By roosty - 10 Jul 2023 2:05 PM
I will be voting with a firm NO! The whole thing is a monstrosity, in addition they are going to set back recognition years if not decades. I think this is a clear example of overreach. The public mood was sympathetic to the concept of a Voice, which around 80% public support. The proponents got greedy and saw it as an opportunity to expand the Voice's scope, to not only one of influencing indigenous affairs but one with practically no limits. The public was awaken to the trojan horse and public support has withered, and now Voice proponents are quickly backtracking and spreading their disinformation campaign, that the voice will be small in scope and practice.
It doesn't matter how sincere the Voice architects are working with governments, at some point they will be swept aside and it would be hijacked by people like Lidia Thorpe, who will make all kinds of crazy wild demands and when governments fail to enact it they will clog up the high court.
|
By Denny_White - 23 Jun 2024 8:05 PM
I hear your concerns, and it sounds like you have strong reservations about the Voice Referendum. It's definitely a contentious issue with valid arguments on both sides.
|
|