The Voice referendum, as tabled, was an incredibly misbegotten terrible idea that would do nothing to support indigenous communities (which is why many opposed it). It didn't really have much of a chance.
Well, I actually just went to look and it appeared to be this only:
Chapter IX Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples
129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice
In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:
There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice;
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples;
The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.
------------
That appears to me to be an advisory board of sorts. It appears unfortunately that conservatives mounted a public scare campaign about how it was instead a massive expansion of government power rather than what it was. TBH since that is a common theme I believe it far more than what you said disingenuously, since it keeps happening.
Here is what I was talking about, note the wiki warning:
Misinformation and disinformation
This section may contain indiscriminate, excessive, or irrelevant examples. Please improve the article by adding more descriptive text and removing less pertinent examples. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for further suggestions. (October 2023)
Some opponents of the Voice, primarily right-wing and far-right politicians and commentators, internet trolls, and members of the sovereign citizen movement, have spread misinformation, disinformation and unfounded conspiracy theories regarding the referendum online. This activity is most prominent on Telegram and Twitter (now X).[230] According to independent monitors and fact-checkers, online debate has focused on race, particularly on X. Ben James, editor of the Australian Associated Press' FactCheck team, which monitors content on Facebook, Instagram and TikTok, says that the amount of misinformation and disinformation had by early September exceeded that which had been observed on social media ahead of the 2022 Australian election. Leading Indigenous campaigner Thomas Mayo has been subjected to a great deal of racial abuse. While some misinformation has been observed from people on both sides of the discussion, there was generally more on the No side – although it is noted that not all of the claims emanated from the official No campaign. Social media experts have observed "bot-like behaviour" that spread the same content across social media.[231]
A preprint study in September 2023 showed Yes tweets dominating the X platform, including amplification of misinformation and conspiracy theories created by the No side, with the Yes voters trying to fact-check and correct them. Politicians and media were also increasing the themes of "racial division" and "hidden agenda" on X, in particular Sky News Australia. Many of the No accounts appeared to be recently created and suspicious, although there was little evidence of social bots. The preprint concluded "Overall, our findings reveal a media ecosystem fraught with confusion, conspiratorial sensemaking, and strategic media manipulation".[232]
It was reported that much of the misleading information and disinformation has been promoted by internet trolls linked to the Chinese Communist Party, with China being accused of espionage, attempting to undermine Western influence and attempting to silence Western criticism of human rights abuses in China. An analysis by Recorded Future confirmed the findings of Australian Strategic Policy Institute in this regard but found no evidence that Iran or Russia were trying to influence the debate.[230]
Australian Electoral Commissioner Tom Rogers said that social media had not adequately dealt with misinformation and disinformation on their platforms; of 47 reported by the AEC as being of concern, only 16 had been taken down.[27]
RMIT FactLab, which had been checking some of the claims made by the No campaign, including that the Uluru Statement comprised more than one page, was suspended by Meta as its key fact-checking organisation in August 2023 because its certification from the International Fact-Checking Network had expired in December 2022.[233][234][235] However, it continues its work and is regularly published by ABC News.[236]
In early October, an open letter by 71 academics included a rebuttal to Peter Dutton's claim that the change would introduce race into the Constitution, as it is already in the document. The letter was also intended to "encourage Australian voters to think about who is giving the opinion, and the evidence they are using".[237]
False claims promoted online about the referendum and the Voice included:[230]
Home ownership will be banned if the Voice referendum succeeds, and homeowners would instead be forced to rent or sell their land,[238][239] and various other claims relating to land being taken away from current owners, some of which were sent out in fraudulent letters in Melbourne.[236]
The Voice would get rid of Anzac Day commemorations.[230]
The Voice would lead to a system of apartheid akin to the old South African regime – repeated by Sky News Australia host Cory Bernardi and other media outlets.[230]
The AEC would rig the referendum in favour of the Yes vote,[240][241][236] and those who fail to vote in the referendum would be counted as having voted Yes.[242]
Rather than just the one actual referendum question, there are actually two questions to the referendum, one on whether to recognise Indigenous Australians and one about the Voice; and writing Yes on the first question will override a No vote on the second question.[243][241]
That the voice is a product of one or several international bodies with ill intent including globalists, the United Nations, the World Health Organization and the World Economic Forum[244][238][245][239]
A "Communist and New World Order agenda" is behind the Voice; first aired on the anti-Semitic XYZ website in January 2023, then by a Telegram channel which posts content from the XYZ website as well as extremists such as Blair Cottrell; uses a 1980s book and documentary, Red Over Black, created by former Communist Party of Australia member Geoff McDonald (now a right-wing activist) which claimed that the land rights movement was a Communist plot to attack Australia's sovereignty; encouraged by various anti-Semitic individuals and organisations.[246]
That the referendum is being pushed by an Australian corporation that replaced the old government and now runs Australia as a private for-profit entity (according to the sovereign citizen movement).[247][245]
That the change re-inserts race into the Constitution after all references were removed in the 1967 referendum. This is untrue; race is still mentioned in the so-called "race power" of the Constitution.[236][237]
There is a secret agenda, by the Communist party of Australia, Jews (in a plan to "decrease Australia's sovereignty"[230]), or individual Yes campaigners.[236]
The UN would take over land in Australia, appointing "one man and one woman in every district" (spread in a viral video created by former Neighbours star Nicola Charles).[248]
The Yes campaign received favourable treatment with regard to tax, or the Labor Party bribed people to vote Yes.[236]
Various "slippery slope" arguments, including an incorrect comparison with New Zealand's Waitangi Tribunal, which was in fact set up "specifically to adjudicate on breaches of the country's foundational treaty"[236]
Votes in pencil would be erased.[241]
The vote is illegitimate because the writ for it was not issued with the Great Seal of the Commonwealth or because the Constitution of Australia has been invalid since 1973[241]
The electoral roll is somehow being "stacked".[241]
The AEC has campaigned for Yes.[241]
The AEC has campaigned for No.[249]
Voting is not compulsory, or requires special registration.[241]
Quality of public debate
Concerns were aired about the quality of public debate, by both campaigns and private individuals on both sides of the debate,[250] in some cases describing it as divisive and "toxic".[251] Political commentator Laura Tingle described the debate as "bitter", criticising the No campaign in particular.[252][253]
Marcia Langton was accused of calling No voters "racists",[254] after The Australian published an article headlined "Langton brands No voters 'racist, stupid'";[255] it was shown afterwards that she was referring to the tactics of No campaigners, not the voters, which she said were "based in racism and stupidity".[256]
There has been racism directed against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people,[257] including criticism of unrelated topics such as Welcomes to Country, claims that Indigenous people have special treatment, and promulgation of racist stereotypes.[258] "Progressive No" campaigner Lidia Thorpe, who herself has been subject to racist abuse and death threats, exposed a video of a hooded man making racist remarks, burning an Aboriginal flag, and giving a Nazi salute.[257] Abuse towards campaigners on both sides reportedly affected the mental health of several people.[259]
Author
Topic: Non-EU europe thread (with Russia, Israel and Australia included) (Read 195604 times)