Supporters of the Voice to Parliament, including Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and SA Premier Peter Malinauskas have called out protesters who targeted a major No campaign event in Adelaide.
There is nothing in the proposal that says the body will have any power whatsoever. It can’t propose bills. It can’t veto bills. All it can do is draw attention to matters that will specifically impact First Nation peoples.
It is a step. The first step towards a reconciliation and hopefully a treaty between First Australian and the new Australians who have come in the past 250 years.
Because it is to be constitutionally recognised, the body cannot be dissolved by some future government. If and when we reach a treaty, the body will exist to represent the diverse Aboriginal peoples around the nation.
Yes lol. Half the reason this country is deteriorating is because big business is calling the shots, and the state of our property market is well trodden ground.
I will not remove this comment, however, this argument is tired and has been rejected time and time again. It’s just wrong. In fact I would go so far as to say misinformation.
As has been stated by other users the alteration actually gives no power to Indigenous Australians that they don’t already have:
Chapter IX Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples
129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice
In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:
there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice;
the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples;
the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.
I forgot to mention it in the post because Dale wouldn’t have picked up that this article was about the voice but we do have a megathread where this has been brought up before. If it becomes apparent that you are engaging in bad faith there will be further action taken.
Removed by mod
Apparently not a lot, considering actual race based powers have been in the constitution since its inception.
The foundation of the Australian colony is predicated on the notion that Indigenous People are not real humans and therefore the land was unoccupied.
Removed by mod
Why do you think 51(xxvi) was created?
Of which powers do you speak?
There is nothing in the proposal that says the body will have any power whatsoever. It can’t propose bills. It can’t veto bills. All it can do is draw attention to matters that will specifically impact First Nation peoples.
Removed by mod
It is a step. The first step towards a reconciliation and hopefully a treaty between First Australian and the new Australians who have come in the past 250 years.
Because it is to be constitutionally recognised, the body cannot be dissolved by some future government. If and when we reach a treaty, the body will exist to represent the diverse Aboriginal peoples around the nation.
So we should scrap all the other 20+ advisory panels with the same “powers” such as the landlords one, and the big business one?
Yes lol. Half the reason this country is deteriorating is because big business is calling the shots, and the state of our property market is well trodden ground.
I will not remove this comment, however, this argument is tired and has been rejected time and time again. It’s just wrong. In fact I would go so far as to say misinformation.
As has been stated by other users the alteration actually gives no power to Indigenous Australians that they don’t already have:
I forgot to mention it in the post because Dale wouldn’t have picked up that this article was about the voice but we do have a megathread where this has been brought up before. If it becomes apparent that you are engaging in bad faith there will be further action taken.
is this one of the arguments you got from that pro-putin cooker who is organising ‘NO’ protests?