Indigenous Voice to Parliament

[think positive]

Governments that make bad decisions are still the majority of people’s choice, they are elected.

Not sure why any race not elected should have any more say than any other non elected person.

[stui magpie]

^

I'm voting yes but I completey understand how a growing number of people are having doubts about exactly what the powers of the Voice would be.

Albo and the government dropped the ball on ths at the start and the yes campain, as barely visible as it is, has been fumbling around trying to pick it up. The opportunity was there up front to spell out in clear detail what it would be able to do and what it wouldn't, even putting out a draft of the proposed legislation. Instead they took a moral high ground and said "trust us".

[think positive]

Thankyou Stui that’s exactly right!
I went from probably yes to probably not pretty quickly and then Hell no.

[stui magpie]

Cheers Jo, just another point on what you said above, the voice would only have power to make recommendations, it would be the government of the day that decided whether to enact that recommendation or not.

So it's the government still holding the power, making the decisions, and they're the ones we get to vote out if they stuff it up.

Not trying to change you mind, just hopefully elaborating.

[think positive]

You’re a good egg Stu xx

[David]

[stui magpie]

^

The Government already spends a shitpile of our money on Indigenous issues, most of it wasted with poor results. They don't need to spend more money, just spend it smarter and that's where the Voice would have hopefully come in, helping to direct money to where it had the most impact.

yes I'm using past tense cos it's dead in the water, unfortunately.

[pietillidie]

^That's sad to hear, but certainly not surprising.

This is just a lack of discipline from another direction. There is an addictive reliance out there on the energy of bitter self-entitlement; it's just the easiest way for people to motivate themselves to care about anything, and that makes the decision a foregone conclusion.

These things will always fail, 100% everytime, because it's as easy as clicking one's fingers to bring the focus back to poor me, the poorest, most deserving victim on earth.

It's such an easy win when something can be turned into either a handout for me on the one hand, or punishing someone else / not doing a good turn for someone else on the other.

Of course, serious societal decision making is about improving the whole, which also includes my benefit, but it seems beyond us.

Unfortunately, that's where 'poor self-entitled old me' society lives now; hence, so many things go unfixed, even if they cost more tomorrow, or incredibly ridiculous decisions are made, like Brexit.

This was one of those cases where you might try something different because you can't keep doing the same thing that doesn't work. But turning it into a referendumb will lock in another 30 years of more-of-the-same costly failure, because it has turned a serious adult matter into a two-team football match.

Can they call it off now or does it have to go ahead?

[stui magpie]

I don't think it's about self entitlement, it's change management 101 and the reason why most referendums fail.

First step in getting people to buy into change is to create a compelling reason for the change. Albo and the Yes campaign have utterly failed to do this and combined with natural distrust of government(s) it's on a hiding to nothing.

No actual date has been set yet, it's still possible to call it off but Albo is right between a rock and a hard place.

[What'sinaname]

WA Aboriginal cultural heritage law changes to be scrapped after overwhelming pressure on Cook Government

[David]

[think positive]

[Jezza]

Can they call it off now or does it have to go ahead?

I'm unsure if it can be called off. The opposition have asked the Prime Minister to call it off, which suggests it can be done.

If it does go ahead as planned, it now must be held between September 9 and December 16 this year which is two to six months after the bill to trigger a referendum passed both Houses of Parliament.

[David]

You want to take cracks at me you will get them back.

It might seem like splitting hairs, but I’m not calling you a selfish person. I’m saying that voting no in the referendum for the reasons you’ve offered seems like a selfish position, because you’re prioritising the avoidance of potential economic cost to you over potential benefit to others who may need it more.

To put that another way, we might all hold certain political opinions for selfish reasons, but that doesn’t necessarily mean that our entire political outlook is selfish or that we treat others selfishly in our personal life. Your response to that was "I’m not selfish, you are". You may or may not be right about that (I think those who know me can make that judgement for themselves), but I don’t think it has anything to do with what we’re talking about here. Last I checked, I’m not Indigenous; I have nothing specific to gain from this referendum getting up.

And much as I’m not here to hurt other people’s feelings, I’m not afraid to call it as I see it: I think one of the reasons this referendum will fail is because Indigenous self-determination is simply a lower priority for many Australians than maintaining their own tax bracket, super, property, etc. (even though there’s little reason to assume that the Voice would negatively affect any of that.) Often, positive change gets defeated by fear of change, and it seems this will be one such case. There’s no real sugarcoating any of that.

[stui magpie]