Frank wrote on Mar 25^th, 2023 at 9:17am:

Frank wrote on Mar 25^th, 2023 at 6:13pm:


I think he's got it.

Took you a while, dear chap, but you are a New Australian.

A constitutional voice is about establishing a federal body that can't be disbanded by certain, ahem, political currents. I'm sure you know what I mean.

Don't like it? Don't vote.

Cunning, no?

In his announcement Albanese endorsed a maximalist voice, thereby guaranteeing a fundamental change in Australia’s system of parliamentary and executive governance and making a contentious referendum even more contentious. Instead of putting qualifications on the voice Albanese went the other way – bowing before the Indigenous working group, he refused any meaningful change to the voice’s capacity to advise the executive government or address reported concerns of the Solicitor-General and Attorney-General.

This is no way to finalise a referendum question. The optics are disastrous – Albanese left the impression of a compliant prime minister submitting to Indigenous demands. There is no reason to change the recent assessment offered to the Sydney Institute by human rights lawyer and voice supporter Frank Brennan: “What’s proposed is too fixed, too simple, it won’t fly and I don’t think the Australian public would ever accept it.”

For Albanese, it is a personal mission. “I’m here to change the country,” he said. He wants to change the Constitution “to recognise the fullness of our history”. Magnificent vision. But beware prime ministers when they get emotional; it usually means a lurch into unreality.

Do cabinet ministers understand what they signed off on Thursday morning? This is constitutionally empowered group rights tied to constitutionally empowered unlimited representations. It is unprecedented in a dual sense. If carried, it will change our governance and society. There is no way the Coalition could support this model and retain its integrity. It is a sad conclusion from Albanese’s latest remarks that he seeks to carry this referendum on a tactic of deception – relying on goodwill, emotions and the injustice Indigenous people have faced for so long.

This is an intellectual and moral deception. And that needs to be said now because if this referendum is defeated its origins will lie with the decisions Albanese announced on Thursday and the defeat will be his responsibility as the prime decision-maker.

Don’t blame the Indigenous leaders. Having lacked political power for so long, when they saw a compliant prime minister they went for broke. The trouble is that Albanese has saddled himself with a model riddled with problems that guarantees a tactic of constant undermining by the No side.

The tragedy is that Albanese has conflated the just cause of Indigenous recognition with a model of the voice that breaches too many principles and runs too many risks to be supported.
...
There are thousands, probably millions, of people who support recognition and consultation but who will oppose the voice because they believe it is divisive or dangerous. Law professor Megan Davis, a member of the working group, told ABC radio the Prime Minister had listened to the working group. She said the voice “will have an extraordinary impact in terms of the government of the day and the parliament”. It would be proactive; it wouldn’t wait to be consulted. It is “a very, very powerful mechanism”. We should believe her.

The referendum is about power. The voice will make representations not just to parliament but the executive government including cabinet, ministers and public servants as decision-makers. The idea the voice has limited influence because it is advisory is disingenuous. It will function as a powerful political entity exerting enormous influence. That’s the entire purpose. It’s what the whole idea is about.

The constitutional amendment is open-ended and unlimited, such that the voice can make representations on virtually anything – from the conditions of Indigenous people to tax, social, economic, resources, cultural, defence and foreign policy.

Trying to impose order on this open-ended constitutional power, Brennan urged the government to a surgical change – limiting or excluding its executive government advice in the Constitution, eliminating public servants from any constitutional ambit and letting the parliament take any such decisions.

He got nowhere. His effort trying to get a more viable, acceptable model was seen as counter-productive. Labor wants a voice with maximum interventionist scope, thereby inviting maximum resistance from the Coalition side of politics. This is smart politics? There is a fatalism at work here. Brennan argued that because the voice cannot possibly know about the multitude of decisions envisaged by hundreds of public servants affecting Indigenous people this would open the door to litigation, with the voice claiming it had been overlooked or muted.

The Prime Minister said people should support the referendum because we will “feel better” about ourselves. This is insulting and demeaning. It debases what this referendum is about and really says people don’t need to worry about what Albanese is proposing to do with our Constitution. The more he says this, the more he insults people. On every issue Albanese has deferred to the authority of the voice. This is surely an omen of the future – he has previously said it would be a brave government that ignored the advice of the voice. This underlines the sheer enormity of the political nature of this proposal.
Paul Kelly

Nobody and nothing will ever "Close the Gap" because you will never make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

It will never happen - you are your DNA



Chappy has a Voice.

Put him in charge

thegreatdivide wrote on Mar 26^th, 2023 at 10:00am:



There in lies your stupidity.

Boris wrote on Mar 26^th, 2023 at 10:47am:



He's looking after the Songlines, innit.

Boris wrote on Mar 26^th, 2023 at 10:47am:


Nonsense;


"During the Victorian era, the rates of people living in poverty increased drastically. This is due to many factors, including low wages, the growth of cities (and general population growth), and lack of stable employment."

Nothing to do with DNA.

I think, rather than being concerned with 'closing' any gaps - those can be addressed by other ways etc and have nothing to do with constitutional change - this nation will be caught up in massive civil unrest and possibly civil war.

Once that is over - I doubt there will be many gaps left to fill.  Best to move on with Aborassic Park immediately, and ship all the dissidents there and leave them to sort it out 'their way'..... give 'em a homeland ... let them return to their idyllic pre-colonisation paradise, and leave them to it.

In two years we'll check on the survivors.

Close the gaps in abusing and bashing women and children and men v one another, the rampant crime .... arrest public figures who call for a war against this country, and chop away all the dead wood in all those countless Aboriginal only structures that are standing in the way of closing any gaps.  If they stop abusing, fighting and neglecting one another they might even live longer.