Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Aug 1
st, 2022 at 5:09pm:
Now just to try to gett little bitch Smith back on track here:-
Here is the news to date:-
Aborigines etc already have all the voice they need same as everyone else.
They already have a higher percentage of representation in Parliament than their percentage representation in the community.
They are already enshrined in the constitution as Australians - same as everyone else.
They also have lobby groups, special representative groups with access to government, and over-representation in the press.
They have the support of Labor, the Greens, the majority of Independents, as well as a number of those on the 'right' side of Parliament.
What the actual powers and functions of any Special Voice are intended to be has not begun to be addressed. The wording is vague, perhaps deliberately so.
Such a voice is racist, discriminatory and exclusionist.
It is not clear if any 'voice' has political voting power in Parliament.
Such a voice body would be an ATSIC or similar that could never be abolished or stood down for corruption etc.
It will achieve nothing that cannot be achieved without it, and at huge and unnecessary cost in money and disturbance of the democratic process
The intent of 'Aboriginal activists' is not to view this as the end result, but as the stepping stone towards the creation of mini-states throughout Australia, all bound by treaty to the Australian Government and funded by the taxpayer and any relevant business wishing to operate there.
It is not simply about 'Aboriginal issues'. Any claim or demand by one group has direct effects on every member of Australia. Similar to 'women's issues' and such these do not exist in a vacuum.
Depending on the model, it could mean permanent seats in Parliament for people who are only voted on by that one group (or groups) – those claiming Aboriginal descent.
To have a separate voice elected only by Aboriginals would mean that the current Aboriginal elected representatives are superfluous and should be stood down.
The claim to have 'never ceded sovereignty', means that elected Aborigines are ineligible to be chosen or to sit in Parliament.
44. Any person who –
(i.) Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power:
shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.
Further – Albo's speech:-
It would also be critical to delete the words “and the executive government” from the proposed second sentence. Voice activists have spoken about a “voice to parliament” arguing that commenting on proposed bills before parliament is modest in scope.
Extending the reach of this body to everything done by executive government means it could permanently second-guess everything that passed across the desk of ministers or public servants. This extension is an act of massive overreach that will radically change our system of government.
You just don't like Boongs, dear, we get it. You don't want to see them having a say, and that's okay.
You'd support a voice to parliament for yabbiers though, no?
Maybe the Boongs could tag along to that.
Forum
Pages: 
The question about a voice will be asked... (Read 60092 times)
