Foxy,

There are vast numbers of sanctimonious morons on the YES side, each telling NO voters what they think the "voice" is.

The problem is that the question in the referendum is so vague as to be a blank cheque and given Labor's record of lying to the voters there is a lot of healthy skepticism.

The question needs to be longer and define exactly the limits to the voice before anyone will believe Labor otherwise the outcome is just an assumption.

Dear Foxy,

To reiterate, you have allowed yourself to be mislead about the length of the Uluru statement by a psychological technique studied by Stanley Milgram, whereby an authority figure can override the evidence before you.

My suggestion is that you look at the evidence forming the opinions rather than the "fact checks". You could get pointers to the evidence for the Uluru statement being longer than a page from Peta Credlin's defence of her claim:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qAWIzOk_0c

Alternatively Foxy, you could visit the ABC, that illustrious organisation that ran a "fact check" showing that the Uluru statement was only one page, and listen for yourself to Megan Davis saying that the statement was much longer (from about 33 minutes if you don't want to listen to the whole thing).

https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/bigideas/indigenous-recognition-as-a-step-towards-an-australian-republic/10772592

.

Dear mhaze,

.

You wrote :

« The question has already been decided and legislated.... »
.

That’s correct, mhaze, the federal parliament passed the Constitution Alteration Bill on Monday 19 June 2023.

Here are the details :

http://www.niaa.gov.au/indigenous-affairs/referendum-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-voice

We’ll just have to wait to see how it is presented on the ballot papers.

If, miraculously and against all odds, the referendum passes, the Voice will have to be created and submitted to Parliament for legislative approval.

The business plan is that of a well-structured professional lobby :

1. make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples

2. make representations proactively

3. respond to requests for representations from the Parliament and the Executive Government.

4. have its own resources to allow it to research, develop and make representations.

5. The Parliament and Executive Government should seek representations in writing from the Voice early in the development of proposed laws and policies

Perhaps they will hire some of our former political leaders to advise and assist them to do their lobbying as the supermarket chains do.

Coles, for example, is represented by both ECG Consulting and Bespoke Approach, while its own parent company, Wesfarmers, has former West Australian premier Alan Carpenter in charge of corporate affairs. Woolworths has a government relations team composed of former Labor and Liberal advisers, under the direction of a former leader of the National Party, Andrew Hall. Aldi engages GRA (Government Relations Australia), one of Australia's largest lobbying firms, whose staff includes former Federal Labor treasurer, John Dawkins.

Peter Costello is one of the many former politicians and staffers working in lobby firms. Former Howard chief-of-staff Grahame Morris is director of Barton Deakin Government Relations.

Since the 1980s, lobbying in Australia has grown from a small industry of a few hundred employees to a multi-billion dollar per year industry employing more than 10,000 people representing every facet of human interest and activity.

The Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) activists include every prime minister we ever had, from John Howard to Scott Morrison.

.

Fester,
I had to stop reading the link you provided. It is so coloured in that it becomes painful to read to someone who has actually experienced living with indigenous & pseudo-indigenous. It is a total distortion of any possible truth or fact. It'd make a great novel but not a historical document !
I can see how it would appeal to city dwelling ignoramuses but then again, the report is made up by such people. I'm afraid that by knowing a few of the people pushing the Voice, just reading a couple of sections in this report has totally convinced me of the lack of integrity of the Voice movement !

Foxy on 13/8...
"Ignore the Ad Hominem attack.

A typical tactic used by many on discussion forums such as this
one. Instead of addressing someone's
argument or position - another poster irrelevantly attacks the
person or some aspect of the person who's making the
argument. It shows this poster unfortunately, is not capable of higher-level thinking."

Foxy on 19/8....
"Speaking of morons?

We all should have zero tolerance for sanctimonius morons
who try to scare people with lies and misinformation.
It;s extraordinary how many morons there are in the
NO campaign in both number and depth of moronity."

Schizophrenia? Two Foxys in the group? Hypocrisy?

Indyvidual,

I am glad you found the link useful. I was looking for some links from the yes camp that suggested the Uluru statement was longer than a page. As for Peta Credlin's suggestion that Mr Albanese intended to implement the statement in full, I suspect that the truth is that he was unaware that the statement was longer than a page, which is perhaps more embarrassing.

As for the plight of indigenous Australians in remote areas, I am more in the camp believing that the problems are not about the lack of a voice, but the lack of accountability.