ABORIGINAL leader Warren Mundine has warned Australians were being deceived with tricks and emotive language into supporting an Aboriginal Voice.
In an article appearing in The Australian newspaper this week the author and businessman described the Voice as nothing more than a “bait and switch” swindle.
- It’s not important enough to be in the constitution “or anywhere”.
- Australia has had many Indigenous bodies, including four failed ones.
- Voice advocates are ignorant, or deliberately ignoring, Aboriginal cultures.
He said the government was arguing that it would be just advisory and could be ignored by parliament.
If that’s the case, he argued, then why does it need to be “constitutionally enshrined?”
BAIT & SWITCH
“The bait and switch is that the Voice is ‘conservative’ because it’s just advisory,” he wrote.
“So the Voice is essential because Indigenous people have no voice but ‘safe’ because government can ignore it.
“There are other influential bodies like lobby groups and unions, but none is constitutionally enshrined.”
Mr Mundine advised Prime Minister Anthony Albanese it would be safer to legislate the Voice rather than enshrine it.
“We’ve had many Indigenous bodies, including four failed ones,” he said.
He said Mr Albanese should prove the Voice is not another failure, like ATSIC, before constitutionally imposing it on Australians.
“Legislate the Voice tomorrow ~ and show us,” he said.
“Indigenous people are in the constitution like every other Australian. Every part of the constitution is about us and how we are governed.
“The Voice will be about Indigenous Australians and no one else.
RACE-BASED
“And if it won’t improve Indigenous lives, it’s not important enough to be in the constitution or anywhere.
“I believe it’s wrong to demarcate a system of government on racial grounds. Race-based constitutional rights don’t work. Look at Fiji.
Mr Mundine said many Australians rejected the Voice, including many Indigenous Australians like himself.
“Here’s where Voice advocates are ignorant, or deliberately ignoring, Aboriginal cultures,” he wrote.
“No Aboriginal person can speak for another country – only their own.
“Where’s the proposal for a constitutional Voice for the Bundjalung people (on my father’s side) or the Gumbaynggirr or Yuin people (on my mother’s side)?
“The Voice won’t, and can’t, represent Indigenous people as a group.” PC
The unusual increase in claimants for recognition as Indigenous Australians should be reason enough to require DNA testing before appointment to positions or access to any other benefits.
Could the 300,000 suspected excess to reality be part of the Voice referendum tactics?
The voice referendum Labor tricks are being prepared with funding for the yes case and no funding for no.
Appointment of an Ambassador for the yes case funded by taxpayers is another.
And funding distributed to obviously yes side groups using climate change as a disguise and others.
Meanwhile representatives of Indigenous Australians have expressed concern that of the latest census count of 800,000 Indigenous Australians probably 300,000 or more are masquerading as Indigenous and many have positions of employment based on their “Indigenous” claim.
SBS
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/insight/article/community-leaders-warn-many-who-claim-to-be-indigenous-could-be-fakes/bc6c8bneg
Labor Budget tonight lists funding for a voice referendum and Labor are advertising for an “Ambassador” to sell the referendum question for them.
So already the divide is on, representing a very small segment of our Australian population and really an activist minority of that segment. The ones who want fellow Australians to enter a treaty with them.
It’s definitely NO from me.
I cannot obtain information about First Nations in the land we call Australia?
And Mr Mundine has explained: “No Aboriginal person can speak for another country – only their own.”
I take that to mean the traditional tribal land of an Indigenous ancestry Australian?
So how could there be a treaty or a voice group representing all, and why are they needed, how can fellow Australians sign a treaty with fellow Australians based on First Fleet 1788 arrival and establishment of the first colony, New South Wales and the others that were established later?
Colonial governments that reached agreement to create the Federation of States, Commonwealth of Australia.
When considering your referendum vote, for “the voice” or for a republic please consider that The Australian Republican Movement convener is on record criticising the Constitution and wanting to make many changes.
The same applies now, for example Prime Minister Albanese described the Constitution as “archaic”.
Different referendum subject, same left side of politics wanting permission to make changes but they wont give voters the details, they rely on marketing puffery and hyperbole to sell their snake oil.