The Voice

[PaulP]

Fair dinkum...there is some absolutely absurd judgements being made..............................

Don't worry Lods. You're one of the "good" Queenslanders lol.

I'm not sure you can overstate the importance of a constitutionally recognised Voice. It's not just words on a piece of paper. Having Indigenous groups advising at state and local level is all well and good, but it's not the same as the Voice. The Voice provides a way to have some coordination of diverse indigenous issues, and a way to really have a seat at the table.

So, how about that Treaty that's been on the agenda for decades ? All those in favour......

[Lods]

Don't worry Lods. You're one of the "good" Queenslanders lol.

I'm not sure you can overstate the importance of a constitutionally recognised Voice. It's not just words on a piece of paper. Having Indigenous groups advising at state and local level is all well and good, but it's not the same as the Voice. The Voice provides a way to have some coordination of diverse indigenous issues, and a way to really have a seat at the table.

So, how about that Treaty that's been on the agenda for decades ? All those in favour......

You know in some ways this referendum may have some positive effects.

One of my main concerns was the level of disappointment that a 'No' vote would have on many first nations people who will be naturally be disppointed by the result.

But it's now firmly on the agenda.
I can see Voice committees being established at various levels of government.
Even those politicians advocating a 'No' vote were at pains to say that whatever the result there were indigenous issues that need addressing.
We'll see how their words will translate into actions.

Again....the important thing is not the voice...it's listening to it, and acting on it.

[tonyo]

Fair dinkum...there is some absolutely absurd judgements being made.

The reasons for voting 'No' were widespread and diverse.
There is no intellectual superiority in the 'Yes' case.
That's purely a personal opinion, and perhaps that arrogance is arguably one of the reasons the case was lost.

If the question had been...."Do you think first nations people should be recognised in the constitution?... it would have romped in".

The fact is that indigenous folks have a Voice.
It's a strong voice.
It's heard often.
You only have to look at indigenous input on both sides of the debate.
It was impressive...yes, even Lydia Thorpe (who may be a bit out there, but who is a strong and commited advocate for her people)
But it is a diverse voice.

Many government departments at both a state and federal level have an indigenous input...its especially so in things like education and health
If you think governments aren't aware of the problems indigenous folk face you're mistaken.
They're well aware of issues and locations.

The Voice isn't the problem...it's the Ears.
The voice is loud and clear.
It needs to be listened to, and there need to be a willingness by governments to close that gap.
...and we've just wasted a heap of money that could have been better spent

No one is saying there is an intellectual superiority in voting yes - far from it, if people consider the facts and vote 'No', then that is democracy at work, and I have no doubt that many 'No' voters are in that category.

But if people voted 'no' simply because they didn't know what the issues were (or couldn't be bothered finding out), then that is ignorance at its best.  And the fact that the 'No' campaign legitimised the fact that remaining ignorant was acceptable, is, in my book, the biggest shame of this whole process.  

Einstein said the true definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.  So something has to change in the relationship between First Nations peoples and our elected leaders, or we will be talking about the same issues in 20 or 30 years' time.

As for needing 'Ears' - ears can listen, but it doesn't mean they understand.  It's the last bit we need to get a better handle on. 

 

[PaulP]

You know in some ways this referendum may have some positive effects.

One of my main concerns was the level of disappointment that a 'No' vote would have on many first nations people who will be naturally be disppointed by the result.

But it's now firmly on the agenda.
I can see Voice committees being established at various levels of government.
Even those politicians advocating a 'No' vote were at pains to say that whatever the result there were indigenous issues that need addressing.
We'll see how their words will translate into actions.

Again....the important thing is not the voice...it's listening to it, and acting on it.

Well, I guess we'll know in the next decade or so. I'm not hopeful, because I think all these committees you refer to are essentially a way of dragging the discussion on and on, to ensure that nothing actually gets done. Just constantly delaying any action for as long as humanly possible. Traditionally Labor governments are reform governments, and history in our country shows very clearly that people don't like reform.

[Lods]

As for needing 'Ears' - ears can listen, but it doesn't mean they understand.  It's the last bit we need to get a better handle on.

Yep
It's not like these issues aren't there in front of our eyes.
As someone who worked in Juvenile Justice I spent just about every day of my 40 year career working with indigenous young people....with added contact from parents, elders, teachers, aides.
The disproportionate rate of incarceration of young indigenous boys and girls, and the knowledge of the influences that led to those rates of incarceration isn't rocket science.
It's well known and understood.
The educational gaps in terms of school missed often presented as fourteen and fifteen year old kids unable to read.
Add to that the health issues that were often more apparent in young indigenous kids... hearing and eyesight issues that weren't addressed until their incarceration
And those were the ones that were in  a custodial situation
Now translate to an adult population and you can understand the very real issues.

Governments have a huge task and responsibility...but in the end it comes down to a willingness to tackle those issues.
They don't need to be told...they know!

[northernblue]

If there was a election tomorrow and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price was running for PM, I'd vote for her in a heat beat. I'd not  heard much about her prior to the Voice debate, what a breath of fresh air, the future of Australian politics I reckon. Thoughts?

Follow her a bit closer… she is incapable of reaching any type of consensus, she’s trump like.
Constantly verbally brawling and tossing mud/accusations left, right and centre.
I expect my politicians to represent everyone, whether they are supporters or not.

[northernblue]

Why so you say that?  Because no won?  This doesn't make the country against indigenous affairs or for it.  It makes the nation unconvinced that the yes no referendum would make any difference and would simply lead to another mouth feeding at the trough of politics. 

Another one who seems to think that the outcome of a poorly articulated and scoped referendum not getting up says more about the public than those in parliament proposing this rubbish.

What were we actually voting for?  The answer is nothing. It's wel known that the indigenous people don't have one united voice.  They have multiple languages, tribes, and people.  One voice was never going to be sufficient but i heard from the minister of Indigenous affairs last week, and instantly thought to myself should this seat not be our indigenous voice to parliament?

What about the democratic process means the indigenous people have no voice?

What is stopping the indigenous people from forming a party for this reason and running for election?

We are currently in the midst of one of the poorest economic situations the country has seen during my lifetime, and we have just thrown 100s of millions away on a referendum that has no scope.

That is political suicide.

I voted no for most of the reasons you’ve just expressed, particularly the new group of snouts in the trough, the last thing this country needs.
I also agree that Aboriginal people of the NT have plenty of opportunity to get representation by voting.

On a side note, I have actually been blocked by ABC Darwin on fb, it would seem that my suggestion that gov can never be wholly responsible for people and their lives and that they as a community must accept personal responsibility for the alcoholism, rampant drug use and child neglect.

[ElwoodBlues1]

Probably a bad time for a referendum with a cost of living crisis and when Governments are asking voters to vote a certain away the natural reaction from many doing it tough would be to vote the opposite because Governments and Politicians are doing nothing for them and cant be trusted.
Doesnt help either when you have media like Ray Martin calling older folk Dinasours and Dheads if they cant understand the question or find the answers to questions. It was an expensive marketing fail and it should have been legislated in Parliament first where it could be tested, fine tuned, shown to be working and then taken to the people at a later date for constitutional recognition where it would have had more chance of being successful imho.

[dodge]

For me, the 250 representatives that formed the Uluru Statement that suggested the Voice was a sign of indigenous unity.  I think the LNP pretty well said no straight away. (Except for the Indigenous Affairs Minister of the day.)

The indigenous unity didn't exist during the campaign - where did it go or was the Uluru statement not representative?

From this base, it was easy for the no campaign.  Hard for the yes, particularly as they needed to be very precise and articulate about what the voice is and the benefits of it and weren't that at all.

As bipartisan support was really required for success,  it was probably doomed early on.

Be interesting to see what action will now be taken to help close the gap - which the latest report shows a few outcomes improving, a few going backwards, a number without measurement (higher education/ employment) and some neutral.  A number are not on track to meet goals by 2030.

I wait with bated breath.

[PaulP]

Discussions around constitutional recognition for our First Nations people were happening 100 years ago. And what’s the result of a century of stop start, on off discussions ? A resounding no vote. Well, you can’t rush these things I guess. We clearly need a few more select committees, another dozen or so advisory groups, a parliamentary committee or two, and then, most importantly, some thinking time. Maybe in 100 years we can have another referendum.

As watered down and wussy as the Voice was , it’s still better than nothing, and still better than what we have now.  A unique moment in history, and what do we serve up ? A swing and a miss. Well played.