TOPIC:

BC wrote:

My big problem with it is that they want to enshrine it in the Constitution. If all goes pear shaped or needs major structural changes so that it works properly, where do we go from there? Another referendum? Much easier to legislate it then it only takes a stroke of the pen to play around with the thing.

BC I have also maintained you could achieve the same thing without the body being in the Constitution, the fact they want to lock it in the Constitution is the most alarming thing, Imagine the US Congress being told it was compelled to consult a Committe of anyone prior to passing a law?

 

Agreed Baz. My other concern is how the thing will work at a granular level. Any legislation referred to the panel for comment may impact indigenous folk differently depending on where they live and their individual circumstances.

For example, reforms to social services might be ok for a city dwelling person but detrimental to someone in a remote area who doesn't have the same level of access. How is that going to work? I think it's a divisive idea which is going to open a whole new can of worms just to make a few woke do-gooders feel better about themselves.

58shark wrote:

So the debate goes on and Elbows refuses to tell us what is in the document.  Now I hear that 2/3’s of West Aussies are going to vote yes.  So does this mean 2/3’s of West Aussies are fkn idiots, or does it mean they know more about it than me?  Can anyone explain to me how the Labour party (aka Loco Party) can alter the constitution without telling us why, how, costs and how it going to affect ALL Australians?  This fkn idiot of a PM could cause some real havoc before we can get rid of him.  Fkn spewing!!!!

I wouldn't be reading too much into any polling done by the Flogged Dog Polling Agency.  Clearly they're retained by state Labor here in WA even if it's indirectly and they never publish the questions they use or where they did the polling.  They can skew a poll question any way they like to get a predetermined outcome and/or ask them in Labor strongholds in the metro area knowing full well respondents will support whatever is the view of Dear Leader or Elbow.

He should drop the idea, noting that he has listened to the electorate; they may get him from within the  ALP, a fact he does not realise; put pressure on the Liberals--the Nats should leave the coalition--that is how damaging for the country a 'yes vote' would be.

BC wrote:

58shark wrote:

So the debate goes on and Elbows refuses to tell us what is in the document.  Now I hear that 2/3’s of West Aussies are going to vote yes.  So does this mean 2/3’s of West Aussies are fkn idiots, or does it mean they know more about it than me?  Can anyone explain to me how the Labour party (aka Loco Party) can alter the constitution without telling us why, how, costs and how it going to affect ALL Australians?  This fkn idiot of a PM could cause some real havoc before we can get rid of him.  Fkn spewing!!!!

I wouldn't be reading too much into any polling done by the Flogged Dog Polling Agency.  Clearly they're retained by state Labor here in WA even if it's indirectly and they never publish the questions they use or where they did the polling.  They can skew a poll question any way they like to get a predetermined outcome and/or ask them in Labor strongholds in the metro area knowing full well respondents will support whatever is the view of Dear Leader or Elbow.

Spoken to a few people, and in my workplace, don't know a single person who is voting yes.

BC wrote:

Agreed Baz. My other concern is how the thing will work at a granular level. Any legislation referred to the panel for comment may impact indigenous folk differently depending on where they live and their individual circumstances.

For example, reforms to social services might be ok for a city dwelling person but detrimental to someone in a remote area who doesn't have the same level of access. How is that going to work? I think it's a divisive idea which is going to open a whole new can of worms just to make a few woke do-gooders feel better about themselves.

Yes, takes me to my other argument is, this thing is really ATSIC on steroids, we all know what a shambles that turned into, dysfuctional infighting, millions wasted, achieved sfa, the Indigenous industry the archtects of the voice have never got over the abolution of the ATSIC gravy train, hence why they designed this as a lock into the Constitution, no PM will be able to just come up and abolish it if its a train wreck, we are stuck with it for good.

You would be lucky to get a handful of Aboriginal groups who agree with each other on a single issue, just look at the North West and the Burrup, firms spend millions going through the Indigenous Consultation process, get approval and then a tiny breakaway group starts a protest because they missed out on a payment. All ends up in court again. Absolute joke.

 

Albo should forget about something which is being done to placate less than 3% of the population and focus on something far more important being a referendum on becoming a republic now the Queen has gone and what is left behind is in total disarray. I for one, don't want Chilla and Camilla as my heads of state and you can raffle the rest maybe with the exception of Bill and Kate. This Harry clown and his narcissistic missus along with Randy Andy can all piss off into oblivion.

BC: we have stability because of the monarchy, so that will not go through either. She is a yankie plant in the tradition of the Simpson woman back in the 1930s.

I'm not sure I agree with that AR. Maybe for the first 150 years after colonisation we relied on Britain for stability but I think it became very evident after the First World War that Australia could stand on it's own two feet and move away from being a constitutional monarchy.

India is a good example where they've continued to grow and become a world power with little or no help from Britain after gaining independence in 1947.

Anyway, the republican debate is for another thread but thought I'd throw it out there.

BC: India has lost the McMahon line to China since 1947, has the caste system, and, in addition, continues to occupy Kashmir; in short, she is a shinning example of littlte.