|
As I was walking home this morning I reflected on the points I made about the Voice in an infographic I made last night. It is the one above or here it is as a blog post: https://www.tomgrimshaw.com/tomsblog/?p=46590
One of the most important lessons I have learned this lifetime is to evaluate relative importances, to ’sort the wheat from the chaff’ as goes the old saying.
So I am always trying to distill my messages to the irrefutable simplicity.
It occurs to me there is a sea of data and an ocean of opinion about the Voice but one indisputable datum stands head and shoulders above all others.
That fact is that we are being conned.
How is that indisputable?
Because it comes directly from the mouth of Anthony Albanese. Now granted, he is not honest enough to call it a con but no con man ever alerts you in advance to the details of the sting.
This article https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/detail-of-indigenous-voice-to-come-after-referendum-albanese-20220731-p5b5zj.html reports:
“Details about a proposed Indigenous Voice to parliament will not be known before a referendum on the issue, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says, arguing he does not want a repeat of the failed 1999 republic referendum.
“Albanese, speaking from the Garma festival in Arnhem Land, said the detail of the Voice would be left to federal parliamentarians to debate rather than let it be a central element of a proposed referendum...
“...There have already been calls for more details about the Voice, including from Coalition spokesman for Indigenous Australians Julian Leeser who says while the referendum question was a positive start there were many details to be explained.
“But Albanese said he wanted to avoid the situation caused by the republic referendum where people may have disagreed with one element within the proposed model and were then urged to vote no.“
“One of the things I’m trying to avoid here ... [is] people looking for all of the detail and saying well, if you disagree with these 50 clauses, if you disagree with one out of the 50 but 49 are OK, vote no. We’re not doing that. We’re not doing that. We’re learning from history,” Albanese said on ABC television on Sunday.
Well, that’s all very well, but would you sign a contract without having the opportunity for you or your solicitor to read it?
What if one of the 50 clauses is to cede sovereignty over your house and land to a new council with no redress?
Or take a percentage of your income or spending as reparations?
Shouldn’t you have the right to reject the whole thing over that one clause?
The whole idea of a referendum is so that Australians can decide on issues of importance, like changes to the Constitution. How can we make an informed decision if we don’t know on what we are deciding?
Albo continues, “We’re appealing to the goodwill of the Australian people and as I said, the Australian character as I see it.”
In my opinion that means he takes us for fools who can be easily manipulated emotionally to do something that is logically not in our best interests.
I think it’s time to show him we are smarter than that and vote “No”.
|
