• @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    29 months ago

    All the details? Really? How many people would this government put on the board? How would they be selected?

    Point me to those details please.

    • @Nachorella
      link
      1
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      We’re not going to be able to answer those questions because you voted no, were those really your hangups, though? How many people would be on the advisory board? If you’re actually curious to learn more, go have a read https://ulurustatement.org/the-voice/what-is-the-voice/ It’s a bit late, though.

      • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        19 months ago

        Those were some of my hangups, yes.

        That site doesn’t tell me what the Albanese government were going to do if it passed.

        • @Nachorella
          link
          29 months ago

          Recognise aboriginals in the constitution and add an advisory board that can’t simply be removed by the next government. It says it right there. The advisory board wouldn’t change how our government is run in any way, it would just be there to help decision making on things specifically relating to aboriginal affairs. I’m not sure if you’re actually being sincere here, it’s not a nefarious plot or anything. Advisory boards are a very common normal thing and you can read about them here: https://www.directory.gov.au/boards-and-other-entities/what-board There’s also a list of all the advisory boards we currently have. But seriously, there’s a ton of information on how it would have worked. https://voice.gov.au/resources/information-booklet This mentions it would have members from each of the states, territories and Torres Strait islands. So now you know, had you done some basic research you would have gotten your answer.

          • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            19 months ago

            Recognise aboriginals in the constitution and add an advisory board that can’t simply be removed by the next government. It says it right there.

            That’s not the details people are asking for. How many people would be on the advisory board? How would they be selected? How long would their terms be?

            They. Would. Not. Give. Us. Any. Details. This is a huge part of the reason why they lost. People don’t trust the government, and this was a huge “trust us, we’ll definitely do the right thing this time” move. It’s no surprise it backfired so badly.

            So now you know, had you done some basic research you would have gotten your answer.

            Maybe try not being so smug when you’re incorrectly answering questions next time.

            • @Nachorella
              link
              19 months ago

              literally everything you just asked is answered in the links, maybe try learning how to read lol

              • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                -19 months ago

                Literally none of it is.

                What was this Albanese governments makeup of the voice going to look like? How were they going to be selected? What were the term limits?

                • @Nachorella
                  link
                  19 months ago

                  They list the constitutional amendment process on the page, a lot of the finer details are decided on afterwards, this has been the case for almost all referendums. It mentions specifically that consultation with aboriginal leaders, parliament and the broader public would help design the voice. It also mentions that it would work alongside existing organisations and structures, again, advisory boards are very common.

                  They also explicitly state that the voice would be chosen by aboriginal and torres strait islander people based on the wishes of the community. It also says members would be chosen from each of the states, territories and the torres straight islands.

                  If it’s the structure of a referendum that you have a problem with then cool, but it wasn’t a good reason to vote no.

                  Also please read, it talks about all of your questions. It’s honestly frustrating to hear you say it doesn’t talk about any of it when all of these things are covered in the official literature.

                  • @Whirlybird@aussie.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    19 months ago

                    This isn’t one of the things that should be out in the constitution and “have the finer details decided on afterwards”. An advisory board with no power doesn’t belong in the constitution.

                    There is no “official literature” with what it would look like if it won. There are lots of ideas, but nothing concrete. It can’t be both “we’ll work out the details later” and “here are the details”.