With the Voice to Parliament Referendum date announced to be October 14 2023, this thread will run in the lead up to the date for general discussions/queries regarding the Voice to Parliament.

The Proposed Constitutional Amendment

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.

Past Discussions

Here are some previous posts in this community regarding the referendum:

Common Misinformation

  • “The Uluru Statement from the Heart is 26 Pages not 1” - not true

Government Information

Amendments to this post

If you would like to see some other articles or posts linked here please let me know and I’ll try to add it as soon as possible.

  1. Added the proposed constitutional amendment (31/08/2023)
  2. Added Common Misinformation section (01/07/2023)

Discussion / Rules

Please follow the rules in the sidebar and for aussie.zone in general. Anything deemed to be misinformation or with malicious intent will be removed at moderators’ discretion. This is a safe space to discuss your opinion on the voice or ask general questions.

Please continue posting news articles as separate posts but consider adding a link to this post to encourage discussion.

    • ReverseThePolarity@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s very relevant. We need to decide if we want to irrevocably change the country. We need more than “don’t worry about it”

      • Nonameuser678@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you are not an Indigenous person then the voice will not really be advising on things that are relevant to you. And the voice is fundamentally an advisory group that will present their concerns to the government. The government will then act on this advice. It will still be the government making laws and policies. It just needs to be constitutional so that it can’t be terminated like previous advisory groups have been.

        Considering the level of disadvantage that Indigenous Australians experience, don’t you think it’s reasonable that they should have greater say (a voice) on how to address the issues that are relevant to them?

      • ⸻ Ban DHMO 🇦🇺 ⸻@aussie.zoneOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        We’ve already decided on that through the previous federal election. Theoretically, the voice will be legislated in a way which appeals to the majority of Australians.

        Remember: bad politicians and parties only get into parliament because, we, Australians, put them there

        • ReverseThePolarity@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The rich put them there. We Australians don’t really have a choice. The Libs are complete garbage and Labor have abandoned their principles just to get power. They are only slightly better?
          What other choice do we have?

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        if we want to irrevocably change

        The composition of the Voice is not irrevocable. The vote in the referendum is whether you support the notion that there is a constitutionally-mandated Voice, and not whether you approve of the specific model being proposed. Parliament can change the specific model at will, regardless of whether it is the current Labor Government or a future LNP one. The only thing that will be irrevocable is the fact that some Voice exists.

        • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Which makes the voice completely irrelevant. When the LNP are in power the voice will be 1 spot held by some white idiot like Barnaby Joyce or Scomo. If One Nation ever got in power the voice would be some white racist saying that the indigenous people want to all be shipped off to the middle of the country and left alone in a fenced area with no contact with the rest of the country.

          • samson@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Untrue. The high court would have something to say about an aboriginal voice being composed of non Aboriginals.

            • Whirlybird@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Would they? There’s nothing in the proposed constituational amendment that says that the body has to be made up of indigenous people and indigenous people only.

              • samson@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Constitutional interpretation relies on all sources used to draft the document. Intentions must be gathered as this is a founding document, therefore all Acts spring forth from it. Explanatory documents, the Uluru statement itself, and documents by the referendum working group all support the idea of the A&TSIVoice being for ATSI people only.

        • samson@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not entirely true. HC will likely set some sort of minimum standard for composition eventually, probably minimum standards for how they can provide representations if parliament decides to make it hard for them to do so.

        • RealVenom@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          And that’s where I can see people having concerns. By voting Yes, you are opening the door for a model that you may not agree with. I can see people being hesitant about it, like it’s a trap. But that’s just my devil’s advocate opinion, the fact is that this will unlikely affect anyone who isn’t ingenious in a tangible way.

          It’s well overdue for us to genuinely celebrate our indigenous heritage and ensure our constitution allows us to embed this culture into our country’s DNA.