This week we look at the issue from both sides now, to borrow from a beautiful ballad by Joni Mitchell. Edited by Phil Jarratt.
Why? YES
Former Noosa Council CEO BRETT DE CHASTEL has spent his two years of retirement mentoring leaders at Cherbourg Aboriginal Community and in remote communities in Far North Queensland.
How do you intend to vote in The Voice referendum?
I intend to vote Yes.
Australia’s relationship with our First Nations peoples is one of the big unresolved issues our country needs to come to terms with. Starting with the 1967 referendum recognising our indigenous people, through the land rights/native title era, and now to the opportunity to formalise a Voice, this is part of a longer journey of recognition. Establishing a Voice mechanism is the next logical step in that process.
Do you think the Voice to Parliament would be largely symbolic or create real change?
I certainly hope that it will not be just symbolic, but that is perhaps the worst-case scenario. At its best, the Voice is an opportunity to create real change by leading to better outcomes for our First Nations peoples. What could be better than listening directly those people affected by government decisions before making those decisions?
What do you think would be the outcome of a successful No vote?
I hope that no matter what the outcome of the vote is, everyone respects that outcome. Respect is important in any major national debate and unfortunately, that is too often forgotten by many on either side of this debate.
What research did you do to arrive at your voting decision?
I started by reading the Uluru Statement From The Heart, not other people’s interpretation of it. It is a document full of hope and aspiration and definitely worth reading. I have also had the privilege of doing some work supporting indigenous councils and communities across Queensland, including Cherbourg, Wujal Wujal on Cape York and Mornington Island in the Gulf of Carpentaria. That has convinced me that a bottom-up listening approach is better than a top-down “we will tell you what you need” approach. The latter hasn’t worked on the ground to date, so it is time listen, and the Voice is the most logical mechanism to do this.
NO
Sunrise Beach retiree and part-time weatherman JIM KENNEDY reports on weather trends for Noosa Today.
It’s quite clear to me that Anthony Albanese is heavily influenced with regard to the Voice by two previous Labor prime ministers, but unfortunately, the prime minister he should be trying to replicate he has decided to ignore.
In effect, he has decided to emulate one, imitate another, and totally ignore the third one at great peril.
It’s obvious that Anthony Albanese woke up one morning and decided he was going to emulate Kevin Rudd’s “Sorry” speech in 2008. Albo doesn’t appear to know that the Sorry speech did not have a financial or long-lasting implication. Also, it was something that people could ignore if they chose to. Unfortunately for Anthony Albanese, the proposed Voice, once it’s added to the constitution, cannot be ignored or forgotten about.
Worse still, the lack of detail relating to the Voice means we do not know the financial or social cost. I should also add that Kevin Rudd was voted out of office two years later by the Labor Party.
Now, Anthony Albanese has run into some tough going trying to get the Voice over the line. Instead of acknowledging the issues that people are concerned about, he has said that if we don’t vote Yes there will not be another opportunity for 30 years. Almost like saying, “I’m taking my bat and ball home if you won’t play by my rules”. Albo is obviously imitating another Labor prime minister, Gough Whitlam, who was famous, or infamous, for the “crash or crash through” mentality, which of course doesn’t work in a democracy. Gough suffered a similar fate to Rudd and the Labor party was voted out of office after three years, with the 1975 election recording the largest swing against any party postwar; Labor finished up with less than 30 per cent of the seats in the lower house.
Furthermore, Albanese shows no real concern or respect shown for the Aboriginal community, otherwise why would he adopt a “crash or crash through” mentality? To show concern shouldn’t he be trying to bring all factions together to iron out the problems as best they can? Then, and only then, present the Voice to the Australian people.
The question I ask Anthony Albanese is how would Bob Hawke have resolved this problem? Simple, he would mediate and negotiate his way through the multiple problems that currently exist. Unfortunately Albo does not appear to have the ability or the inclination to find his way through the minefield and is happy to make the Aboriginal people wait another 30 years.
Finally, we don’t have to have the referendum this year. The Labor Party has another two years before the next election so Albanese still has a chance to get his name written into history, if that is what he really wants.
NOTE: Noosa Today has not verified the contributed content above. All articles appearing under this banner can be fact-checked at these websites:
www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-19/fact-check-yes-no-campaign-pamphlets-
