Comments on: A Voice for On Country and one for the city

By: Joshua Pretting

Joshua Pretting — Tue, 19 Sep 2023 05:48:30 +0000

@ Phil Walcott: I believe if you are a citizen aged 18 or older, you must vote. A referendum requires (in contrast to “respectfully encourages”) everyone who is eligible to cast a vote.
So yes, we should have our conversations and make our voices count because we each only really get one shot at this.
We don’t want an uneducated Aus randomly casting a vote for Yes or No based on misinformation or what your neighbour said the other day.
This all really links back to getting the true Aboriginal perspective out there, because that is what is needed right now to foster a more balanced debate.

By: Joshua Pretting

Joshua Pretting — Tue, 19 Sep 2023 05:43:34 +0000

Support for the no case is now stronger than ever – it is leading in every state, and not by an insignificant margin.
If it is true that the debate about the Voice within remote Aboriginal communities isn’t strong, Albo needs to find a way to educate them about what it is, so the rest of Aus has the opportunity to hear what they think about the matter.
At the end of the day, it is we, the people, who are voting.
Not the politicians sat in parliament. It should be the people the Voice is affecting, teaching the rest of Aus about the affect it will have on them, not Albo and Dutton speaking on their behalf.

By: Henry Wang

Henry Wang — Wed, 06 Sep 2023 22:35:19 +0000

It is a commendable endeavour, effectively articulating the concerns and perspectives of Australia’s Indigenous populace.

By: Interested Party

Interested Party — Wed, 06 Sep 2023 14:45:29 +0000

This is such a timely, relevant, well-written, and well-researched article. Thanks for contributing to the dialogue on this issue and illuminating different sides of the argument. Kudos to the author!

By: Phil Walcott

Phil Walcott — Thu, 24 Aug 2023 21:26:46 +0000

Even if Australian citizens aged 18 years or older are registered to vote, it doesn’t mean they will cast a vote in favour or against the referendum question. Eligible people are respectfully encouraged to be registered and vote their preference one way or another.
Looks like the date will be 14th October (to be confirmed in Adelaide next week). There are still some weeks until then so have your conversations, ask your questions and make your voice count!

By: Frank Baarda

Frank Baarda — Thu, 24 Aug 2023 10:20:47 +0000

@ Abi Campbell. A bit of context: my family and I arrived in Yuendumu in 1973. I am not Aboriginal but have Aboriginal family.
In the half a century we have lived here, I have attended countless meetings at which locals have spoken up in erudite English (despite Warlpiri being their mother tongue) offering suggestions on how to make Yuendumu a better place.
Officials used to consult with the community, now they only engage. Consulting means exchanging questions and answers. Engagement means those in power presenting their answers (take it or leave it).
The gradual disempowerment and marginalisation of local leadership went on steroids with the Intervention which was supported by the two major parties. The pandemic enabled the authorities to further tighten their grip.
Fewer and fewer locals go to public meetings. What is the point if no one listens anyway?
I’m not at all surprised that out here the Voice debate isn’t on top of the agenda.
In the end I expect most Yuendumu residents will vote Yes, but not because they expect things to change for the better. They’ve been disappointed too often.
Myself I will be voting Yes. I sympathise with the “Treaty First” No voters, but can’t possibly vote with the deceitful, mean spirited leaders of the No campaign.
I’ve even heard a spokesperson for the No campaign invoke the communist bogey. I thought Australia had moved on from the 1950s reds under the beds mentality.
I’ll be glad if the Yes campaign gets up, but won’t be holding my breath awaiting positive change.
Local Warlpiri people are well aware that a Voice is useless without ears.

By: Passive observer

Passive observer — Thu, 24 Aug 2023 08:35:41 +0000

Dear Maya, I doubt Harry Clark asked the “wrong” questions to the “wrong” people.
It seems he was just hoping for a genuine conversation with the very people who stand to benefit the most from a referendum that is clearly struggling to win popular support.
I suspect that he has also not forgotten the basic requirements of a referendum. In fact his main point seems to be based on exactly this — that the referendum requires a vote from everyone … and unless everyone hears a strong, clear voice from Indigenous Australians, the referendum will likely continue to struggle.

By: Evelyne Roullet

Evelyne Roullet — Thu, 24 Aug 2023 05:06:11 +0000

I agree with Maya: The Northern Territory has the highest proportion of Indigenous residents among its population – an estimated 32% (79,000 people) in 2022, but it does not mean we have more Indigenous Australians than other States
In the 2021 Census there were 812,728 people who identified as being of Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander origin
In 2022, the highest proportion of Indigenous Australians lived in New South Wales (33.2%), followed by Queensland (28.2%) and Western Australia (12.5%). The Australian Capital Territory has the smallest proportion of Australia’s Indigenous population (1.0%).
(Statistics from webs.)

By: Maya

Maya — Thu, 24 Aug 2023 01:47:48 +0000

The article which led to this debate are the words and opinions of Harry Clark solely.
Indigenous people in the town camps or remote communities of Central Australia have not always heard about the very long process which culminated into the Uluru Statement but they surely know there was a big meeting at Uluru in 2016-17.
Mr Clark may have asked the wrong question to the wrong people.
He seems to forget that in a referendum it is The People of Australia, all of them having reached the mature age of 18 and being on the electoral roll, who are asked to vote YES or NO to the wording before them: the recognition of the First Nations people who occupied this blessed land since “always”, through the establishment of a Voice to Parliament.
This is the basic request of the Uluru Statement from the Heart, after many years (some 30 years) of consultations among all Indigenous groups.
The Indigenous people of Alice Springs are but a small proportion of the 3% of all indigenous persons of this country.
Some may know about the Voice, other may not, but the major organisations that represent them (CAAC, Tangentyere, CLC, and the many religious bodies in town) do know that a Voice may yield results.
It is more than a gamble, it is a hope and an aspiration to be able to express their views on Bills of law affecting them before they become Acts of Parliament.
How? Through a Voice? Simple as that.
A simple demand has become a monster of contradictions, a political issue, a battle field between Albo and Dutton, a sabotage of the Statement from the Heart.
If it fails we, the Australian People, all of us, of whatever origin or political opinion, are to be “shamed” for not listening and answering a simple demand that may lead to big changes and unity.
A No result would be another “missed opportunity”. The maturity of the nation is at stake. Shall we ever grow up?
[ED: The Alice Springs News stands by Harry Clark’s report. The words and opinions he is quoting are those of his sources.]

By: Abi Campbell

Abi Campbell — Wed, 23 Aug 2023 11:40:35 +0000

@ Frank Baarda I am curious, as a resident of a remote community, is this story correct in saying the Voice is not as large of a concern in remote NT as it is in urban areas?
I live in Sydney and can confirm that this story is pretty accurate when it comes to describing the hectic debates in the cities, but would imagine the debate to be a huge deal in remote areas, as it is there after all where the Voice would have the largest effect.