Pretty simple - how is a 'voice' elected from the existing groups going to work when the groups are no longer clear tribal group identities?  The Sydney area 'land council' that managed to claim Goat Island on the premise that it was owned by Bennelong and thus his descendants, is itself riven by the fact that the majority of its members have no connection with that 'land' and with historical ownership.... they are not from that part of Australia.

Who is to be elected to this 'voice' to represent them all? (a. the one with the biggest fists and standover) ...

Same as all this guff about National Parks - how is a group of all kinds/mobs combined and living in the towns in any way representative of the 'traditional owners' of any part of those areas?  Most of them have no historical roots to the area, and they've never lived there, never even walked there in most cases, so there is no unbroken connection and in many cases no connection whatsoever.

Again - who is to be the chosen one to represent that non-mob in a 'voice'?

Clearly having even a single representative for each tribal group, clan etc, resulting in nearly 1100, is ridiculous, and who is to say they are even of that 'mob'?

Sorry - but there is no realistic foundation for any voice, apart from all the other issues that stand against it - AND I will repeat - in view of all the prevailing science, clearly there is a crying need for not only a full review of the current approach to 'land claims', but also into the historical ones already made and set down.

Time for a full moratorium on all land claims and other claims, and a proper approach made to all these things, NONE of which will do a single thing to resolve the crying problems of the Indigenous.

Also time for the clear understanding that it is impossible to even consider any 'treaty' or 'voice' with a people who do not form one contiguous group, and move on.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 14^th, 2022 at 9:37pm:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fhj5AfyUoAEkG4W?.jpg

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Nov 14^th, 2022 at 10:05pm:


Wrong as always.  The CDEP was engendering improvement (reducing alcoholism and crime) in previously dysfunctional communities, when it was cut down by ignorant  neoliberal ideologues.

That' not "failure", that's sabotage of a scheme producing positive social outcomes such as reducing crime and alcoholism, the prerequisites for stabilty and progress in communities.   

Quote:


learning job attendance is the first skill for blacks adjusting to the modern economy

Quote:


Wrong as usual, environment management is a necessary activity for sustainable development

Quote:


No doubt the more talented among them were on the path to becoming tradesmen and the like, before ignorant neoliberal ideologues decapitated the scheme.

But note: ANY economy needs 'unskilled' workers as well as skilled workers   


Quote:


Ah..the real reason for your objection: "who is going to pay for it"...

Wake up: currency-issuing govt doesn't need your money, to pay for Job Guarantee schemes, it's a matter of government utilizing available resources to ensure work for everyone, whether in the individual greed-based incentive and reward private sector system, or the social-outcomes based employer of last resort (ELR) public sector.

thegreatdivide wrote on Nov 15^th, 2022 at 11:33am:


So you admit there were no long-lasting outcomes that were positive? 

And that only by endlessly feeding cash into a failed culture could they even begin to rise from their own gutter?

So .... errrr... how many years does it take to produce a tradesperson, and why did those in receipt of this munificence then just drop their pursuit of trade that would benefit their people and society at large?  How long did you say your pet project went on for again?  **coughs**

YOU said "who is going to pay for it" - not me.  Don't read in....

.....

That's one up on you, then.