The high cost of the Liberals’ Voice rejection — for both Peter Dutton and the party

Special as in retards....

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Apr 7^th, 2023 at 12:16pm:


It's relative: in 1788 the Brits were still relying on wind-power  to invade Oz (as did Caesar to invade Britain)...retards...

Bottom Line:

"The potential for great irremediable harm to Australian society means that the Voice should never be incorporated in the constitution."

Terence Cole is a former Judge of the NSW Court


https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/04/the-uluru-statement-from-the-heart-and-the-...





Anyone not agree?

What are your qualifications?

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Apr 7^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:


My point was it took the brits 2000 years to improve on Roman ship-power technology, yet they were not retards, during that whole time.

Neither were/are Oz blacks retards; technological development has many inputs (causes) apart from 'native' (endogenous)  intelligence.

Boris wrote on Apr 7^th, 2023 at 1:13pm:

As a former constitutional law academic, I know just how much the details matter when it comes to any constitutional amendment. In this case, the few details we have been given make clear that this is not, as some have called it, a modest proposal.
There are two aspects in particular that take this proposal well beyond being a minimalist model and make it one that instead would fundamentally alter our existing constitutional framework.

The first is the extension of the voice to include representations to not only the parliament but also to the executive government. This substantially increases the risks of bureaucratic complexity, legal uncertainty and judicial activism

.The second is the guarantee that the voice may make representations “on matters relating to Abori­ginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples”.

This wording goes beyond matters having special significance to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and also beyond “matters which would affect their rights”, which is the form of words used in describing the right to self-representation under article 18 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

It is difficult to think of an issue that would be beyond the scope of the voice in its proposed form, as surely every law or policy of general application would be considered to be “matters relating to” Indigenous Australians in the same way as they are matters relating to all other Australians.
...

Article one of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights tells us “all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights”.

UNDRIP itself expressly provides that it does not authorise any action that would impair the “political unity of sovereign and indep­en­dent states” and that its prov­isions should be interpreted in accordance with the principles of equality and non-discrimination.

The draft wording that has been announced goes beyond ensuring that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have a right to participate in decision-making that affects them. It inserts race into the Australian Constitution in a way that undermines the foundational human rights principles of equality and non-discrimination and creates constitutional uncertainty in terms of its interpretation and operation.

Lorraine Finlay is Human Rights Commissioner.