I hope you do not have David Marr's burden - blood on the hands of forbears engaged in the "dispersal" of the original inhabitants of this land.

With David Marr has put a bullet through the righteousness of guilt- hiding.

If the Voice gets up one of the jarring aspects will be the emboldening of resource veto attempts. With the multibillion dollar Scarborough gas field 375 km offshore one person seemingly not of the hunter gatherer type has stopped further exploration. Seismic testing will apparently ruin the song lines of the whales. The Eyre Peninsula nuclear waste facility had the approval of most people who actually lived nearby and so far $86m has been spent on it. Now cancelled because spirits apparently inhabit the area.

It wouldn't be so bad if the protagonists took a large funding cut in recognition of their demands. As it is they want more money the same time as preventing wealth creation. If the Voice succeeds that will be just the beginning.

Just vote.

Not necessarily, but I'll hold judgement until voting day.
Alan B.

Who gives a toss..don’t vote, reality is, you’re not invited to the circus, the result is a foregone conclusion.

The AEC has ticked off voting in multiple booths as acceptable, (it’s actually illegal), but not on this great occasion apparently, so I read in a foreign news outlet which covers some Au news events.

.

Dear Viv (the author),

.

You wrote :

« I will be voting “NO” »
.

Well, if you do, Viv, that will make it one all.

I just voted YES at the Australian embassy here in Paris.

To tell you the truth, Viv, even if you don’t vote, I’m afraid it won’t make any difference. The failure rate of referendums to modify our old colonial Constitution is 82%. The YES vote is a real outsider, a long shot with only an 18% chance of pulling it off. So, I wouldn’t worry about it if I were you.

You can go fishing or whatever.

In fact, this historic referendum has a greater handicap than all the previous ones that failed. As I'm sure you are aware, most people interviewed by the media say they don’t know what it’s all about. They don’t understand it. Many say they didn’t even know they had to vote.

The general opinion seems to be that it’s probably just another hand-out to our already far too generously subsidised Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander “bludgers”, “profiteers” and the like.

The brevity of the referendum question without the slightest explication is hardly conducive to a positive reply. There is an evident lack of relevant information and easily comprehensible explication for people to be able to make an informed decision that is pertinent to the issue at hand.

Our natural reaction to that, of course, is, as usual, to put the blame on the government, but the government's hands are tied when it comes to national referendums to change the Constitution. Part 11 (4) of the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984, prohibits the government from spending public money in favour of, or against, the referendum proposal.

What the law does require is for the government to fund neutral civics education and awareness programs on the Voice to Parliament. These programs are required by law to remain neutral and may not promote one campaign over another.

Nothing we can do about that, I'm afraid, so :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NY2IpSCV-Nk&ab_channel=PolinaFig%C5%82owska

.

How many Yes supporters come from revenue creating circles ?

Well said Viv. We are all Australians, equal and responsible for one another. The Voice is about enshrining "them and us" and "we were here first" in the Constitution. All that is missing is "go back to where you came from". The Voice will encourage indigenous Australians to distance themselves from other Australians.

There is no place for a race based hierarchy in this nation. The Voice should be rejected.

Fester away as you might, but Oz was founded on race.

My message to Chinese Australians might shed some light for you.

https://johnmenadue.com/will-chinese-australians-take-the-moral-high-ground-again/

Oz was founded on race.
Chek,
Yes, what else did you expect ? And, as soon as the indigenous stepped up from & out of their time lock they were included !
Seems like inclusion is not accepted by you ?

And begin a new journey to find a peaceful restitution to the heirs of the original inhabitants of this land.
Is that too much to ask?
Chek,
Of course it is not. However, is too much to ask for clarity of this proposal called TheVoice ?
Is it too much too ask for clarification in cases of obviously doubtful claims of descendance ?
Is it too much to ask for the planned policies to be put up front ?
Is it too much to ask to be enlightened as to what people are requested to approve of ?
Recognition as I said above is a no brainer, not signing a blank policy document is also a no brainer !

Chek,
I forgot to ask you, do you think it a valid question to ask why the NIAA couldn't take the place of the Voice ?
Would the efforts & finances used for the Voice have been more effective & positive to make the NIAA do their job ?

What the law does require is for the government to fund neutral civics education and awareness programs on the Voice to Parliament.
Banjo Paterson,
Wrong on all accounts. It's the real agenda behind the Voice that puts a lot of decent people off.
Also, many are still waiting for someone from the NIAA to explain to us why the NIAA hasn't long ago taken on the role of a Voice.
I have been told a few times by indigenous what the activists are really aiming for but if I quote it here I'll be instantly & again branded racist by our resident racists !

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

As you know, I have already voted YES and it was not just for the benefit of any so-called activists and what they might be fomenting behind the scenes.

There are people everywhere in all walks of life who indulge in activism of some sort, just as there are all sorts of experts in all sorts of domains of science and the humanities who indulge in all sorts of research.

Bot just as most experts who spend all their working lives doing research never actually succeed in finding anything of any real significance, so it is for most activists.

Activists are a small and often insignificant minority whose principal if not sole achievement is usually to create a nuisance.

Their presence is inevitable, whatever the cause. We just have to take their activism in our stride and deal with it.

.

Their presence is inevitable, whatever the cause. We just have to take their activism in our stride and deal with it.
Banjo Paterson,
Totally agree, that's why the Voice will not work as it is purely the domain of activists ! These people will or rather can not solve discrimination whilst causing more !
My consistent argument is that the NIAA has failed & the Voice is merely a more costly & socially divisive NIAA.
Ideology sounds great on paper however, in reality ideology has & is & will cause discrimination wherever & whenever it has involvement ! Why ? Because people will not care about others if they're brought up not to care ! Ideology is talking about care & practicing selfishness !

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

You wrote :

« Totally agree, that's why the Voice will not work as it is purely the domain of activists ! »
.

I’m afraid you have been very badly misinformed, Indyvidual.

Around 300 Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders gathered at Uluru in 2017 to hold a First Nations Convention. Running over four days, the meeting was the culmination of 12 regional dialogues held across the country on the constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians.

The Convention was the final step in the long-running debate on the constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians. It was organised by the Referendum Council, a body jointly established by Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten in December 2015. The council was tasked with providing advice on progress and next steps toward constitutional reform.

Each regional dialogue meeting was capped at 100 participants. 60% of places for traditional owner groups; 20% for community organisations; and 20% for key individuals. A balance was sought between gender and age groups. Representation for the Stolen Generations was also key.

The council worked in partnership with a host organisation at each location to ensure the local community was appropriately represented in the process.

The dialogues were conducted as a deliberative forum. Each took place over three days and included large and small group discussions.

The Referendum Council assisted delegates by providing information on the Constitution and the history of constitutional reform. This allowed delegates to discuss and assess different reform options in an informed manner, and to explain what recognition would mean for their communities.

At the end of the three days, the delegates of each regional dialogue issued a report on their discussion and selected ten representatives for the Uluru meeting.

This has been a very long and well-organised process, Indyvidual, involving not only thousands of indigenous people but also many non-indigenous people who were consulted by a parliamentary committee that reported on the issue in 2015.

The result of the process was the Uluru Statement from the Heart calling for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution.

.

Banjo Paterson,
I'm afraid my personal experiences with all things idealistic & bureaucratic does not allow me to let me get sucked in by rhetoric that is all about demands but totally ignores responsibility.
Why, even you have chosen not to comment on the NIAA which was actually the crux of my previous post.
Do you expect for the NIAA to get disbanded if the Voice succeeds or do you approve of maintaining the course of two wrongs should be expected to make a Right. Do you expect the same rather wealthy indigenous in positions of authority alongside non-indigenous of the same calibre to continue despite the proven managerial ineffectiveness.
I have absolutely no reservations to vote Yes for anything that is helping to build a more cohesive society rather than a splintered one such as the one that is now in the making.
Start talking responsibility ! Anything else is simply more of the same increasing !

this historic referendum has a greater handicap
Banjo Paterson,
It does not have a greater handicap. It is a handicap ! A hurdle that is already procreating !
No matter what the outcome from the polls, the seeds of discontent are already sprouting !
One just has to look at where the support for Yes comes from.

.

Dear Indyvidual,

.

I understand your frustration and disappointment.

Managing indigenous affairs is no easy task It’s complex. It’s important, and it’s human, very human. It’s about clearing up the mess, repairing the damage, and restoring the dignity of humanity’s oldest continuing culture. Many have tried and many have failed.

Does that mean we should give up ? I don’t think so, Indyvidual. As long as I live, I will do what I can to encourage those in responsibility.

I don’t pretend to know any better than those who have failed. I don’t think there is any recipe for success. I think it’s a matter of trial and error until we get it right.

From all reports, the current referendum is destined to fail which is a pity. We just have to keep on trying, and in the meantime, do whatever we can to improve things.

Every little success, however modest, is better than doing nothing.

That's how I see it, Indyvidual.

.

Thank you Banjo.

What a gentle and generous spirit.