Cheers for the Conversation article. Even though it’s clearly a “Vote Yes” PR article, it has good information in it.
The issues that I still have with it are that basically we could all vote Yes, have a voice put in the constitution, but then the government at any time can just completely change what the Voice actually entails and how it’s used. With so much handling of it left to the government of the time, it’s very hard to see how it’s not just going to be essentially ignored/reduced every time the LNP get in power for example.
I guess a “Yes” vote is really a vote for “It’s something at least, it’s a start”, which can definitely be a good thing.
Honestly, how is that any different from all the other policies that the LNP get’s their grubby hands on…
Just add the Voice to the cycle hell that all the other policies are subjected to… at least then indigenous issues will finally get somewhat treated the same as the rest 😅
Sure, but the way I equate it with is the NBN… sure the LNP NBN is far worse than what was planned, but some NBN is better than no NBN.
Sure, the Voice can be gutted, but there has to be a voice and it has to represent aboriginal people.
It’s not ideal policy, but I definitely don’t want to make the mistake the Greens did with the Carbon Tax… voted against something imperfect (Rudd tax) and now they get nothing as no majors want to touch it after the Gillard debacle.
The benefit of this proposal also makes the Voice flexible and can actually be improved upon, something that couldn’t be done if aspects were rigidly defined by the constitution.
Again, it ain’t perfect policy… but then again perfection is the enemy of good enough.
Cheers for the Conversation article. Even though it’s clearly a “Vote Yes” PR article, it has good information in it.
The issues that I still have with it are that basically we could all vote Yes, have a voice put in the constitution, but then the government at any time can just completely change what the Voice actually entails and how it’s used. With so much handling of it left to the government of the time, it’s very hard to see how it’s not just going to be essentially ignored/reduced every time the LNP get in power for example.
I guess a “Yes” vote is really a vote for “It’s something at least, it’s a start”, which can definitely be a good thing.
Honestly, how is that any different from all the other policies that the LNP get’s their grubby hands on…
Just add the Voice to the cycle hell that all the other policies are subjected to… at least then indigenous issues will finally get somewhat treated the same as the rest 😅
It’s not, and that’s an issue. It shouldn’t be something that can be gutted by the government to the point of it being irrelevant.
Sure, but the way I equate it with is the NBN… sure the LNP NBN is far worse than what was planned, but some NBN is better than no NBN.
Sure, the Voice can be gutted, but there has to be a voice and it has to represent aboriginal people.
It’s not ideal policy, but I definitely don’t want to make the mistake the Greens did with the Carbon Tax… voted against something imperfect (Rudd tax) and now they get nothing as no majors want to touch it after the Gillard debacle.
The benefit of this proposal also makes the Voice flexible and can actually be improved upon, something that couldn’t be done if aspects were rigidly defined by the constitution.
Again, it ain’t perfect policy… but then again perfection is the enemy of good enough.