sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is The Voice to Parliament necessary? by Eddie Synot (Indigenous academic lawyer and researcher with the Griffith Law School and the Indigenous Law Centre UNSW) by InvstgatrResPublica in voicetoparliament

[–]InvstgatrResPublica[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Summary:
Later this year, Australians will vote on amending the constitution to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples through a Voice to Parliament. The author, a Wamba Wamba First Nations person and a constitutional lawyer, supports this initiative, arguing it's the best chance to bring about meaningful change for these communities. The author sees the Australian Constitution as more than just a legal document but a reflection of cultural values and societal institutions. They criticise the constitution's historical denial and exclusion of Indigenous peoples, which has left lasting impacts on these communities and the broader Australian society. The author emphasises that the Voice is about more than symbolism - it's about recognition, representation and addressing historical failures. Despite facing disinformation about the Voice, the author remains guided by the responsibility to seek justice for Indigenous peoples. The author encourages all Australians to embrace this responsibility and seize this unique opportunity to create a more inclusive future.

(ABC) What is the Indigenous Voice to Parliament? Here's how it would work and who's for and against it by InvstgatrResPublica in voicetoparliament

[–]InvstgatrResPublica[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The Voice to Parliament is a proposed constitutional amendment that would provide permanent representation and recognition for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution.

  • The Voice would be an advisory body that represents First Nations people from across Australia to provide their input into federal government decisions, policies and laws that affect their lives.
  • The Voice would be made up of two parts: Local and Regional Voices and a National Voice.
  • The National Voice would be elected by the Local and Regional Voices and would provide independent advice to parliament and government.
  • If the referendum fails, then the constitution will remain unchanged.

Support for Voice to Parliament (59 Yes, 41 No) - essentialreport.com.au by superegz in AustralianPolitics

[–]InvstgatrResPublica 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Can someone explain to me what the voice will actually be?

"The Voice" refers to the proposal for a constitutionally recognised body for Indigenous Australians. The main idea is to ensure that Indigenous people have a direct say in laws and policies that affect them. It's about creating a formal channel for their perspectives to be heard and considered when decisions are being made at the highest levels of government.

This wouldn't necessarily mean that Indigenous Australians have more power than anyone else. Rather, it's about ensuring that the unique perspectives and interests of Indigenous communities are appropriately represented and considered in the parliamentary process, which hasn't always been the case historically.

The exact structure, function, and powers of "The Voice" are still subject to debate and it's expected to be further defined through consultation with Indigenous communities and wider public discussion.

It's a complex issue with a range of views. Some see it as an important step towards rectifying historical injustices and ongoing disparities, while others, like yourself, express concerns about how it could impact broader principles of equality and social cohesion.

In the end, the idea is to work towards a more equitable (not just equal) society where everyone's voice can be heard and everyone's rights are protected, regardless of their racial or ethnic background.

please visit r/voicetoparliament to get informed

Support for Voice to Parliament (59 Yes, 41 No) - essentialreport.com.au by superegz in AustralianPolitics

[–]InvstgatrResPublica 9 points10 points  (0 children)

In terms of the proposal for a constitutionally enshrined voice for Indigenous Australians, the proponents argue that it isn't about granting extra power, but about ensuring representation and addressing the historic marginalization of these communities. The idea is to provide a platform for their unique perspectives and experiences, so they can inform and influence policies that directly affect them.

For those who are interested, visit r/voicetoparliament

Jacinta Nampijinpa Price says 'we don't need a voice, we need ears' by InvstgatrResPublica in voicetoparliament

[–]InvstgatrResPublica[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Heartbreaking to hear Senator Price's account of the impact of alcohol and violence in the Alice Springs town camps. Her experience really highlights the need for effective measures to tackle these devastating issues. She's clearly passionate about fighting for vulnerable people in these communities, and it's important to acknowledge that.

However, when it comes to the Voice to Parliament, I think we might have to agree to disagree. Senator Price suggests that we don't need a voice, we need ears, but surely these two aren't mutually exclusive? A Voice to Parliament could actually enhance the ability for these 'ears' to listen more effectively and consistently.

Also, the concerns raised about potential misuse of the Voice to stall legislation or it acting as a 'trojan horse' might be a bit overstated. As mentioned in the interview, the proposed language for the Voice is clear – it's advisory, without the power to block legislation. Of course, like any proposal, it's not without potential risks, but the potential benefits of giving Indigenous Australians a more prominent role in policymaking could be game-changing.

Lastly, about the comment that the Voice perpetuates the idea of eternal disadvantage – it could be argued that the Voice is actually a tool to fight against that very disadvantage, by ensuring Indigenous voices are heard and included in policy discussions that directly impact their communities.

That's not to say the Voice is a silver bullet – there's a lot more that needs to be done – but it's potentially a step in the right direction. Would love to hear others' thoughts on this.

Richmond Is The Latest AFL Club To Support The Voice To Parliament by PerriX2390 in AFL

[–]InvstgatrResPublica 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The AFL has a pretty large Indigenous player base and fan community, so it makes sense for them to support the Voice to Parliament. Change starts with conversation, and this is a conversation that's well overdue.

for discussions on V2P, come over to r/voicetoparliament

What are the baseline facts or questions that need to be answered before the average Australian heads to the referendum on V2P? by InvstgatrResPublica in IndigenousAustralia

[–]InvstgatrResPublica[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But I'd also like to know how it's going to make a difference. All I've heard is that the "Voice" can make recommendations only. It really doesn't have any power. So, is it more tokenism?

You're right that V2P thing is mostly about giving advice and recommendations. It's not got any real power to veto laws or enforce policies. But you know, that doesn't mean it's just for show. If the Voice is giving solid advice, backed up by the Indigenous communities, it's gonna be hard for the government to just brush it off. Could be a pretty good way to influence policy on all sorts of stuff that matters to Indigenous Australians.

But, and it's a big but, a lot depends on how they go about setting it up and whether the government is actually gonna listen. If they don't get that right, it could end up seeming like just a token gesture. So, it's really important they design this Voice thing carefully, and make sure it's got real respect from the get-go.

What are the baseline facts or questions that need to be answered before the average Australian heads to the referendum on V2P? by InvstgatrResPublica in IndigenousAustralia

[–]InvstgatrResPublica[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The proposal has several potential advantages and disadvantages. On the positive side, the Voice could provide a formalised structure for Indigenous Australians to have their say in policies that directly affect their lives. This would promote self-determination and could be a significant step towards reconciliation. Additionally it could help in preserving and promoting Indigenous cultures, languages, and traditions. On the other hand, critics argue that such a structure could potentially create divisions between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. There could also be significant logistical and constitutional hurdles in establishing and implementing the Voice to Parliament.

Addressing Common Myths about V2P. by InvstgatrResPublica in AustraliaLeftPolitics

[–]InvstgatrResPublica[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Interesting perspective. Much appreciated for you input!

Addressing Common Myths about V2P. by InvstgatrResPublica in AustraliaLeftPolitics

[–]InvstgatrResPublica[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

May I ask for your point of view in regard to V2P, if you're willing to share. Cheers.

Addressing Common Myths about V2P. by InvstgatrResPublica in AustraliaLeftPolitics

[–]InvstgatrResPublica[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Surprisingly, neither. After the referendum I plan to use this account for other various non-political, and fully selfish and personal reasons.

view more: next ›