The Voice vote:

[What'sinaname]

^ wouldn't every decision affect First Nations People. This is not about things that affect ONLY First Nations People, but things that affect First Nations People - which is EVERYTHING.

Make an amendment the Australian Organ and Tissue Donation and Transplantation Authority Act 2008, have to wait to hear from The Voice

Amend the Broadcasting the Services Act 1992, have to wait to hear from The Voice

[stui magpie]

That's, with due respect, BS that's being circulated by mischievous No campaigners.
They don't have to wait for the voice on general stuff, they don't have to wait at all. The way it would work is that proposals that would impact First Nations Peoples would be referred to the voice for their opinion. Other general stuff just goes through normal process.

[What'sinaname]

^ prove it

[stui magpie]

^

Read the details and prove you're right.

Lets use your example of Organ Donation.

Say the Feds decided to make Organ Donation an opt out system for all. The Voice comes in after and says, we don't like that, we want First nations Peoples to be Opt In.

The Government considers that and can agree or disagree.

Exactly the same situation could happen with Muslim or other lobby groups.

The Government is still in charge, The Voice just offers an opinion.

[What'sinaname]

I can't prove anything. The lack of detail is exactly the problem.

And wrong re: Muslims and other lobby groups. The following isn't proposed for any other group.

The Parliament and Executive Government should seek representations in writing from the Voice early in the development of proposed laws and policies.

[Bucks5]

What is to stop the Government from making exceptions for First Nations people when writing new laws and policies each time the Voice says the changes will adversely hurt their people?

Eg. Tax increases, increased fines, etc. to apply to everyone except First Nations people.

[stui magpie]

^

Answer is, the Government. The voice has no power except to make recommendations. If the Government of the day is dumb enough to make dumb decisions based on a dumb recommendation, that's on them.

[stui magpie]

I can't prove anything. The lack of detail is exactly the problem.

And wrong re: Muslims and other lobby groups. The following isn't proposed for any other group.

The Parliament and Executive Government should seek representations in writing from the Voice early in the development of proposed laws and policies.

Wrong.

The wording is,

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

[What'sinaname]

^ educate yourself on what The Voice will look like "when the details are worked through" after the Referendum

https://voice.gov.au/about-voice/voice-principles

Once again, the lack of information is why we can't agree on exactly what The Voice can and will do.

[stui magpie]

The first level details are in the wording to be voted on. Nothing scary there.

The next level details will be decided by parliament and therefore subject to change by future governments.

Taking one clause in a legal document literally without the context of referring to previous clauses is always a recipe for getting the wrong answer

[Bucks5]

This is quite alarming especially as Thomas Mayo is one of the signatories of the Uluru statement from the heart.

https://www.news.com.au/national/politi ... e8d6d0f3d9

[stui magpie]

people have dumb ideas.

Even if Legislation to enact that managed to get through both houses of Parliament, the Government that proposed it would be writing their own death warrant. Can no happen.

Any reparations would come from a treaty and our taxes, not some half arsed tax on homeowners and certainly not from the Voice.

[What'sinaname]

The first level details are in the wording to be voted on. Nothing scary there.

The next level details will be decided by parliament and therefore subject to change by future governments.

Taking one clause in a legal document literally without the context of referring to previous clauses is always a recipe for getting the wrong answer

So wouldn't it be better if these details were spelled out BEFORE we vote. When things are intentionally concealed, it's hard not to be suspicious.

[Bucks5]

people have dumb ideas.

Even if Legislation to enact that managed to get through both houses of Parliament, the Government that proposed it would be writing their own death warrant. Can no happen.

Any reparations would come from a treaty and our taxes, not some half arsed tax on homeowners and certainly not from the Voice.

There is such a thing as the slippery slope. Look at gender ideology.

You think it wont happen but I foresee a future scenario where land has to be handed back to the traditional land owners instead of being passed onto your children upon death.

So many people in the younger generations now believe in the "Their land, always was, always will be" mantra. How many generations before parliament is filled with young idealistic ministers who could enact that change, especially if there is a Voice in the background encouraging it.

[stui magpie]

In that scenario, it could hapen without the voice. You and I will be long dead and it will be up to the voting public to keep Government in check.