TOPIC:

58shark wrote:

And the sad thing is, this generation and the last one doesn’t really care.  

Who are you referring to - First Nation or Caucasian generations? 

The Paul Ramsay Foundation has put up $5 million, which will go to Australians for Indigenous Constitutional Recognition (AICR), the official fundraising and governance body for the Yes campaign.
So a charitable organisation that receives millions of dollars from the government is passing on the doe for the yes campaign. They are Ramsay Health, shouldn't that money be kept for heath. Give me strength. What a waste of money.

If the Libs allowed this sort of thing the press, ABC in particular would tear them a new one.

Winger wrote:

The Paul Ramsay Foundation has put up $5 million, which will go to Australians for Indigenous Constitutional Recognition (AICR), the official fundraising and governance body for the Yes campaign.
So a charitable organisation that receives millions of dollars from the government is passing on the doe for the yes campaign. They are Ramsay Health, shouldn't that money be kept for heath. Give me strength. What a waste of money.

Its utterly bizarre, they spend 5 Million bucks on an add campaign...imagine what that would have done for health care.

The , madness of this waste for pie in the sky ideas is mind boggling.

i see SBS have now abandoned City Names on their news weather chart and now use Aboriginal locality names.

Pretty sure the SBS charter required English Translation when a language other than English is used - of course that's been ignored.



 

75 Million to prepare for the referendum, this includes 15 million for the electoral commission to get ready, 16 million to get more indigenous voters enrolled, shouldn’t they be enrolled anyway. A further 7 million is to create indigenous agencies to create special advisory groups. Donations to the yes vote are tax deductible. At this stage opposition to the voice does not get the tax advantage. 105 million for the indigenous folk to respond to climate change. This is abuse of tax payers money.

Had a long chat with a good mate who is a political journo and has read the full Voice document, well the only one available so far. About 125 pages I think, took him 3 nights to plough through it. He is a bit left leaning and it scared the crap outa him. The layers of "voice" review are mind blowing. There will be a federal panel, state panels made up of numerous regional groups and panels for local government. So in my mates words, nothing will get done if it's implemented, there will be administrative gridlock. Any proposed legislation that can in anyway be see to affect indigenous groups will be subject to this multi layered review system and you can bet that they can make a case that everything has an impact. The costs will be astronomical to support this massive bureaucracy that is doomed to be another indigenous white elephant. Until Elbows comes clean with full details, the no vote will likely win but maybe after hearing what's in the document, he has every reason to conceal it's full impact.

... And if the yes vote is successful people, I would not worry.
Governments and bureaucracy will tell you all that taxpayers have a never ending supply of money to pay for it all forever! 

Senior Seagull wrote:

Had a long chat with a good mate who is a political journo and has read the full Voice document, well the only one available so far. About 125 pages I think, took him 3 nights to plough through it. He is a bit left leaning and it scared the crap outa him. The layers of "voice" review are mind blowing. There will be a federal panel, state panels made up of numerous regional groups and panels for local government. So in my mates words, nothing will get done if it's implemented, there will be administrative gridlock. Any proposed legislation that can in anyway be see to affect indigenous groups will be subject to this multi layered review system and you can bet that they can make a case that everything has an impact. The costs will be astronomical to support this massive bureaucracy that is doomed to be another indigenous white elephant. Until Elbows comes clean with full details, the no vote will likely win but maybe after hearing what's in the document, he has every reason to conceal it's full impact.

True, did the same myself, seeings that the proponents won't tell us wtf is going on with it and to just read the 125 "statement from the heart" doc. I decided to take the time to do.

If they think its a great advertisement for the voice they are seriously misguided, I was shocked at just how complex and extensive the beaucratic layers and bolt on's are they are planning, and that is just what they are planning, knowing how gov works it grows very quickly, several layers of advisory committees and additional youth/elder bodies (voices), btw members are not broadly elected, they are appointed by delegates who are elected with regional elections which must be funded. Even after that the statement cannot decide on a final format suggesting three possible set ups. The flow charts are a myriad of bureaucratic complexity that would cost a fortune and be grinding slow in outcomes.

State based voice in SA is allowing $11 Mill PA just as a start-up cost base for admin!

Albos $75 Mill Referendum would of been far better spent on Power Bill relief for old age pensioners, buy why give a toss about cost of living pressures when you can blow money on this giant dud.



 

and let's not forget the potential for litigation on the taxpayer's dime if any interest groups or advisory bodies reckon they haven't been consulted on a particular decision. Heaven help us all.

BC wrote:

and let's not forget the potential for litigation on the taxpayer's dime if any interest groups or advisory bodies reckon they haven't been consulted on a particular decision. Heaven help us all.

Advocates for the voice are now coming out and saying litigation is possible but that is how our "democracy works" exact words from one of them on Insiders on Sunday.

Actually, I always thought our democracy worked on a one vote one value principal regardless of race with no one special group getting a say on legislation.