🇦🇺 Australian Indigenous Voice to Parliament Referendum (October 14th)

[AustralianSwingVoter]

In Adelaide the Prime Minister has officially announced the date of the Indigenous Voice referendum. It is to be held in only 45 days time, as widely expected.

[PSOL]

The signaling of Labour trying to appear like they care about Aboriginals is as expected. The cowardice that they chose this route instead of shooting it down is lolworthy.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Peter Dutton's response:

"The referendum will be held on 14 October.

The result will be close. The Yes campaign are backed by big unions and corporations. We know they will spend many millions on advertising.

Despite what Mr Albanese says, this Voice proposal goes much further than simply recognising Indigenous Australians.

It covers all areas of “Executive Government”. Basically, no issue would be beyond its reach.

It risks legal challenges and delays. The High Court would ultimately decide its powers.

Some Voice supporters say this will be a first step to reparations and compensation and other radical changes.

Incredibly, Mr Albanese recently admitted he hasn’t read additional pages that, until recently, leading Voice proponents said were part of the Uluru Statement.

The Prime Minister isn’t good with details. And his government is refusing to provide details.

For example, we don’t know how members of the Voice would be chosen or how it would operate. Australians are being asked to vote before these details are worked out.

Enshrining the Voice into the Constitution would mean it’s permanent.

When we need to unite the country, this divides us."

[GoTfan]

Peter Dutton's response:

"The referendum will be held on 14 October.

The result will be close. The Yes campaign are backed by big unions and corporations. We know they will spend many millions on advertising.

Despite what Mr Albanese says, this Voice proposal goes much further than simply recognising Indigenous Australians.

It covers all areas of “Executive Government”. Basically, no issue would be beyond its reach.

It risks legal challenges and delays. The High Court would ultimately decide its powers.

Some Voice supporters say this will be a first step to reparations and compensation and other radical changes.

Incredibly, Mr Albanese recently admitted he hasn’t read additional pages that, until recently, leading Voice proponents said were part of the Uluru Statement.

The Prime Minister isn’t good with details. And his government is refusing to provide details.

For example, we don’t know how members of the Voice would be chosen or how it would operate. Australians are being asked to vote before these details are worked out.

Enshrining the Voice into the Constitution would mean it’s permanent.

When we need to unite the country, this divides us."

Interesting that Peter Dutton of all people claims to be a uniter when he is more divisive than Pauline.

If anyone not great with details, it's him. He started a scare campaign because he believes people are too stupid to write a one syllable word in an attempt to undermine the system. The details have been available for some time now; if he's too lazy to read, then that's his problem.

[Logical]

54-46 No. Only Vic and ACT votes yes.

[Pericles]

This really shouldn't be too much to ask, a consultative body with non-binding powers is really basic. Given how appalling racial inequality is and the history of Aborigines not being listened to, it is reasonable to require at least some consideration. This is also about the symbolism-Australia should demonstrate they want to do something about racial injustice.

[JimJamUK]

54-46 No. Only Vic and ACT votes yes.

On that margin I really struggle to see NSW voting yes, and quite possibly Victoria as well.

[Meclazine for Israel]

The Federal Liberal members coming out thick and fast now.

Ian Goodenough's response:

THE RISKY VOICE REFERENDUM

"Changing our Constitution is a big decision, yet Labor refuses to provide basic details before the vote, which has officially been set for October 14th.
 
We don’t know how members of the Voice would be chosen or how it would operate. We also don’t know how much it would cost.
 
This is legally risky, with unknown consequences. And any changes will be permanent.
 
Western Australia’s recent Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act demonstrates what can happen when Governments get the details wrong. Of course, bad legislation can be reversed by Parliament.
 
Changes to our Constitution can’t be – meaning Australians will be stuck with any negative consequences.
 
Labor has also ignored warnings from many legal experts about the Voice covering all areas of “Executive Government” and decisions being subject to legal challenge. This risks more dysfunction and delay.
 
As a migrant to our great country myself, I am also concerned that the Voice will undermine our equality of citizenship. We are all equal in the eyes of the Constitution and we need to bring Australians together, not divide them.

Some Voice supporters say this would just be a first step to reparations and compensation and other radical changes. So, what would come next?

This Voice is legally risky, with unknown consequences. It would be divisive and permanent."

[CumbrianLefty]

This really shouldn't be too much to ask, a consultative body with non-binding powers is really basic. Given how appalling racial inequality is and the history of Aborigines not being listened to, it is reasonable to require at least some consideration. This is also about the symbolism-Australia should demonstrate they want to do something about racial injustice.

Yes, but its token (or, if you prefer, symbolic) nature is proving rather a downside as well.

[xelas81]

Have any current Labor officials stated that they voting against the referendum?

[Oryxslayer]

This really shouldn't be too much to ask, a consultative body with non-binding powers is really basic. Given how appalling racial inequality is and the history of Aborigines not being listened to, it is reasonable to require at least some consideration. This is also about the symbolism-Australia should demonstrate they want to do something about racial injustice.

Yes, but its token (or, if you prefer, symbolic) nature is proving rather a downside as well.

This is why I personally don't think the referendum is a net positive. The potentially established body is all but a official lobbying mechanism, and that can be ignored or followed at whim depending on the discretion of those with actual power. But it's establishment would no doubt lead to expectations of resolving said long-term problems to be hoisted on said body by the wider and unknowing electorate.

There are several good ways to actually ensure said accessibility to power. You have the US and Canadian options where accessibility FPTP seats are explicitly created: either through maintaining OMOV by giving secondary consideration to other deliniators like in the US, or through maintaining said local lines but with seats way under the ideal size like in Canada. Or, if there is not enough concentration of population to provide for access those ways, there is always the example from next door of New Zealand and the Maori electoral slate.

And we don't exactly know if the community would prefer said formal electoral access to the informal Voice, or really any other litany of alternatives, because they were not options. The Voice was seemingly top-down decided rather than community-led bottom-up. But if it's passed, said alternatives would become harder to achieve, because there already would be the Voice.

[JimJamUK]

Have any current Labor officials stated that they voting against the referendum?

I don’t think so. Labor tightly binds its elected official to support party policy, so the most criticism you get is the Queensland premier saying she’s voting yes but would welcome more information for voters to make a decision.

[DL]

In principle, I really don't like the idea of referendums being used to determine issues around minority rights. It would be like having all of Alabama (which is 65% white) vote in a referendum on whether or not the 35% who are Black should be allowed to vote. Majority rules is fine but what happens if the majority votes to kill the minority?

[DL]

How do Indigenous Australians feel about this? Are they 100% in favour or are there any dissident elements among them who oppose having a voice?

[Ebowed]

How do Indigenous Australians feel about this? Are they 100% in favour or are there any dissident elements among them who oppose having a voice?

Remote indigenous communities are, of course, very difficult to poll.  The Northern Territory, which contains many of these communities, only counts towards the national vote total and not towards the "electoral college" aspect of this, so there is even less of an incentive to poll it.  Journalists venturing to these communities have encountered both support and more broadly the repeated plea for more detail about what the Voice actually is and how it will work.  To be completely honest, it is challenging to ascertain how well or whether some of these communities were consulted about it.  However, it is likely that support for 'Yes' would be strong.

'Yes' will do very, very well among self-identifying Indigenous people living in the major cities.

For its part, the 'No' campaign is fronted by two prominent Indigenous politicians.  In addition, some self-described progressive Indigenous people, including a federal Senator, are also opposed because they see the Voice as not going far enough and/or they would prefer the governments to negotiate a Treaty with Indigenous nations first.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Channel 9 asked people on Social Media (Instagram/Facebook) if listening to Albanese' speech helped sell the YES vote for them for the upcoming referendum.

The responses:

[Ebowed]

The Voice has won the backing from one of the worst people in Australian politics, Malcolm Turnbull: Why my government didn’t back the Voice, but I’m now voting yes.  This sniveling weasel makes it sound like it wasn't him who immediately dismissed the Voice and maligned it (very effectively, I might add) as a "Third Chamber", ending any discussion of implementing the Uluru Statement under his leadership.  No, under his retelling, he was an ineffective figurehead held hostage to a party base that he clearly despises.  A man with a perpetual need to be liked (and/or "on the right side of history"), he has never demonstrated throughout his long public life that he actually holds any principles whatsoever.

[Meclazine for Israel]

Albanese campaigning in the state of Tasmania.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-31/albanese-spends-first-campaign-day-in-hobart/102797868


Where are the Aboriginal people? Anthony Albanese says he is convinced Tasmanians will support the Voice.(ABC News: David Sciasci)

A state with essentially an aboriginal population of zero, Albanese is confident Tasmania will vote YES.

It will be interesting to see if Albanese visits the Aboriginal villages in outback Northern Territory, the most populated Aboriginal region in Australia who are disqualified from the 2nd half of the referendum because NT has no vote under the constitution.

If Northern Territory was a state, then the YES vote would be a chance in this referendum.

[Хahar 🤔]

The signaling of Labour trying to appear like they care about Aboriginals is as expected. The cowardice that they chose this route instead of shooting it down is lolworthy.

Labor.

[xelas81]

Albanese campaigning in the state of Tasmania.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-31/albanese-spends-first-campaign-day-in-hobart/102797868
A state with essentially an aboriginal population of zero, Albanese is confident Tasmania will vote YES.

It will be interesting to see if Albanese visits the Aboriginal villages in outback Northern Territory, the most populated Aboriginal region in Australia who are disqualified from the 2nd half of the referendum because NT has no vote under the constitution.

If Northern Territory was a state, then the YES vote would be a chance in this referendum.

Not entirely true, there are few Aboriginal Tasmanians by partial descent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Tasmanians

[Meclazine for Israel]

Albanese campaigning in the state of Tasmania.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-31/albanese-spends-first-campaign-day-in-hobart/102797868
A state with essentially an aboriginal population of zero, Albanese is confident Tasmania will vote YES.

It will be interesting to see if Albanese visits the Aboriginal villages in outback Northern Territory, the most populated Aboriginal region in Australia who are disqualified from the 2nd half of the referendum because NT has no vote under the constitution.

If Northern Territory was a state, then the YES vote would be a chance in this referendum.

Not entirely true, there are few Aboriginal Tasmanians by partial descent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Tasmanians

Truganini was considered the last born Tasmanian Aboriginal. Aboriginal people were shipped in by Batman from Sydney before and after. Batman used Mainland Aboriginals to kill the remaining Tasmanian Aboriginals.

Hence, the Tasmanian historians are currently campaigning to have 'Batman's" name removed from landmarks. Although he did not initiate the killings, he is now viewed like King Leopold in Tasmanian history.

From the very link you posted.

"Two individuals, Truganini (1812–1876) and Fanny Cochrane Smith (1834–1905), are separately considered to have been the last people solely of Tasmanian descent."

When we lived in Tasmania, were we taught Truganini was the last of her kind.

When I was young, there was a family named Mansell in the community who also claim to be part aboriginal.

[Aurelius2]

Albanese campaigning in the state of Tasmania.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-31/albanese-spends-first-campaign-day-in-hobart/102797868
A state with essentially an aboriginal population of zero, Albanese is confident Tasmania will vote YES.

It will be interesting to see if Albanese visits the Aboriginal villages in outback Northern Territory, the most populated Aboriginal region in Australia who are disqualified from the 2nd half of the referendum because NT has no vote under the constitution.

If Northern Territory was a state, then the YES vote would be a chance in this referendum.

Not entirely true, there are few Aboriginal Tasmanians by partial descent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Tasmanians

Truganini was considered the last born Tasmanian Aboriginal. Aboriginal people were shipped in by Batman from Sydney before and after. Batman used Mainland Aboriginals to kill the remaining Tasmanian Aboriginals.

Hence, the Tasmanian historians are currently campaigning to have 'Batmans" name removed from landmarks. Although he did not initiate the killings, he is now viewed like King Leopold in Tasmanian history.

From the very link you posted.

"Two individuals, Truganini (1812–1876) and Fanny Cochrane Smith (1834–1905), are separately considered to have been the last people solely of Tasmanian descent."

When we lived in Tasmania, were we taught Truganini was the last of her kind.

When I was young, there was a family named Mansell in the community who also claim to be part aboriginal.

I thought "Batman" was a nickname. Looked it up. Nope!

[Meclazine for Israel]

Albanese campaigning in the state of Tasmania.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-31/albanese-spends-first-campaign-day-in-hobart/102797868
A state with essentially an aboriginal population of zero, Albanese is confident Tasmania will vote YES.

It will be interesting to see if Albanese visits the Aboriginal villages in outback Northern Territory, the most populated Aboriginal region in Australia who are disqualified from the 2nd half of the referendum because NT has no vote under the constitution.

If Northern Territory was a state, then the YES vote would be a chance in this referendum.

Not entirely true, there are few Aboriginal Tasmanians by partial descent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Tasmanians

Truganini was considered the last born Tasmanian Aboriginal. Aboriginal people were shipped in by Batman from Sydney before and after. Batman used Mainland Aboriginals to kill the remaining Tasmanian Aboriginals.

Hence, the Tasmanian historians are currently campaigning to have 'Batmans" name removed from landmarks. Although he did not initiate the killings, he is now viewed like King Leopold in Tasmanian history.

From the very link you posted.

"Two individuals, Truganini (1812–1876) and Fanny Cochrane Smith (1834–1905), are separately considered to have been the last people solely of Tasmanian descent."

When we lived in Tasmania, were we taught Truganini was the last of her kind.

When I was young, there was a family named Mansell in the community who also claim to be part aboriginal.

I thought "Batman" was a nickname. Looked it up. Nope!

Batman wasn't the guy who initiated the killings. Truth be told, a lot of Tasmanian Aboriginals died from foreign imported diseases.

The killing by the British of the Tasmanian Aboriginals was thought to have been initiated by a military leader in Hobart following the deflowering of his daughter by the locals.

Batman is thought to be the one of the Governor's responsible for killing a lot of Tasmanian Aboriginals with his mainland posse.

The 'Black Line' was a technique of dividing state into two parts to hunt down any remaining locals.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_War

[AustralianSwingVoter]

Albanese campaigning in the state of Tasmania.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-31/albanese-spends-first-campaign-day-in-hobart/102797868
A state with essentially an aboriginal population of zero, Albanese is confident Tasmania will vote YES.

It will be interesting to see if Albanese visits the Aboriginal villages in outback Northern Territory, the most populated Aboriginal region in Australia who are disqualified from the 2nd half of the referendum because NT has no vote under the constitution.

If Northern Territory was a state, then the YES vote would be a chance in this referendum.

Not entirely true, there are few Aboriginal Tasmanians by partial descent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Tasmanians

Truganini was considered the last born Tasmanian Aboriginal. Aboriginal people were shipped in by Batman from Sydney before and after. Batman used Mainland Aboriginals to kill the remaining Tasmanian Aboriginals.

Hence, the Tasmanian historians are currently campaigning to have 'Batmans" name removed from landmarks. Although he did not initiate the killings, he is now viewed like King Leopold in Tasmanian history.

From the very link you posted.

"Two individuals, Truganini (1812–1876) and Fanny Cochrane Smith (1834–1905), are separately considered to have been the last people solely of Tasmanian descent."

When we lived in Tasmania, were we taught Truganini was the last of her kind.

When I was young, there was a family named Mansell in the community who also claim to be part aboriginal.

I thought "Batman" was a nickname. Looked it up. Nope!

They even named an electorate after him!

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

I still support Albanese and he's way better than Dutton, but this whole voice thing has left a bad taste in my mouth. Australia should have a colorblind government.