With the Voice to Parliament Referendum date announced to be October 14 2023, this thread will run in the lead up to the date for general discussions/queries regarding the Voice to Parliament.

The Proposed Constitutional Amendment

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:

there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice; the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.

Past Discussions

Here are some previous posts in this community regarding the referendum:

Common Misinformation

  • "The Uluru Statement from the Heart is 26 Pages not 1" - not true

Government Information

Amendments to this post

If you would like to see some other articles or posts linked here please let me know and I'll try to add it as soon as possible.

  1. Added the proposed constitutional amendment (31/08/2023)
  2. Added Common Misinformation section (01/07/2023)

Discussion / Rules

Please follow the rules in the sidebar and for aussie.zone in general. Anything deemed to be misinformation or with malicious intent will be removed at moderators' discretion. This is a safe space to discuss your opinion on the voice or ask general questions.

Please continue posting news articles as separate posts but consider adding a link to this post to encourage discussion.

  • gorkette@aussie.zone
    ·
    1 year ago

    Just to point out, racism does not have to be negative treatment. Racism just has to be inequitable. The proposed amendment creates a system for Indigenous Australians, which is unavailable to other Australians. That is inequitable.

    The changes needed can be achieved without a Constitutional amendment.

    • Marin_Rider@aussie.zone
      ·
      1 year ago

      The changes needed can be achieved without a Constitutional amendment.

      and removed next term when the next quasi fascist gets elected.

      frankly im a little sick of the 'no' side claiming the Voice will both do nothing, but simultaneously cause some sort of irrepairable divide that will destroy the nation.

      And every. single. cooker. is loudly vocally on the No side. Which makes it an easy choice for me

      • Ban DHMO 🇦🇺@aussie.zone
        hexagon
        M
        ·
        1 year ago

        Insulting people and labelling people with whom you disagree doesn't foster good discussion and only emboldens their position

            • Marin_Rider@aussie.zone
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              edit: dont worry just thinking out loud, my intention wasnt to derail the thread and on thought this thread should be a place for discussing the voice not the riff raff. apologies

              • Ban DHMO 🇦🇺@aussie.zone
                hexagon
                M
                ·
                1 year ago

                Thanks for asking for feedback. The bit about cookers is worded a bit vaguely in such a way that it is unclear whether the converse is implied, that is, every vocal no voter is a cooker or a significant portion of vocal 'no' voters are cookers. And to be honest I do agree with that - just look at The Guardian's fact checking of the official 'No' essay, most of it was made up. It's just that using the term 'cooker' is probably not the most respectful way to convey that

      • Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone
        ·
        1 year ago

        and removed next term when the next quasi fascist gets elected.

        Come on, this is just FUD, plain and simple.

        If the voice does turn out to be a white elephant, then we should have the flexibility to remove it and try again with a different model. I'm 100% on board with the Government of the day legislating a body, but I don't believe it should be in the constution, and I doubt I'm the only one.

        Using inflammatory language is not the way to try and convince people one way or the other.

          • Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of course that's an option in theory - but in practice, referendums are incredibly expensive operations, not to mention generally damaging to public discourse of other issues.

            Most Governments would prefer to just reduce any funding for the body down to the bare minimum required, and have it sit impotently to the side, rather than front up and say 'yeah nah, this didn't work, so here's another big money spend to fix the constitutional issue we created while we think of something else'.

            • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
              ·
              1 year ago

              But but that logic, it’s either not bad enough to be worth removing, or the government of the day has no real need to remove it.

              Ergo, it being in the constitution is not really a problem.

              • Paradoxvoid@aussie.zone
                ·
                1 year ago

                The government only has no real need to remove it if they're happy with the status quo regarding inequality - they can still point to the (presumingly failed) body and say 'we tried' and not bother with something better.

      • Commiejones [comrade/them, he/him]
        ·
        1 year ago

        and removed next term when the next quasi fascist gets elected.

        nothing in the referendum stops that if you actually read it.

    • Dalek Thal@aussie.zone
      ·
      1 year ago

      this is inequitable

      Not what equity means. Equity refers to equal access to the same opportunities. Put simply, due to their post-genocide, White Australia Policy and "Breeding out the Black" (real campaign) numbers, Indigenous Australians completely lack representation in Parliament. Therefore they lack access to the opportunities your average Australian (regardless of race) has. An Indigenous Voice to Parliament will make things more equitable, not less, as it will provide access to the same opportunities of representation that the rest of us have already.

      • Cypher@aussie.zone
        ·
        1 year ago

        Indigenous Australians completely lack representation in Parliament

        There are Indigenous Australians in Parliament so this cannot be true.

        it will provide access to the same opportunities of representation that the rest of us have already

        I get a vote and that's it, Indigenous Australians also get a vote.

        Sounds like the same opportunity for representation to me.

        • Nonameuser678@aussie.zone
          ·
          1 year ago

          These parliamentarians don't necessarily represent or advocate for Indigenous Australians as they represent everyone in their electorate. Anthony Albanese doesn't just represent the Italians in his electorate, he represents everyone. That's how majority based systems work. The majority based system is a problem when you have a minority group who are so disadvantaged and have limited ways of having their voices heard. Especially when it's about policies and laws that affect them specifically.

    • tristan@aussie.zone
      ·
      1 year ago

      which is unavailable to other Australians

      Perhaps you should look up just how many existing governmental advisory bodies there are that have zero relation to the indigenous population. Maybe we should go and revoke them, you know, for equality

    • Ilandar@aussie.zone
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think you need to look up the definition of equity with regards to human rights. You have it completely the wrong way around.