this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2023
41 points (97.7% liked)

Australia

3616 readers
103 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @[email protected] who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @[email protected] and @[email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A very good read about the voice to parliament, I believe it addresses some of the concerns raised in the megathread.

A reminder that we encourage discussions about the voice itself to take place in the megathread

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Already, however, the public debate around those 92 words has grown like an invasive weed, generating ill-will and dispute over issues that are far removed from the question at hand.

"Prior to 1967, census asked a question about Aboriginal race to establish numbers of 'half-castes' and 'full-bloods'," reports this very handy research brief from the excellent folk at the Parliamentary Library.

So the failure to count Indigenous people in these calculations skewed all sorts of things, with particular ramifications for states and territories with larger First Nations populations.

If the Yes campaign in 1967 had been "Vote Yes To Remove The Ban On Making Discriminatory Laws For Aboriginal People and Also To Fix A Nagging Administrative Matter In The Calculation Of Federal Payments And Electoral Boundaries" – how do you think it would have fared?

You'll see that the proposed Voice "may make representations" to the parliament and to federal departments "on matter relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples".

That's how constitutional law works; the High Court chucks out legislation that doesn't accord with the spirit of what the Australian voting population has agreed to have enshrined in our national document.


The original article contains 1,564 words, the summary contains 192 words. Saved 88%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!