Whirlybird

Read my post again. I didn’t say it would be abolished, I said it would be essentially dismantled since it would be reduced to nothing.

I don’t say it would be abolished, just that it could and likely would essentially be completely gutted many times over because like I said, the only thing that’s protected is the thing existing.

I don’t say it would be abolished, just that it could and likely would essentially be completely gutted many times over because like I said, the only thing that’s protected is the thing existing.

100% incorrect.

I would have voted yes if we were guaranteeing something to indigenous people that would actually be guaranteed to help, like 10 senate seats or something. A new indigenous government agency that gives indigenous people money and say over all indigenous things.

You know what would also really help? Details about the thing I’m voting on, not a vague “just leave the details to us, the government, who have shown we’re not to be trusted over and over again”.

Voting for the voice as it was was essentially maintaining the status quo while being able to pat ourselves on the back and tell ourselves we saved the indigenous people.

Your last paragraph describes most of the reason why people would vote yes on such a toothless virtue signalling change.

It literally would be another toothless advisory panel because it was not going to have any power. Being constitutionally supported just means it has to exist in some unspecified form. There was no “demonstrated will of the Australian people” in it.

You know what does have the demonstrated will of the Australian people? That the proposed voice was a bad idea. That shouldn’t be ignored.

Clearly a lot did, yes. 60% of people voted for gay marriage. That’s a far more “progressive” and divisive issue and it won.

Also seems the results are showing that a lot of massive indigenous population areas voted overwhelmingly no.

That’s reason to vote against it because it’s pointless. It achieves nothing positive, and likely leads to decades more of inaction because “but we put you guys in the constitution and gave you a voice, what more can we do?!”.

I’m not voting to change our constitution for something this pathetic. It’s not a shopping list.

Says the person saying how frequently they’re disbanded 😂. You’re literally arguing against yourself.

There definitely is, that path just isn’t another pointless advisory panel.

And with how vague the voice constitutional change was, it would be able to be dismantled in every meaningful way another 11 times in the future. It would just have to exist, but it could have been comprised of a 19 year old white intern who supported anti-indigenous things.

Almost everything I’ve seen last night and this morning was about how this wasn’t a result to do nothing and ignore it, it was a result that said go back and rethink because what you suggested wasn’t going to help.