The last federal election results showed us the direction
in which people want the country to go. As did the state
election in Victoria. Australians usually do get things
right at the ballot box.

We're not entitled to our opinions
when those opinions are factually wrong. They should and
usually are called out by rational people on this forum.
The selective few who keep complaining when called out -
only have themselves to blame. If they don't like the
facts being provided they can of course improve.
Although I suspect that some don't have the capabilities
to improve therefore they resort to personal insults.

That's par for the course on public forums and social
media.

As for The Voice to Parliament?

There will be interesting times ahead to see how many
Australians do support it. And just as with same-sex marriage,
I'm sure that most Australians will have a collective
rejection of the racism experienced by our First Nations Peoples
for hundreds of years.

Most Australians will see the need to get rid of this unjust
power effecting our First citizens and effectively stripping
them in the land of their birth.

I have full confidence in Australians to finally do the right thing.

Even the Spectator is allowing Peter Dutton to get away with doing nothing, saying that the softies letter to Ockernese demanding details of the loathsome Voice is "a welcome and well-timed development "

Pig's ribs! Dutton should be vigorously opposing it.

A proper and detailed and clear purpose must be given to every voter as it involves the changing of out Constuction. Just voting on a Yes / No vote without every voter reading its details, just means Trust the Politicians.

Dutton's 15 questions about the Indigenous Voice to Parliament
1. Who will be eligible to serve on the body

2. What are the prerequisites for nomination?

3. Will the Government clarify the definition of Aboriginality to determine who can serve on the body?

4.How will members be elected, chosen or appointed?

5. How many people will make up the body

6. How much will it cost taxpayers annually?

7. What are its functions and powers?

8. Is it purely advisory or will it have decision-making capabilities?

9. Who will oversee the body and ensure it is accountable?

10.If needed, can the body be dissolved and reconstituted in extraordinary circumstances?

11. How will the Government ensure that the body includes those who still need to get a platform in Australian public life?

12. How will it interact with the Closing of the Gap process?

13. Will the Government rule out using the Voice to negotiate any national treaty?

14. Will the Government commit to Local and Regional Voices, as recommended in the report on the co-design process led by Tom Calma and Marcia Langton?

15.If not, how will it effectively address the real issues that impact people's lives daily on the ground in the community?

Sky News tells us that most people are over the
cheap culture war stunts. That even Liberal backbenchers
are arguing that MPs should be able to decide for
themselves if they want to support or oppose The Voice instead
of a forced unified and binding position. After all the
Liberal Party is supposed to be a "broad church."

Therefore Mr Dutton's claims are not adding to a good lock.
And are coming across as only attempts at stirring and
being divisive - showing just how out of touch he really is.

He's looking irrelevant because not only was a detailed
report present to Parliament ages ago but the Labor
government will launch a "week of action in February to
effectively launch their "Yes" campaign for the
constitutionally enshrined Indigenous Voice.

Supporters of The Voice will also engage in various
community activities such as barbeques and door-knocking
to further raise awareness and momentum and provide even
more detail ahead of this year's referendum.

If Mr Dutton wants to be taken seriously - like some people
on this forum, he needs to get his facts straight.

WTF?

ttbn states: "...who will be thinking about what they read here when they vote."

I would state it as a question: "Who will be thinking about what they read here when they vote?"

As a total - probably not many. Most younger voters will be getting their information elsewhere.

I think many political commentors are out of touch with the public mind-set.

The TEALS rolling the Liberal party on their home turf. "Dictator Dan" getting the nod of approval.

The look of stunned silence on the face of an almost catatonic Peta Credin on Victorian election night just shows how out of touch with the public political commentators can be.

One thing that might help is the recognition of history. We could start with the War Memorial. The War Memorial is supposed to be a recognition of Australia's wars. Land was given to the settlers of Australia regardless of the connection of Aborigines with the land. There was a war to complete the dispossession of the Aborigines. That was Australia's original sin, and it should be recognised in the War Memorial. The slaughters of Aborigines should also be noted as these slaughters were a continuation of the original war of dispossession. The Aborigines demand for a separate voice is in part due to the recognition of what has been their fate during much of the history of Australia. An alien religion has been imposed on them. An alien language has been imposed on them. An alien culture has been imposed on them. Australia now has members of various ethnic groups. With the exception of the Aborigines they have not been denied their languages, culture and religion except during the first few years of English settlement where the only recognised religion was the Church of England.