The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© Thomson Reuters 2023.Support dips for Indigenous recognition referendum in Australia, poll shows
SYDNEY©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
© Thomson Reuters 2023.
24 Comments
Login to comment
Illyas
Isn't their 'voice in parliament' supposed to be taken care of by their duly elected representatives? The US has a few of these but they're for overseas territories that don't vote in federal elections. Having something like this on top of normal representation seems ill-conceived.
Jonathan Prin
Why minorities, even historical ones, shall have privileges ? Isn't everyone equal ?
diagonalslip
looks to me like another case of divisiveness masquerading as inclusiveness....
Gareth Myles
The plight of the indigenous in Australia is heartbreaking to witness. Since the colonisation of Australia they have lost their land, their social structure, and their freedom. Early actions amounted almost to attempted extermination and the "stolen baby" era was an appalling policy to destroy indigenous traditions by converting the next generation to "good Australians". Most attempts to help the indigenous now are subtler versions of the stolen-baby policy: offer young indigenous educational scholarships that take them away from their families, break their links with the land, and turn them into middle-class Australians. In addition, there is the recent tradition of the appalling "welcome to country" messages that are supposed to recognise the indigenous but, in fact, only provide a reminder of how they have suffered. To paraphrase "We acknowledge this was your land. We built on it. Tough luck." With this historical context, The Voice is just another cynical attempt to appear to do something while still avoiding the fundamental issue. An entire continent of people had its society destroyed and its land stolen in what is still only the recent, documented, past. Ever since, they have been abused and forced to live on the fringes of the alien society created on their land. They have rightly refused to disappear and their situation shames Australia. Rather than offering another opportunity for political hacks, Australia needs to seek real solutions for the indigenous and truly redress a century and a half of damage. Sadly, I cannot see this ever happening.
Ricky Kaminski13
Gareth, have to ask what exactly you think those real solutions are? Sentiments alone aren’t worth the paper they’re written on. Hence the current referendum and debate. What do you think the solutions would look like?
gcFd1
By the way, the National Voice must have a gender balance among the members.
Sanjinosebleed
Because no one even knows what the voice will be! If the Govt wants people to vote yes they need to actually start selling it by informing people of what it entails and what it will actually achieve!
Mocheake
A worldwide thing brought on by European colonialists. Destroy the Aboriginal or native society and way of life. Keep them down as much as possible. Then, after you have just about eliminated them and are comfortably ensconced, act like you care and are trying to right historical wrongs. This probably won't even pass so they are not even acting like they care. They don't.
Gareth Myles
@Ricky The indigenous Australians had a society that functioned in harmony with a harsh land for 50,000 years until it was abruptly destroyed. Clearly, it is impossible to revert to pre-colonisation status. In my view a real solution would start with an investigation of how the indigenous would want to live given no constraints upon choice. This would involve consulting all indigenous especially the most alienated from modern Australian society. Taking the opinion of a few political climbers is in no way adequate. Then has to come the recognition from modern Australia that it may have to make some serious concessions. If the indigenous want land to roam they should be given it. If they want a semi-nomadic lifestyle that follows the seasons it should be made possible. If they want river banks cleared so they can camp then they should be. If a university has a Welcome to Country statement that admits it is built on indigenous land, then it should remove the buildings and give the land back. These statements may seem like madness but they illustrate what may be required if the indigenous issues are ever truly going to be addressed. I suspect that, if asked, many indigenous dream of a country without "Europeans". And that, for me, is why the problem will never be resolved.
Peter14
No system has yet been found that allows indigenous people to continue their culture and way of life, along side modern life.
The indigenous way of life has no form of currency.
The modern way of life relies totally on currency.
The native way of life relies on living off the land, and in harmony with it, and no formal individual land ownership.
Modern life has ownership from government land to individual land ownership.
There are many aspects of life at odds and trying to find a way of allowing the continuation of a way of life that has worked for tens of thousands of years, yet provide the benefits of modern life and technology, have not yet been solved, anywhere on earth. Different attempts have been made on different continents but nothing seems to favor the indigenous peoples. Modern life has no way of supplying education, health care, homes and at the same time allowing the continuing life style from millennia to continue unchanged without costing any money.
It may be that such things are simply not possible or compatible at this point in time.
Does that mean new attempts should not be tried? The worst that can happen is it fails to achieve its goal, as all before it have. It may be more successful than a total failure.
The real crime is to stop trying.
Ricky Kaminski13
Ah the old fallacy that people actually wake up in the morning and think to themselves, today I'm going to do everything in my power to put so and so down, or this group down. If you had any real historical context into Australian political systems and government of early inhabitants it would tell you a very different story. There were a ton of well-meaning people and good-faith actors, that were in fact ahead of their time and trying to do everything in their power to help the Aboriginal people. If anything the early government lacked the manpower, not the will, to enforce and police rogue settlers and landgrabbers. The narratives on sale today by the left have nothing to do with fact and everything to do with their own agendas and power grabs. Victimhood and muddy ideas of reparations being their only currency.
I'd be very careful of having strong opinions on either side of the fence until you have taken into consideration what the actual historians have to say about what was going on back then. Look into it with a clear mind and you will see. It's far from black and white. I'm afraid this referendum is actually going to do more damage and create more division at a time when the general mood of the public is one of good faith.
Algernon LaCroix
I was recently in Australia and watched this "debate" with bemusement. The Yes campaign is heavy on guilt and emotional manipulation but light on facts and details. The campaign managers seem to think drafting celebrities and sports stars to the cause in their ads can substitute for informed discussion, and paint opponents as heartless racists. And the No campaign has a better argument about Aboriginal people already being represented in parliament through the vote they, like every other eligible citizen, can exercise in elections and the like. But they're deathly afraid of being painted as racists, so are hamstrung by their own lak of courage.
I would vote no, but have been out of the country too long and can't do so.
Jay
The 10-point plan was leaked back in March and is available for public viewing online.
Job quotas: Min 10% appointments to be 1st Nations people for judges, magistrates, CW SES, ADF officers, AFP and State police forces, Corrections Depts, Vice Chancellors, and Ambassadors.
Universities: No entry tests, & no fees for 1st Nations people.
Old age pension: Reduced age eligibility for 1st nations people.
Public housing: 1st nations people to have first preference for all vacant public housing across all states and territories.
Sport & Music: Entry fees reduced by 50% for 1st nations people for any events on public land.
Beaches & National Parks: All beaches & national parks to be property of the relevant tribe, & non-First nations people to be charged to use the beaches, parks etc at the discretion of relevant tribe. Revenues to go relevant tribe.
Rivers & streams: To become property of relevant tribe, & fees for water consumption paid to relevant tribe.
Mining royalties: Same as for water.
Income tax: for 1st nations people to be 50% of normal rate.
Liquor licensing: All new liquor licences across Australia to be vetted by Voice Office.
So yes, there's a reason the officials behind the Yes campaign are being so incredibly vague. This entire issue isn't about equality designed to create racial division.
As an egalitarian, that's a hard "no" from me.
Yrral
Peter14,Native American were giving sovereign over vast amount of land in Oklahoma by the supreme court in the US Google Supreme Court Native American Oklahoma Land Ruling
justasking
When I traveled to Australia years ago, I heard a comment by white Australians saying the worst thing the government did was allow "Aboriginals" to drink and this individual continued on they could not hold their liquor due to their DNA. LOL, I thought that goes for any man or woman, no matter their color or race.
桜川雪
This voice body isn't even in parliament and is advisory. Why didn't they look towards new zealand, their neighbour, if they wanted real change and not just political optics?
New Zealand had reserved seats for Maori within parliament. If Maori (indigenous) ancestry, you can choose between the Maori ballot (electorate) or the general ballot (electorate). In addition to that, both Maori and general also get a second vote with nationwide proportional representation. This allows more parties in parliament which is essential for getting multiple views.
Desert Tortoise
Do you know why that happened? Have you ever heard of the Trail of Tears? Maybe you should do some more reading before posting.
Desert Tortoise
I lived briefly in Cairns. My room mate, her brother, mother and mates used harshly racist terms to describe the Aborigines, some terms I had heard my family use when I was young to describe African Americans and others I had not heard before. From what I saw traveling around Australia, and I managed to see the whole eastern half, there is precious little good will in the hearts of Australians towards their first people. It reminded me of the US attitudes towards African Americans in the pre civil rights era.
Yrral
DT,I am talking about modern day Oklahoma territory,I know how the US treated native American and how Custer met his last stand at the battle of bull run
GBR48
Having been through the Brexit referendum that has split the UK, I would suggest that having a referendum over this was a supremely bad idea. The government in power should have decided whether to do it or not, on the basis of their electoral mandate. Australia will probably get a similar split and be divided for some time to come.
The indigenous people have suffered a lot, and the voice might help. In general, the political left promotes indigenous rights. But the political left would really not want to live within an indigenous cultural framework - there is more to it than tree-hugging and camping out telling stories. Plus locking people out of the modern world is not ethical. Pre-industrial lifestyles should not be sentimentalised as pastoral green idylls just to win votes. We get a lot of that from the 'Just Stop Oil' and anti-plastic activists.
Jonathan Prin
@ Gareth
You are saying young Aborigenes are stupid because they should not chose by themselves as adults ?
Sorry to say that such discussion is out of touch and reality. Australia is vast enough and no one holds on huge lands by only right living on it forever.
To counter such fallacious beliefs about colonizers in general (who are as bad and good on average), think if colonizers were all respectful and had to live all outside the given lands to Aborigenes. They would all have died in deserts !
And what to think about modern medicine, hygiene and technology that save lives ?
Survival of the fittest is applicable since it is nature, whether we like it or not.
桜川雪
Structural or certain procedural changes require a referendum.
GBR48
I wouldn't consider this to be a structural or procedural change, more of a canvassing of opinion. Governments do that all the time with 'stakeholders', before ignoring them. Any good it does will not outweigh the toxic consequences of holding the referendum and dividing the nation. Countries should learn from the follies of other nations, not rush to repeat them.