Foxy, give us evidence there will be no High Court Challenges to Governments. It is easy to say these words but hear what the founders mean by the Voice, not what Albanese says. They ultimately want treaty and sovereignty, and the ABC and SBS are supporting them in this. With the claim this is aboriginal land stolen from them by war

Josephus,

Read the report presented to parliament.
The details are in it.

Foxy,

I have read the report and there is nothing in there to protect against activist Judges

"They ultimately want treaty and sovereignty, and the ABC and SBS are supporting them in this."
- They probably want rent, reparations and veto power on any policy we make or where we can and can't build things as well.

Truthfully, I'm not sure their collective resentment will ever be satisfied until what was done to them decades ago, is repaid in kind and done to us.
- But honestly that 'collective resentment' they hold, was it not us that started it?
(By that I mean the British 200 years ago, not the 'us' of today)

"With the claim this is aboriginal land stolen from them by war"

- Their claim? What about yours?
- Are you 'claiming' that's untrue and it didn't happen?
- Are you 'claiming' that we came here first, and that they came here afterwards, and are making false 'claims'?
Are you 'claiming' we didn't take their aboriginal land?
Are you 'claiming' the Frontier Wars didn't happen?
Are you 'claiming' we always treated them with the utmost respect, decency and dignity?

Who's responsible for their suffering?
Was it you or me?

I think the right path must recognise the wrongs of the past and that what was done to them was unfair.
- But I think it should also recognise the new realities as they now exist today.

I don't support the idea of a 'chosen people'
We should stick to '1 person, 1 vote - Equal rights for all'
- I don't think they should be afforded any permanent special treatment, but maybe there is a need for a 'final settlement', and better regional services.
Right now, no-one is actually stopping them from organising their own representative group to speak on their behalf or to have a say on matters that are in their best interests.
They need to DO THIS themselves, FOR themselves.
- Not have a right to special treatment enshrined in the constitution.

SM,

All 272 pages have you. Pray tell what part of the report brought you to the conclusion that we were not protected from these "activist judges". page 137, or was it on page 226? Hummmmmmmmm.

BTW, who are these "activist judges" you refer to?

shadowminister,

Have you really read the report? Or do you mean you've
read "The Spectator?"

Because had you read the report you would have read the
explanation that the Indigenous Voice is part of an
integrated system and it will work within the established
boundaries regarding consultation and engagement.