Dear Josephus,

I see a forum like this as an opportunity to give your opinion and to hear the opinion of others, which is what I see here. I certainly appreciate the efforts people make here regardless of whether I agree with them. It has special relevance for me when I think of the implications of dividing Australian democracy on the basis of racial heritage. This KC at least thinks the need for the Voice is unfounded.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwKGf9dik1c

.

Dear Fester,

.

It’s interesting to see that Libby Mettam, the Liberal Party leader for WA has had second thoughts on the Voice vote. Given the extraordinary botch-up of the WA government’s new Aboriginal cultural heritage laws, it’s no wonder she has decided to run for cover – once bitten, twice shy !

She has lost faith in legislators but continues to support indigenous recognition in the constitution.

She insists “This is a great opportunity to get this right” but regrets the lack of details on the makeup of the Voice, whether the members of the committee would be elected or selected, how it would lead to practical outcomes on the ground … “What we can't afford is the absolute confusion and mess we have experienced here in WA with the Labor government in respect of the Aboriginal culture heritage laws”.

She has a point there. What is best? Work out all the details before or after the vote. Judging from the recent disastrous experience in WA, Libby Mettam says to get it right it must be before the vote.

Maybe, but I’m sure the federal government and its three advisory groups have given serious consideration, precisely, to that important question:

1. First Nations Referendum Working Group (20 members)
2. First Nations Referendum Engagement Group (40 members)
3. Constitutional Expert Group (8 members)

The Working Group, in particular, is charged with :

• the timing of the referendum
• the wording of the constitutional amendment and question
• information about the principles of the Voice.

I am equally sure the federal government and all 68 members of the three advisory groups are fully aware of the humiliating failure of the WA Labor government to foresee the dramatic negative effects of their proposed new Aboriginal cultural heritage laws prior to adoption.

Apparently, the WA Nationals leader Mia Davies maintains her support for the YES vote.

And, who knows, perhaps the liberal leader might eventually realise that the WA Labor government has sounded alarm bells for the federal Labor government, and change her mind once again.

.

Foxy,

"One of the nation’s leading silks has warned that the referendum on the proposed Indigenous voice to parliament is vulnerable to legal challenge in the High Court because it misleads voters.

Stuart Wood KC has produced a legal opinion that says the referendum question fails to state the core function of the proposed Indigenous voice to parliament and the executive.

Instead, the question that will be presented to voters emphasised the notion of constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

In an opinion written jointly with barristers Paul Jeffreys and Jakub Patela, Mr Wood states that the emphasis in the referendum question on constitutional recognition is significant because there is differential support among electors for recognition and the proposed voice.

“In our view, the government’s proposed question misleads and misinforms voters about what they are being asked to approve,” they write.

Their opinion, which was commissioned by the Institute of Public Affairs, says the referendum question is seriously deficient and “will be open to challenge by seeking relevant relief”.

Foxy,

While you constantly claim that I am misleading you have yet to provide anything that proves that I am wrong instead you provide links to "yes" proponents' opinion pages.

If you have done research then it is clear that it was filtered to avoid inconvenient truths.

As I came out against the voice long before Dutton, perhaps he is following me

.

Here is an interesting article on Australia's lobbying laws :

http://insidestory.org.au/flying-high/

.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/ng-interactive/2023/aug/14/indigenous-voice-to-parliament-poll-results-polling-latest-opinion-polls-referendum-tracker-newspoll-essential-yougov-news-by-state-australia

This shows it all. The question is whether Albozo will survive this rejection at the polls.