Paul Chappell

I always find Bios hazardous

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

The future of marketing budgets. https://t.co/DUgAwdhPeV

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@ScoMo30 What do they say about the friends you hang around with?

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

In light of the exposè on #Coles and #Woolworths this week, I’ll be removing all superlatives and referring to them simply as ‘markets’

#ColesWorth

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@SenatorRennick Funny thing is, as science progresses so does our understanding of natural history. That you were told different timelines as a child doesn’t prove science wrong, it proves you’re incapable of changing entrenched views. Much like a racist.

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

Truth-telling is almost impossible for Indigenous Australians with a media industry more and more comfortable with propagating lies and misinformation

https://t.co/DTysqM5Z58

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

Anyone who voted No because of the threat to our constitution and democracy has no place to complain about the cost of the referendum because that is the price of our constitution and democracy in action.
#Referendum2023 #Auspol2023 #VoiceToParliament

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

Vote YES for a better tomorrow #voicetoparliament #referendum #yes23

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@RositaDaz48 And Dutton?

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@CameronWall Or you could vote yes so your kids can live in a country where the most disadvantaged minority, who are the original custodians of our land, are living to the same standard as your kids. And everyone is more united - as equals.

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@CameronWall @bnthompson @realDHolland It could have been, Shorten was a proponent for it. It could have potentially answered some of the questions and added more clarity on the working model. Doesn’t provide an enduring solution though

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

A NO vote explicitly says “No, we shouldn’t listen to First Nations communities about what they need.”

Every other argument for NO is either a baseless aversion to change, a needless projection of fear, a sad manifestation of ignorance or a veiled expression of racism.

#Yes23

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@bnthompson My post didn’t imply that all No voters are ignorant or racist. And no, the referendum isn’t just asking if we agree to amend the constitution. There’s a clear purpose for change, and many futures rely on it. To say No to that requires better alternatives or why get in the way?

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@bnthompson I’m not saying all No voters are ignorant or racist. A lot of No voters I know aren’t. But their reasons for voting No still don’t critically or objectively answer what other solutions can/will lift Indigenous Australians out of their unique disadvantage on terms they agree to.

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@bnthompson What are they? I haven’t seen any that are enduring and have the same level of support from Indigenous people as the Voice?

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@bnthompson There are other ways, of course, but many of them have grossly failed. And legislating the Voice actually offers the same thing only with greater risk of failing because of political jousting. Keen to hear more effective proposals that offer an abiding and effective alternative?

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@bnthompson Neither does the High court being flooded with disputes argument. It’s in the interests of all Indigenous Australians for the Voice to be an effective advisory body to Parliament. And Parliament will have the ability to help it succeed providing there’s bipartisan support.

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

Think of the The Constitution of Australia as the menu you get in a restaurant. It doesn’t give you the recipe. That’s for the chefs in the kitchen… (politicians in Parliament) to decide on.
This #referendum is asking if the menu
is worth serving. The recipe will follow.

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@bnthompson You’re misinterpreting my analogy. The Constitution does not provide the details of how the Voice works. Parliament does that. Yes the HC interprets and applies the articles of the Constitution.

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

@bnthompson Parliament will decide on how the Voice works. The High Court will arbitrate any disputes over how it works. The analogy stands your Honor!

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

Because we have lived, since federation, with governments that have made laws FOR Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, not WITH them.

It’s time we started to listen.

Vote smart.
#Referendum2023

[Paul Chappell @PabloChappo]

All this talk about the Voice creating an Us vs Them division fails to recognise that it ALREADY EXISTS! Closing the Gap is evidence of that.

15 out of the 19 recommendations have still yet to be achieved or have failed completely. Why?