So, the Voice

[Ozgirl75]

I’m trying to follow it from the U.K. where I’m living this year and it seems massively political and divisive, is that what it’s like over there or is that just being started by the media?

There is unfortunately a lot of misinformation and lies from the no campaign which is getting too much uncritical coverage in both mainstream and social media. The federal opposition leader is predictably negative and using it to try to discredit the Prime Minister. But you'd expect that from someone who didn't even attend Parliament on the day of the Apology to Stolen Generations.

I agree with everything Reader123 wrote. An accurate and quick analysis.

And the great majority of First Nations People want this.

I’ll vote yes.

if you are interested look at the Uluṟu Statement From The Heart. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uluru_Statement_from_the_Heart. The actual Statement is a relatively short document in reality, and easy to read. There are no hidden agenda.

When I say majority of First Nations People want ‘this’ - I mean they want The Voice.

Are there things that can only be done because of the Voice? So, reading about truth telling and treaties - could these be done without a constitutional entrenchment, or does the Voice just make it easier to do that?
I did catch a bit of the ABC the other day and one of the supporting ministers said “I have a tray of issues and the Voice will allow me to attend to them” (paraphrased) and I believe these issues were to do with health and prison reform - my question is, could she not just start on that without the Voice?
Governements have had pretty broad support for raising indigenous standards in health, education etc for years (Sorry was in 2007 I believe?) so why is it still that we have no progress and how will the Voice specifically help?

I think (as an outsider, I’m British but have lived in Aus for 16 years) I just don’t understand WHY the problems are so entrenched. Issues with disparities between indigenous and non indigenous communities were being strongly discussed definitely when I moved to Aus, so why hasn’t Closing the Gap worked (enough?) and how would the Voice help it?

I overheard a couple of women at a Cafe recently who were talking about it. They actually said the Voice is a communist plot, and that if it passes referendum the First Nations people will block Australia getting submarines and we will be taken over by China. No kidding, there are people who actually believe this! I Googled it and it's a conspiracy theory going around here in Australia.
What hope do we have.... 😕

Well that’s embarrassing!

I’m regards to the minister with ‘the trays’ of issues - Without The Voice any new initiatives, programmes that will be put into place, will eventually be abandoned just as they always have been. One govt thinks them up. The next govt abandons them and thinks up something new. Even when they have been successful. The current system is broken: With the Voice, it means there has to be consultation first - which is entirely sensible. Who better to ask if a certain programme is needed or should be abandoned for not working, than the people it is meant to benefit? . Even programmes that are successful can be, and have been, abandoned. the voice will have no legislative powers. It is purely consultation.

I wish I could answer this better. I’ve tried a number of times tonight but I have had serious brain fog lately.

If you are looking for answers, there are very knowledgeable First Nations People available to answer any questions in scheduled web chats. I haven’t got a link but they will be easy to find with a search.. Also there are a number of documentaries on the ABC. There is one on the Voice and it’s grass roots beginnings. Every First Nations community in Australia has been consulted for this. Megan Davies is one of the organisers and there is a documentary about her too. It may be a 4 corners episode? Look to see what Professor Marcia Langton has to say also. They can explain far far better than I can.

I think voting yes is very important. We are also the only formerly colonised country in the world, that does not make mention of the original inhabitants of the land in our constitution. That is not okay. And we can change it.

Read the Uluṟu Statement if you haven’t. It tells us everything being asked for.

Tonight’s (9 August) episode of 7.30 had a good interview that helped to explain how it’s so difficult to deal with changing ministers and governments. The Voice will give continuity and mean that the programs and community groups don’t have to start from scratch with each new minister or government.

Recently, several high profile Aboriginal people who were vocal about voting no, have now changed their minds. It seems that some were holding out for a treaty, but they have decided not to let perfect be the enemy of good.

Jesus wept. Some people will believe anything.

I hope it does get in, and that indigenous people’s lives can be helped. It’s such a stain on our history that we can’t seem to increase the standard of living for a whole group of people.
It’s such a shame that talk of things like reparations are putting people off.

What was the treaty that they did want? I thought that the Voice was about getting the Treaty?

The statement from the heart talks about Voice, Treaty and Truth - I had assumed that having one meant having all.

No, Voice, Truth and Treaty are separate things. Arguably, Voice should have been the easiest to implement as it was just a body for consultation about issues that directly impacted indigenous communities. However, this has been politicised as a way of undermining the government.

Many indigenous leaders wanted Treaty first but given how difficult the Voice is to implement, people would lose their minds over treaty.

Ah ok, because I had seen them together in the Uluru statement I assumed that Voice would lead to Treaty.
it must be so hard for people working in these areas - I mean it’s basically been a generation since the Sorry statement and as far as I know, the outcome for those kids born then who are now around 16 years old still isn’t anywhere near what it should be.
It seems astounding to me that a country as wealthy and ready to spend money on indigenous affairs has been so incapable of actually delivering change. When you think of all the charity work that’s done by the billionaires even (Andrew Forrest etc) as well as all the government work, why is it so unsuccessful?

I'm sorry I didn't see that 7.30 report, that sounds excellent.
I hope the Voice goes through - some years ago I was in Alice Springs and my brother who was working there showed me the apartments the government had built for Aboriginal housing. Tiny cement units with no outside areas, they were empty - the people all camped out by the river where they were happier. Why on earth did we not ask them what kind of housing they would like? They live in large groups and like plenty of verandah and outdoor areas!
We've treated them so disgracefully, I'm going to be utterly ashamed of Australia if the referendum fails.

The 7.30 episode will be on iView. Even overseas you can access it if you have a VPN. There have been a lot of interviews over the past few weeks (I don’t watch it every day, but catch it once or twice a week). It’s great they are giving it airtime, but I have no idea what the reporting is like on the commercial networks.

Regarding philanthropy, people like Andrew Forrest make a lot of the right noises and certainly gives a lot of money away, but we need to be clear-eyed about the fact that people like him have made their fortunes from plundering stolen land. Giving back part of his massive wealth is literally the least he could do.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-20/fmg-accused-of-rigging-meeting/4382826

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-08-17/pilbara-mining-jobs-conditions/2844066

You’re right about the lack of progress since Kevin Rudd’s official apology. It’s heartbreaking and enraging. One major problem is no central body for Indigenous Affairs since the dismantling of ATSIC, which was not without problems, but most certainly better than nothing.

As someone mentioned earlier in the thread, have a look at what Professor Marcia Langton has to say. She is an articulate and powerful woman who is unwavering in her vision. I admire her greatly. She knows what her people need, but is also a realist about what can be achieved within the confines of government.

Honestly, if this doesn’t get through, it will be to the detriment of all Australians and bring even greater shame upon us.

I think you have answered your own question @Ozgirl75 . Lots of previous well intention d initiative s have failed because the starting point is not listening to what First Nations people are actually asking for. The Voice will ensure that the starting point is listening to Aboriginal voices. If it is enshrined in the constitution it can't be disbanded next time the Coalition gets in. Several states have already embarked on the Treaty process. I am in Victoria and it is moving along here.

The other really important part of the proposal is the recognition of First Nations peoples:

Chapter IX Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples
129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice
In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:
1 There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice
etc.

Recognition is crucial.

Yes agree. Aboriginal people have lived continuously in Australia for 60,000 years and need formal recognition.

I think the "voice " will tank. I just can't see it getting a majority of people in a majority of states at this stage. The advertising is atrocious. And most people have no idea what it even is.
Questions I've been asked and been unable to answer ( as a yes voter if this ever gets to a referendum )

1. How does this work into our parliamentary system
2. Who elects the people who are "the voice"
3. if they have no authority what is the point?

It's all very hard, and when it fails ( as 40 out of 48 constitutional changes have historically in Australia ) then we are going to be accused of being weirdo racists, when it's actually going to be a case of the referendum question being terribly explained. If people don't understand the outcome completely then they are going to vote no.

This often seems to be the problem with referendums - they need to be a simple question, but there isn’t a simple mechanism for answering questions and so people naturally stick to the status quo. With gay marriage it was an easy question that really had no effect on non gay people so it was a nice easy question for a referendum. However with the question “do you want to get rid of the Queen as head of state” the nature question was “well maybe but what do we replace her with?” and that wasn’t answered with a response that people wanted or believed.
With the Voice I think if the question is “do you think aboriginal Voice should be enshrined in the constitution” people would say “well maybe, what does the Voice cover?”
I think some people fear it’s introducing a two tier system to a country by the back door with somehow “extra” rights for aboriginal people.
All the talk of changing the date for Australia Day, changing names of places etc has muddied the water. it’s a shame because if it fails it makes Australia look backward and kind of racist which I don’t think people are at all in their day to day life.

Exactly!!
You could be me!
That republic referendum question was a disaster. Everyone wanted it , but it became such a fiasco that nobody knew who was going to elect who as a future president .
Australia is so reluctant to vote yes on referendums and I think , sadly, this one is going to go fail due to the general lack of clarity on the issue. And yes we will be called racist morons ( again) which we aren't as one of the most peaceful multicultural countries in the world! We are just a bit reticent.
If the YES camp want to win they need to convince people that is necessary and can't just be done in legislation ( not requiring constitutional change) and I really don't think they have done that yet.
I predict a resounding NO.
The referendum should be delayed until next year. Maybe then they can make a clear concise case. At the moment they are goooooooone.

Australia is actually a very conservative (with a small c) country - very keen on the status quo and not keen on big changes. Also I think generally mistrustful of politicians!
I wish that Labor were able to create a clear and concise response to every question asked - a simple and clear answer to the things people are asking. I’m quite unimpressed at how they’re seemingly ballsing up what, in reality, should be a fairly easy win for them.
I think most Australians are embarrassed about how Indigenous people fare in comparison to non Indigenous, and want things to be done to fix this. Equally, it’s not unreasonable to expect to see the detail of a thing before we enshrine it in the constitution.

Agree the Yes campaign has not cut through the division and fear mongering of the No. There is lots of detail available. Read the O'Brien/Mayo short book or the Calma/Langton report.