Australia's chief legal counsel, Solicitor General
Dr Stephen Donaghue KC has stated the constitutional
amendment for the Voice does "not pose an threat" to
Australia's system of representative government.

In his advice on the Voice Dr Donaghue KC said the
Voice would have no power to make laws, to develop, or
administer policies or to decide disputes. He said the
Voice would operate only as an advisory body to parliament
and government and clearly has no power of veto.

Also The Constitutional Expert Group comprising senior
legal experts who provided advice to the government on
the Voice process said quite clearly in a communique
last year that the Voice would have no veto power.

Any one falling for misinformation is simply stirring and
should do their research.

This talk from John Anderson is a nice summary of the reason why clear-headed thinkers are opposed to the Voice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uH4Qx-QNaPg&t=91s

There's much in this that the unthinking 'Yes' supporters will find surprising and, if they watch it with an open mind, unsettling. But that, of course won't apply to our little band on pro-'Yes' flying-monkeys.

I found this observation most insightful....The Voice won't "achieve anything positive beyond the short-lived rush of joy for those in favour of it".

The rush of joy is, after all, what, for many, is the point.

And what has been achieved by our governments thus far
for our Indigenous people?

Perhaps listening to their advice might produce better results
than what has been attempted.

You think?

If we keep doing what we've done thus far - we'll
keep getting the same results.

Trying something new just may be worth it.

"Perhaps listening to their advice might produce better results
than what has been attempted."

So, obviously you didn't watch the Anderson talk which addressed that very issue. Pretty much what I expected.

SR,

Don't be such a racist idiot. Justice Callinan has aligned himself with those who are arguing against the current wording for the Voice referendum because they see potential overreach. So has ex-chief Justice Brennan.

I know that you lack the IQ to understand this, but the proposed wording for the referendum is sufficiently vague to completely screw up the government for generations.

This is a huge overreach from a PM that has already lied to the voters