The Voice Referendum is bureaucracy, dependence & grievances versus economic participation, independence & self-determination. Disadvantage is caused by lack of economic participation, not by lack of a voice. #notmyvoice
Read my article for NITV here: https://t.co/xvY1ED4lGL
Phillip Thompson OAM MP -
DIVIDED NATION:
Meet Whanjullah & Gubal.
They're proud Indigenous locals who are saying NO to the Voice. They don't believe it will help them or their people in any real way.
@AlboMP is so condescending & self righteous he'd have us believe he speaks for all Indigenous Australians.
•He does not!
The Prime Minister should be ashamed of the division he's caused across the nation.
I stand with those Indigenous Australians who are saying #NO to the Voice.
@TurekAndrew Have never bought rebranded "Cheers" - never will. The original name "Coon" was named after the founder of the business - not a slur (that wasn't even used in this country) on a race
This is beyond contempt; the yes supporters of the voice lead everyone to believe that all the signatories to the Uluru Statement supported the yes campaign.
Now we hear for the first time this is not correct.
To hear that a Traditional owner say he wants to burn the canvas because it has brought nothing but trouble speaks to those of us who have walked the red sands and seen the depth of truth.
There is no choice now, this referendum must be stopped.
#JustVoteNO!!!!
The left💧came after Christian Porter.
They came after Alan Tudge.
They came after the PM re: Brittany Higgins.
*They remained silent re:
Emma Husar.
*They remained silent re: 100s of complaints from Labor staffers.
*They remained silent re: Kaushaliya Vaghela
& Kimberley Kitching.
*They remained silent on the accusations on Bill Shorten..
Hypocrites!!
Dear friends,
Later this year, Australians will be asked to decide whether to change our Constitution and create a permanent Indigenous Voice.
This referendum is not simply about “recognition”. Both major parties support that.
This Voice proposal represents the most radical change to our Constitution – our nation’s rule book – in our history.
The Government has overlooked the concerns of many legal experts. It is pursuing a Voice that covers all areas of “executive government”.
This means that no issue – the economy, national security, infrastructure, health, education and more – would be beyond its scope.
In the words of a member of the Government’s Referendum Working Group:
"The voice will be able to speak to all parts of the government, including the cabinet, ministers, public servants, and independent statutory offices and agencies – such as the Reserve Bank...It (parliament) can’t shut the voice up." (The Australian, 1/4/2023)
Many legal experts have warned this Voice could risk years of litigation.
The High Court would determine the powers and remit of this Voice, not the Parliament.
And no one can predict with any certainty what a future High Court might decide.
Enshrining this Voice into the Constitution means it’s permanent.
When we need to unite the country, it would permanently divide us by race.
Our Constitution is not something you should toy with lightly.
However, the Government refuses to provide basic details on how the Voice would operate.
The proposal is that Australians vote first, before the Government works out the detail.
You wouldn’t buy a house without inspecting it, or a car without test-driving it.
This Voice proposal is legally risky with unknown consequences.
Yet when Australians have raised legitimate concerns, they’ve been dismissed.
Fortunately, this referendum won’t be the choice of any political party, corporation or celebrity.
It will be every Australian’s choice.
For more information about the Voice, read here: https://t.co/e9gjCdjBDq
Regards,
📷
Peter Dutton
Leader of the Opposition
“The gap is between well and sick, free & incarcerated, violent & peaceful, employable & unemployable, not between Indigenous & all others.
If people knew the real gaps between remote & very remote profiles & those of the now great Aboriginal middle class of urban Australia they would stop these false comparisons.
They would also be even more horrified than they already are.”
– ✍🏽 Professor Peter Sutton
https://t.co/AqxIDOE1Rf
"After the Prime Minister tried to limit the voice, leading Indigenous working group member and law professor Megan Davis told The Australian: “The voice will be able to speak to all parts of the government, including the cabinet, ministers, public servants and independent statutory offices and agencies – such as the Reserve Bank” and declared the voice could not be shut up. Fellow working group member Noel Pearson has said that being able to have influence on all areas of government is at “the guts” of the voice."
#VoteNo
https://t.co/oKYmIDnBXk