Wave Of Insolvencies Sweeps Across Australia While Labor Concentrate On Racial Division, page-127

I may have misinterpreted this:

"IF any such thing happens that Gov will, certainly have some very serious questions to answer"

......I'm not sure what serious questions are (aside from hyperbole) unless they are existential.

My point is that you insist this:

"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"

......but you still haven't distinguished between abolishing legislation and ignoring a constitutionalised Voice. And, you really have to, because the Prime Minister could legislate this tomorrow, and get this happening tomorrow, but he refuses to. He could have done it a year ago, but refused to.

He has - by his own admission - not been listening to First Australians as the Prime Minister, not been looking out for their best interests, not been spending taxpayer dollars in a prudent fashion (and certainly not curtailing unproductive and wasteful expenditure), not accepted the advice of First Australians as to where to provide assistance, because apparently all of this requires The Voice to be enshrined in the constitution. But it doesn't, does it Scott. So is the Prime Minister deliberately misspending billions of taxpayer dollars using a bureaucracy that is no longer fit for purpose to avoid the spectre of the Voice functioning perfectly well as a legislated body, or what?