Share
2,790 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 391
clock Created with Sketch. 10/10/23
12:46
Share
Originally posted by Reaper11
↑
Of course they'd keep it for a number of reasons. The first one is that to abolish it would split their party. They have people who think The Voice should be in the constitution, people who think it should be legislated but not in the constitution and people who think it shouldn't exist. the last thing an LNP leader would do is abolish it and split his party 3 ways when he can simply do nothing. If The Voice is coming up with stuff they regard as sensible they can implement it and claim the credit. If the voice comes up with ideas that fail they can sheet the blame back to The Voice not the government. If it comes up with stuff they can't stand they can ignore it and tell voters the adults are in charge and they're not giving in to demands from the Aboriginal industry. The last thing I think any government would do is get rid of an advisory committee it can easily ignore...they'd just tell them that if they improve the quality of their advice the government might implement some of it.
Expand
They couldn't sign a treaty without creating an Indigenous body that represents the 200 nations. That's possibly why legislating it is a moot point. It's not that we don't listen to black fellas, we just didn't have anybody to sign a treaty on behalf of them. I suspect that's why they went Voice, Treaty, Truth instead of getting Truth and Treaty out of the way first. Naughty!
