Red Pill
Enthusiastic Amateur
Appreciate the effort you go to, to explain your opinions. My opinion is that there will likely be issues harmonising a collective united indigenous voice because of the shear diversity amongst the aboriginal community. There are around 150 traditional languages and numerous tribes from what I understand. There are noted significantly contrasting opinions amongst groups. e.g. Jacinta Price vs Lydia Thorpe..In NZ where they have something similar to what is being proposed their indigenous community only has traditionally two main languages. Unless there is a solution to this than my opinion on the likely bickering is by no means a furphy at all whether it is an indigenous group a Christian religious group or any group for that matter..Of course not and I think you know that's not what I'm suggesting. Clearly, there will never be a unanimous support for whatever is proposed. Just like there is never unanimous support from the rest of the country when there is a general election. But we don't then say - well, I'm Catholic and I think we should have another election just for us. I think if people just don't like the idea of indigenous people being acknowledged in the Constitution and that an advisory body will be established that can make representations directly to Parliament specifically on indigenous issues (to be worked out in consultation with the whole Parliament if the referendum is successful) - then they should just say that and move on. I'd rather hear them say something like - "they don't deserve any special treatment coz I don't get any" or "so we took over the country, that was so long ago and I had nothing to do with it and so they just to get over it" (as I've had people say to me) then just say it. As much as I disagree with that sentiment, at least it would be honest. Throwing things out there like - oh dear, there'll be too much bickering, just seems disingenuous. And no, I don't think everyone feels like the two examples I just gave and that they genuinely just want to know what's going on. But from what I've read and heard, it's seems like a pretty simple proposition 1) a referendum to vote on a principle 2) a process developed to establish the advisory group in consultation with the Parliament. Now I know that there are better people out there to explain it better but that's my reading of it. It is impossible at this point to answer questions about how and who coz that's not what is written into the Constitution. The main focus (in my mind) is and should be on whether we support the basic principle. Then the Parliament works out the howz and whoz. And for better or worse, that's all I got!
Also your point about the voice only being for views on indigenous matters only has not yet being specified to my knowledge. Please enlighten me on this? RP.