Brian Ross wrote on Apr 7^th, 2023 at 4:20pm:


You support the perpetuation of the biggest parasitic cargo cult in the world.

Gnads wrote on Apr 7^th, 2023 at 5:41pm:


Bit of a stretch isn't it? Ozpols bigots are hardly the biggest parasitic cult,  there just your average sized parasitic cult

John Smith wrote on Apr 7^th, 2023 at 5:45pm:


Yes... if you understand the the concept of taking a pill or take a powder?

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.

The Heartless Felon wrote on Apr 8^th, 2023 at 9:04am:


That one was there right at the beginning.

Perhaps we need a voice created by legislation so everyone can see what a disaster it is.  It will be the end of Labor in government for a long time.... this kind of madness cannot continue outside the schoolrooms these people inhabit for their discussions.  What will lead to insurrection is such a monstrosity installed in the constitution.

'...that whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these ends (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness), it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it., and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organising its Powere in such Form, as to them seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that government long established should not be changed for light or transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

But, when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object (abolition of the Forms to which the populace are accustomed), evinces a Design to reduce them under Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security'.

From the U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Apr 8^th, 2023 at 9:09am:


So....government promoting  the common welfare  and collective wellbeing?

While The Heartless Felon might have a point about the voice applying to all citizens, I wouldn't invoke the delusional classical liberalism of the US constitution (based on 'individual sovereignty') as a model for good governance. 

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Apr 8^th, 2023 at 10:49am:


The problem with this is: "the people" are NOT all the people, only those comprising the 50%+1 needed to secure the governing party.

thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 8^th, 2023 at 11:44am:


Not a relevant point - without the support of the people such a thing cannot go forward - and it is not a recommendation for massive government intrusion and imposition - since that government must act within the bounds set by the people, not by itself.  A government that loses sight of that loses its position in the west.  Behind every move approved by the people there is an unspoken set of rules that all know they must abide by.... that unofficial constraint on government is what stops Western governments moving too far into excess or extreme behaviour.  Such constraints are not present in many other countries and historically have broken down even in 'western' countries at times.

A despotic government does not require 50% + 1 - all it requires is its ruling group to impose.