Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

The 'yes' mob are in full meltdown., page-136

First 136 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
Tapdancer

4,510 Posts.

114

27/07/23

14:03

Post #: 69015398
Share

Originally posted by Scott th Ratbag: ↑

"But consultation and respect are not relevant, Scott, that's just virtue-signalling in it purest form." ........ it was adopted as LibNat policy following the Agreement the Morrison Gov and state/territory Govs signed in 2020.

the Productivity Comm. review provides the rationale behind my claims that the Voice will likely result in reduced costs and improved productivity through health, education etc and other Closing the Gap improvements. the last CtG report demonstrated the failures of the Morrison Gov. the PC review is scathing of the lack of actions on the Agreement to improve CTG conditions. and you call it "garbage" and "a lie". very disappointing, but I respect your opinion.

you keep asking the same question even though I've already answered this many times over. I don't understand your agitation.

however, because I've read many of your posts that are sensible, I figure you must still not understand the important difference., So.....

the Voice will never have the power to compel Gov to "do as they say" (my words, but the gist of the argument that Govs will be compelled). but any Gov which is concerned with wellbeing and productivity improvement will consider such representations and decide for themselves on elements of those representations/advices and adopt, modify or reject such as they think best.

the constitutional placement is considered necessary by the Uluru statement mob. this is because all previous efforts to provide Govs with advices on how better to manage Aboriginal problems, eg in remote communities and CTG priorities (see the productivity comm review), have been abolished. they want to ensure that a Voice to parliament will not be abolished due to ideological reasons or because the Voice does not suit the Gov agenda.

the legislation can be altered by each successive Gov, but the body will remain.

the constitutional placement can be reversed by any Gov IF they go to the people with a referendum to remove the Voice from the constitution. certainly this would be a major accomplishment if they choose to go down this path, but no greater than the current referendum.

I hope this answers your question adequately..... if it doesn't please ask again and I will answer, but I do ask that you refrain from abusive terms Treefer.

respect.

Expand

Good post. But we shouldn't ignore the additional motive of the Voice, being the first step in meeting the aims of the Uluru Statement, including treaty and the inevitable reparations.

This is where the discussion is currently at in the public domain. Albo's in a huge spot of bother when he says "this referendum isn't about treaty". Technically correct, but hollow to an increasingly sceptical electorate in light of his 100% backing of the Uluru Statement.

Last edited by Tapdancer: 27/07/23
9 Upvote

Reply

Top Stories

NWC

New World board urges holders to accept Kinterra's now-uncontested takeover bid

PSC

Prospect's Mumbezhi Project puts it at the middle of copper's megatrend. And FQM just bought in

ASX Market Open: Oz traders follow Week 29 highs with Monday pullback | July 21

Listen: HotCopper Wire Podcast 018 – Potatoes, TACOs, and the $120M helicopter heist

PTX

This rare type of lymphoma ruins the body – so do existing treatments. Prescient could have a solution

First 136 Last