Australians have resoundingly rejected a proposal to recognise Aboriginal people in its constitution and establish a body to advise parliament on Indigenous issues.

Saturday’s voice to parliament referendum failed, with the defeat clear shortly after polls closed.

  • Seudo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    1 year ago

    Wot? Absolutely nothing stoping parliament from listening to the numerous recommendations that would improve the standard of living or life expectancy of indigenous people. Why would you think a few token lines in the constitution will change that?

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because they’ll have an official body they’ll be dismissing rather than one of many groups, which aren’t always unified - it forces nothing, but does give a go-to body that the government will need to take an optical hit to ignore.

      The constitutional amendment helps because the deserve recognition, and because it stops the next government disbanding the body.

      • Seudo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So there will be just as many people saying the voice doesn’t represent them or their country but white folks can feel like everything is fine and dandy. Swell

        • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Would you mind clarifying what you mean? There’s a few ways to interpret this.

          If you mean that it’s not a perfect representation of the views of the indigenous community, that’s obviously true, but unavoidable in any representative body. What it does is solicit feedback from the community and effectively pushes that forward as a single, strong voice. This works in the same way that a union brings together workers that are powerless as individuals and small groups, into a single, far more powerful, though not perfectly representative body that’s able to campaign for meaningful positive change for all members.

          Sounds swell to me.

        • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          What’s token about forcing the government of the day to take the optical damage from publicly dismissing the guidance of the official body representing indigenous community? Seems it would give them reason to reconsider as well as a great body to consult on how to best prioritise and address the issues facing the community.

          • Seudo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Entirely depends on how it’s to be structured. Which the public didn’t vote on. Done correctly I do agree on the optics of an official body though.

              • Seudo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Either way, some of us whities just don’t feel comfortable determining the future of indigenous people.

                • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  That’s the point of the Voice though, isn’t it - to give a body representing indigenous Australians a say in decisions relating to them.

                  That’s contrasted with the current situation, where the government selects an indigenous affairs minister, then optionally cherrypicks the indigenous representative bodies that support their agenda.