“The current push for recognition of indigenous Australians in the Commonwealth Constitution is unrealistic and therefore unwise”. (Nicholas Hasluck addressing the Samuel Griffith Society).

Points made:

1. There has been a paucity of consultation with the the general public.
2. There is the prospect of disharmony if any 'special entitlement' BASED ON RACE is entrenched in the Constitution.
3. The process has not captured the imagination of the Australian community.
4. The current inability for governments to govern decisively, thanks to the Senate, would put the public against another interfering advisory body.
5. There is, and would be, an increased propensity for people to identify with an indigenous background.
6. Treaties suggest separate development.

Toni,

Yes, I suspect that governments always liaise with the Indigenous population only through the self-appointed 'leadership' of Indigenous organisations, and self-appointed spokespeople - but there isn't much interaction between many urban Indigenous people and the organisations which purport to represent them. Perhaps, what is needed before any national referendum is a sort of Indigenous-only plebiscite about what people rally think and want.

I recall that elections were often won during the days of ATSIC with only twenty votes cast for a successful candidate, and that total participation in such elections was pitifully low, perhaps 10%. Urban people thought that ATSIC focussed on remote populations, and remote populations thought that it focussed on urban populations - i.e. somewhere else but not here.

Of curse, the elites, the organisational 'leaders' differ, since any push for things like an advisory council would mean the massive multiplication of local, regional and state advisory bodies, and therefore sitting fees. Meanwhile, how many Indigenous parliamentary representatives are there already ? I don't know, but twenty or thirty ? Ministers in governments ? i.e. in WA (Treasurer), in SA, Qld, the NT at least, and in the national parliament. That's called 'voice'.

So why isn't the current Indigenous Advisory Council more active ? Why isn't it doing its job ?

Joe

Foxy,

I liked this quote from that book of Attwood's:

"“… many Aboriginal people believe that ‘genocide’ is an appropriate word for remembering their historical experience. It amounts to a truthful myth, and they tell the story in this manner.”

Attwood italicises the words ' experience' and 'myth' in that passage. I'm not sure how people can 'experience' something which is supposed to have happened long before they were born, but there you go. And what is a 'truthful myth' ? Does Attwood mean a 'convenient myth' ? A 'myth which backs up what I am asserting, without the need for pesky 'evidence' ?

A courtroom with only defence lawyers, or only prosecution lawyers, is not a court. One needs a judge and maybe a jury. That's us, Foxy, the people who need to see the evidence for any accusation before we weigh up the evidence for and against, to test what is fabricated and what is genuine and fairly conclusive. Otherwise we have the old Scottish verdict of 'Not Proven'. Narrative alone won't cut it. No Narrative should, without back-up evidence. Passion and belief isn't enough - surely enough witches were drowned or burnt during the Middle Ages on those grounds alone ? Evidence, corroboration, is what we desperately need.

We're not living in the Middle Ages any more - we need more than 'truthful myths'.

Joe

Dear Joe,

Let me make sure that I understand you.

I take it that you are against an Indigenous Voice
to Parliament because you believe that there is
insufficient evidence for their historical claims
(aka Keith Windschuttle).

Then there's nothing more to discuss.

Cheers.

If Foxy is to be believed there is something going very wrong with the representatives elected for the three levels of government and federally two chambers, the House of Representatives and the Senate. They must not be doing the job they were elected to do.

At State level, taking Qld as an example we find,
'Everyone's Parliament'

http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/explore/education/factsheets/Factsheet_3.17_RoleOfMemberParliament.pdf

and federal,
'Infosheet 15 - The work of a Member of Parliament'

http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/House_of_Representatives/Powers_practice_and_procedure/00_-_Infosheets/Infosheet_15_-_The_work_of_a_Member_of_Parliament

Those are the available standards in layman's terms.

So Foxy, where exactly are all of those hundreds of elected representatives who are responsible to the Parliament and to the electorate falling down and are there any already available avenues to advise them of that and seek correction?

Foxy, i read that link and as much as I admire Pearsons zeal and passion for his cause, in this case he hasn't made a convincing argument. Even he, with all his experience and education has only been able to use the issue of land rights in relation to the need for an indigenous voice. And I agree, this is an area that needs some decisive action taken, with advice from indigenous people. But we already have an advisory indigenous council and once the land rights issue is finally resolved, what need is there for any constitutional change?
He mentions the gap that still exists in education and health but part of that gap actually exists because of wrong decisions made by indigenous people. The focus on special education programs for indigenous kids has not led to any major improvements in rural areas but I guarantee an all out focus on actually getting kids to school every day and requiring aboriginal teachers to have the same educational qualifications as white teachers would have made a huge difference, and at one tenth the cost.
Health would be far better served by requiring all aboriginal health workers to have the same qualifications as registered nurses as opposed to the very basic one year course done by sometimes barely literate indigenous people who are then placed in positions of authority in remote communities, diagnosing and treating diseases they have no proper uunderstanding of. It's downright scary when you think of it and no surprise at all that remote health is stagnating. Aboriginal people deserve the same quality of workers as everyone else but that was a decision made by aboriginal people so now they have to live with the outcomes.
Aboriginal people have been dictating educational and health policies for several decades now, with poor results in rural areas yet somehow, it's still the governments fault and giving aboriginal people even more say would somehow lead to a miraculous result. Based on current results, I think not.