Tokenistic, fake, Indige­nous voice and appeasing white guilt, page-5

chers Van...... firstly whats in place has produced the results in the Closing the Gap report, Gov decisions with inadequate consultation that has left the CTG data showing no improvement for some years.

secondly, the V is to provide "representations", not advice, not directions, not any kind of mandated opinion, but telling the story in intimate detail of the observations and concerns of people on site as well as academic/professional opinions..... all in order to better enable more functional delivery of projects and policies.

ideally, this should enable Govs to make better quality decisions wrt first Aussie management. yet it remains moot until the Gov and opposition designed the scope, process and functions of the Voice. it will likely be more effective if the LibNats engage fully in the design process to ensure the Voice is functional from a bipartisan position.

I also expect the Voice will result in reduced cost to the Gov as local and regional Voices are developed using the existing network of service providers for Aboriginal people. rationalisation of excessive organs will result in savings too.

it won't be the same as nothing, the current arrangement, it won't be like ATSIC as they won't have control of money or projects/policies.

imo its not an ideal or unworkable fantasy, but will be a practical method of improving the lot of Aboriginal people and the budget bottom line. but thats just my thought..... as you say, its yet to be designed. put it this way, if you want no change, vote against the V.... if you want change which is more likely to improve conditions, you'll then vote Yes! for the Voice.