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?

Everything I have been reading and hearing indicates that the government is waiting until the referendum date is announced before commencing their yes campaign. I think they want to go out strong with a short campaign, but also not give the No camp a lot of time to undermine their campaign.

Same sex marriage was not a referendum question, it was a plebiscite. A plebiscite only demands a majority of votes. Unlike a Referendum which demands a majority of votes in a majority of the six states - as a result it’s harder for a referendum to pass.

Changes to the Marriage Act did not need a referendum. the Australian parliament already had the power to change the marriage laws act. That power was already guaranteed by the constitution.

Open racist slurs have become less evident in Australia. But I still hear them. Micro aggressions are still common. I think overt acts of racism may also depend (at least, a bit), on where you live in Australia.

Australia’s covert, institutional racism is still evident. The existence of the gap itself, is evidence of this.

I think we need to be open to the fact that the ‘misinformation campaign’ is sometimes a cover for racism, as well as a political tool. And First Nations People are having to suffer this.

it is not hard to understand what we are being asked to vote yes to. It’s been laid out in posts above. The confusion occurs because there are people actively working to infer they are unanswered questions where there are none.

I think one of the strongest argument in favour of the YES is that Scott Morrison is so against the Voice.

I agree TerrorAustralis.

(you also have a great username) 👍

😂Yes, that too. I wish he would leave parliament because he is a disgrace. But at the same time I’m enjoying that he won’t leave because no one else will give him a job.

I will refuse to vote, I’ll just turn up and submit an empty paper. I’ve seen lots of Indigenous spokespeople for it, and lots against it. Until they get their shit together and reach consensus within the Indigenous community I’m not voting, as I want to vote whatever way they have reached consensus on. I don’t believe their is a vast majority position one way or the other at this stage within their communities so wish to wait until true consensus occurs, so not just a majority/minority but consensus. Then happy to vote for whatever that is as I believe it should be directed by them.

The majority of Indigenous people do support the Voice. Like any issue, you will never get 100% agreement from any group. But an overwhelming majority want this.

https://www.unsw.edu.au/news/2023/06/ten-questions-about-the-voice-to-parliament---answered-by-the-ex

Have you noticed that non indigenous people haven't 'got their shit together '? The Voice has come from years of hard work, listening and advocacy by indigenous people and has majority support among them

Well, there are many Indigenous groups saying they don’t want it. I don't care either way, just want them to come to a consensus (which is very different to overall agreement), and I’ll happily go that way. I don’t believe it’s there yet. If it is by the time voting comes around, I’ll go that way, whatever it may be. I don’t want to be THAT white fella who is voting something on them, I want it to be what they have reached consensus on as an overall Indigenous/First Nations community.

@HoppingPavlova how do you define consensus? What would you need to see to be confident that a consensus has been reached?

https://www.unsw.edu.au/news/2023/06/ten-questions-about-the-voice-to-parliament---answered-by-the-ex#:~:text=Two%20polls%20from%202023%20confirm,their%20support%20for%20the%20Voice.
80-83% of First Nations people in favour according to the above.

@HoppingPavlova when you vote in elections do you demand that every member of the party agrees on every single issue before you will vote for them? Or is it only first nations people that you expect to be 100% in agreement before you will deign to exercise your vote for their benefit?

Do polls consistently showing 80% support by First Nations people constitute a consensus in your eyes?

Don’t be obtuse. if I vote for a party then it’s the ‘party line’, I’m voting for. Members of the party may not all agree and there will be individuals with differing opinions but there will be a single party line/party position put forward. Can you not see that this is completely different, and with your analogy I would be voting for a singular party (Indigenous population) who has not as yet established a ‘party line/position’, which is different to them all being in agreement.

I don’t expect anyone to be in agreement for anything irrespective. I do expect a unified position. For example, I need to sign off on certain matters. I don’t necessarily agree with every one thing, but to break a stalemate I will state I disagree, I want that recorded and that my signed agreement reflects consensus. At that point it becomes a unified position/decision that I am part of whether I actually agree or not. It’s not that hard.

“I will refuse to vote, I’ll just turn up and submit an empty paper.”

That’s the first sentence of your first post. Thats your intention. You told us straight up, in your first post. @HoppingPavlova

Unlike you, I don’t expect 100% agreement from any group. Essentially, that’s what you seem to be saying you expect, even though you seem to be denying expecting it, while seeming to expect it.

There is a large majority, 80-83%, of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in agreement. It’s more than good enough for me. I’m voting Yes.

Actually let me reframe that, I have no idea what you are saying.

Except for your clear statement of your intention not to vote, at the beginning of your first post.

Simply, I’ll vote on a unified position. There obviously doesn’t have to be agreement from every Indigenous/First Nations person as, with everyone and everything this would never happen, but there needs to be a unified position with consensus on whether they want to move forward with this as a First Nations population. Put simply, if there is a unified position, I’ll support it wholeheartedly whatever that may be, if it’s not I won’t vote. At present I personally don’t believe there a unified position either way, but hopefully there will be by the time voting rolls around. As I said earlier I’m not going to be the white person forcing something on them as a population. I want them to make the decision, I won’t do it for them as we have done enough of that over history.

So here I am sitting on the lounge watching the Voice, thinking WTF is OP talking about "is it political".... it's just a singing competition?? 😂

My thoughts on why the gap hasn’t closed.

i have a friend whose ex husband was indigenous. She isn’t. Her children (who hasn’t ever lived with their father or have any contact with him - one has never met him the other not since he was 2) are indigenous. She gets (for them) extra free health care, funding for school uniforms, special trips, special indigenous rugby jerseys meeting famous football players, awards days for them for attending school in city hall ect with a big ceremony and dinner.

nothing wrong with any of that. But her kids don’t need help. The kids that need all that stuff are not the ones who live comfortable middle class lives in a major city. The kids who need it are the ones living in disadvantaged communities in the bush. So while there is a ‘pool’ of money to spend, it is easy for the government to give people like my friend a $1000 grant for uniforms so that they can seem like they are doing something. They just solve easy problems and spend money in easy ways. Spending that money to tackle indigenous disadvantage in schools in remote communities would be harder. I think it just gets put in the too hard basket and they instead focus on other thing that are easier.

I don’t know if the voice will solve any of that though.

I do tend to agree that there is a fundamental and massive difference between indigenous people in the cities and those in rural Australia.
I also know a few indigenous people who are indigenous through grandparents, but are white presenting, live in the north shore and are affluent. Their lived experience is presumably very different to those growing up in rural NT.
Having said that, the astounding poverty, abuse, lack of education and terrible health outcomes of rural indigenous Australians is just awful and something has to be done about it. The head teacher of Barker College, Phillip Heath has opened a number of campuses on Country and it has shown that when individuals are given the same opportunities, they absolutely thrive (see the group who entered a robotics competition in Texas recently). I don’t know why more can’t be done like this - not taking people out of their communities but providing firstly education and then jobs in these rural communities.

It’s not just a matter of urban/rural divide though. I’ve worked with a lot of city-based Aboriginal people and there is still an incredible amount of disadvantage within our cities.

Yes that’s true - but is that more just “normal” poverty or specific to being indigenous? Do city based indigenous people suffer greater poverty than non indigenous? If so, what are the causes of that?

There are layers, and it is more complex than what I know or am qualified to comment on. To be completely transparent, it’s a long time since I worked with disadvantaged communities.

That said, it’s partly poverty, it’s inter-generational trauma, lack of education, institutional racism, always being treated with suspicion, 10 times more likely to be arrested and incarcerated, more likely to (still) be removed from your parents, the list goes on.

I think that this is one of the very reasons for The Voice. M/ better distributed and target budgets and programmes etc.. The Australian Parliament will be consulting with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representatives on all matters of legislation that concern them. Thus, we will see better targeting of monies to help the people that need it. It should mean more continuity of programmes and initiatives. There has been no continuity up until now.

Also there is a mistaken belief that when, for example, say, 250 million dollars is set aside for certain programmes, that Aboriginal Communities will be getting the all benefit from those monies - when it’s really the case now, and has been for many years, that by the time the money reaches the programmes, it is only a small percentage of the original amount. Most of the money goes in admin costs, contracts, contractors etc who are not Aboriginal or Torres Strait People This has been addressed by Marcia Langton only recently, but I can’t find the article now. If I come across it, I’ll post the link.

Yes! This is a massive issue, hardly anything gets to the people who need it most. And it is not the fault of the communities.