that is representing First nations people.
Hence, I think we should have a new thread to discuss it.
I should point out that initial readings suggest that those who oppose the concept, are obviously racist white supremacists lacking in moral and ethical thinking.
Notwithstanding that, I can see one problem already.
Invoking the mathematical set theory premise, who will determine which members of the superset Australian residents will constitute the subset of people who can be counted as first nations people?

Mick
Actually I think it may be my post you are referring to, but I consider it a great honour to be mistaken for a gentleman like @Garpal Gumnut. :)
Woooooah. Hoooold up.

I may need to see my original post to comment on this @mullokintyre @SirRumpole .

Where is @wayneL when you need him and the horses are bolting.

I try not to comment on Indigenous issues nor Godbothering.

gg
 
Woooooah. Hoooold up.

I may need to see my original post to comment on this @mullokintyre @SirRumpole .

Where is @wayneL when you need him and the horses are bolting.

I try not to comment on Indigenous issues nor Godbothering.

gg
My apologies GG, but I have just had my 70th Birthday, and complete senility is another step closer.
Mick
 
I think there needs to be recognition in the constitution, which I think there already is, but the wording of the Albo Voice amendment is way too loose and will open the door for lawfare against parliamentary decision making. Things will end up in the High Court for adjudication and that's not how our democracy should work.

If you've got a News subscription, Janet Albrechtsen seems to talking straight on the issue, IMO.

Screenshot 2022-12-08 at 10.46.58 am.png
 
My apologies GG, but I have just had my 70th Birthday, and complete senility is another step closer.
Mick

Hope you enjoyed your birthday Mick big mile stone in life great to see you are still sharp and engaged long may it continue.

A mate and life long friend has had a life being super fit and very healthy has dementia at 65 wont see 70 breaks my heart.
 
I think there needs to be recognition in the constitution, which I think there already is, but the wording of the Albo Voice amendment is way too loose and will open the door for lawfare against parliamentary decision making. Things will end up in the High Court for adjudication and that's not how our democracy should work.

If you've got a News subscription, Janet Albrechtsen seems to talking straight on the issue, IMO.

View attachment 150242

Sean haven't read and not a Pearson's fan less so for Janet but in that clip Janet's comment on intellectual rigour fails basic logic the Nationals no stance in particular is based on false hoods, it was pulled apart by commentators left and right and is pretty much a political play.
 
Sean haven't read and not a Pearson's fan less so for Janet but in that clip Janet's comment on intellectual rigour fails basic logic the Nationals no stance in particular is based on false hoods, it was pulled apart by commentators left and right and is pretty much a political play.

She's pulled it apart in several pieces on the legal basis of it and possible consequences and it raised a lot of questions to me. More than there should be in what will become legislation. Having said that, I think most people will vote on this on their own ideological views and the vibe. It's all political really and won't close the gap one iota.
 
Hope you enjoyed your birthday Mick big mile stone in life great to see you are still sharp and engaged long may it continue.

A mate and life long friend has had a life being super fit and very healthy has dementia at 65 wont see 70 breaks my heart.
Thanks for those kind wishes. I have endeavoured to spend every significant birthday out of Australia since I spent my 30th in USA.
40th in Fiji, 50th in New Zealand, 60th in Africa, and reprised Fiji for 70. lot of things changed in Fiji in 30 years, most of Suva was unrecognizable.
Mick
 
I think most people will vote on this on their own ideological views and the vibe. It's all political really and won't close the gap one iota.

I don't have a Pollyanna view that the Voice will fix any thing directly and by and large a lot of it will be all about symbolism.

How ever symbolism cannot be ignored it is important not only to 1st Nations people but us all other wise we would have dispensed with the Aus Flag and much of the Westminster System along with the Royal Family as head of state and for heavens sake don't mention the culture wars which are totally about symbolism.

What is important IMHO is its at least another path way to raise indigenous pride and engagement with Australian society outside of their own community's, mob, families etc. I don't think many understand the feeling of shame that's exists.

Indigenous rightly or wrongly believe they get no say or are not heard by Australian society what's not talked about is that it will flow both ways no doubt there will be pressure going back for the indigenous to also do more for themselves.

Having been involved as a young bloke with indigenous and have family members who are fully initiated in a mobs law I know no one has the answers to all the issues least of all Janet Albrechtsen but I do think "The Voice" can be a step forward and worth a punt if not what else is there.

If it fails the stoploss will be the Libs who will throw it out anyway.
 
I don't have a Pollyanna view that the Voice will fix any thing directly and by and large a lot of it will be all about symbolism.

How ever symbolism cannot be ignored it is important not only to 1st Nations people but us all other wise we would have dispensed with the Aus Flag and much of the Westminster System along with the Royal Family as head of state and for heavens sake don't mention the culture wars which are totally about symbolism.

What is important IMHO is its at least another path way to raise indigenous pride and engagement with Australian society outside of their own community's, mob, families etc. I don't think many understand the feeling of shame that's exists.

Indigenous rightly or wrongly believe they get no say or are not heard by Australian society what's not talked about is that it will flow both ways no doubt there will be pressure going back for the indigenous to also do more for themselves.

Having been involved as a young bloke with indigenous and have family members who are fully initiated in a mobs law I know no one has the answers to all the issues least of all Janet Albrechtsen but I do think "The Voice" can be a step forward and worth a punt if not what else is there.

If it fails the stoploss will be the Libs who will throw it out anyway.
And that's exactly what it is mate, a sheer punt. We have no idea what this voice is actually going to be.

And as far as libs throwing it out if it doesn't work? Not in a million years.

Choose wisely because we will be stuck with it for ever.

I will be voting no.
 
I fail to see what this can achieve when we already have heaps of "services" supposedly helping aboriginals already.

There a Lot of people employed in Canberra and other cities to tell us what people living in isolated communities need.

The biggest problems are outback, DV and vandalism is rife in country towns like Halls Creek and Fitzroy Crossing, the local police have their hands tied because if they arrest someone there could be a riot so they let it go.

The elders want to influence the local laws but seem unable to stop DV, fighting and vandalism, it really is difficult situation and will Not be solved by another group of people with city ideas.

I have spent a bit of time outback and I have met a lot of Aboriginal people who are doing OK in today's world and if given control of their community they would prosper but along comes another local with a boot full of grog or a pocket full of pills and all hell breaks loose.

A very old friend is a senior Elder (Uncle) in our local Land Council and he argues endlessly about the victim mentality, he says they Must teach their children to live in today's world.

They Must not encourage the coming generations to be living fossils or living museum exhibits, they have to go to school and learn to be modern, valued citizens of Australia

That can only be done locally, if we need to re direct funds to that then it can be done immediately through existing services or we could use the money that the "talkers" were going to get for being on the Voice.

Perhaps we could have the elected Pollies who are of aboriginal descent form a committee and advise on any new laws.
 
I would agree with that, except for one word - Thorpe.

Yes, she is the type of person who will end up in the Voice, by having a mixture of Parties in a sub committee we can still have an aboriginal point of view put forward by Elected people.

I guess we end up with a slight majority of the ruling party but they are in power so that is fair enough but at least they answer to the public next election.

By being on the sub committee all members could do a media door stop with their opinions on the topic before them

We already have numerous unelected spokes people for Aboriginal people, we don't need anymore.

As we have already spent billions on trying to fix this I really can't see more money being the solution. We need to change what we are doing not just add another service doing the same thing.

In Alice Springs it seemed to me that a quarter of all businesses are supported by Govt money to help aboriginal people. The number of shop fronts offering various services was quite amazing in 2019 when I was there

I noticed that there seems to be a lot of white fellas caring for black fellas, yet they claim there is no work for them.

Maybe we start there, train aboriginal people to care for other aboriginal people. Surely we would get a better quality carer as they understand the lifestyle and beliefs of their patient and at the same time improve the self respect and prospects of the carer.
 
From Jacinta Price:

The Uluru Statement from the Heart, signed by only 0.03% of the Indigenous population, demanding constitutionally enshrined identity politics – that’s unifying and representative of the entire Indigenous population.

A democratically elected Senator and Aboriginal woman, representing a Territory with a population that’s almost 30% Indigenous, who has a long-held and well documented belief that ALL Australians are equal – that’s divisive and ignorant.

Makes sense…

Of course it’s rubbish, and they know it too.

And it didn’t take much for the charade to drop and their true colours to show.

Somehow the Voice has made it acceptable for privileged blokes to attack Aboriginal women over their stance on Indigenous issues – and the lefties are all on board.

I mean, we all knew this would happen.

You can’t oppose a constitutional gravy train for those after taxpayer funded salaries, and not expect a few fireworks – but wow, that was quicker than I was expecting!

We don’t even have details on Albo’s Voice to Parliament and already its backers have sunk to name calling, intimidation tactics and racially motivated abuse to help bully their way to what they want.

When the Nationals stood before Australia and declared our opposition to the Voice, we did so because we knew no unelected body could speak for ALL Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians.

How could it? How could a body of 24 people cherry-picked from the nearly 900,000 Indigenous Australians hope to speak for all of them without even consulting them first? It couldn’t.

And every day since that announcement, the Voice proponents have come after me in the media, telling everyone that I don’t speak for them, I don’t represent them, my views aren’t their views.

THANK YOU! YOU’VE MADE MY POINT!

We are not the same! We think differently! We have different views, opinions, beliefs, ideas and plans.

We are not a monolithic people destined to agree on everything!

We vote for leaders who best represent our individual views and we send them to speak those views in the nation’s parliament.

Just like every other Australian.

I know it, you know it, they know it.

That’s why Albo and his Referendum Engagement Group are changing the rules for referendums just in time for their Voice vote.

They’re throwing buckets of taxpayer cash at the Voice, they have the backing and big bucks from woke corporations and sycophants, they’ve played the game to build their Yes campaign, now they’re changing the rules to try and stop the No cause.

It’s undemocratic, cynical and dishonest.

Labor has changed the referendum rules to saturate the country with “education materials” on the Voice.

The Yes campaign will ramp up its bullying, gaslighting and emotional blackmail tactics – anything to get their own spoiled-brat kind of way.

And while we all waste our time and government money on this, nothing gets done to address the REAL problems.
 
Top