Cypher

joined 1 year ago
[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 5 points 1 year ago

This is how Sony won this generation by a landslide.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There’s just no soul to the game, I’m the same as you, and it really disappointed me.

It’s the last Blizzard game I will ever buy.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 10 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I was looking forward to playing Elite with PS VR2 but they don’t bother supporting it, and I couldn’t even get the account sync to work.

It’s the one game I have refunded on PS5.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Legislating the Voice is of course an option and something the government has committed to doing if the referendum is successful.

You should contact the ABC and provide them with a correction.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-27/you-ask-we-answer-why-cant-voice-to-parliament-be-legislated/102879806

The government would prefer to take the concept of a Voice and constitutional recognition for First Nations people to a referendum and have the actual machinery of the body put forward in legislation.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-10/how-voice-to-parliament-could-work/101749746

If the referendum passes:

  1. Consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, the Parliament and the broader public to design the Voice
  1. Introduce a Voice establishment bill into the Parliament
  1. Once Parliament approves the legislation to establish the Voice, the legislation comes into effect and the work to set up the Voice begins.

https://voice.gov.au/resources/fact-sheet-referendum-question-and-constitutional-amendment

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You claimed the legislation had been shown, it has not.

Your misinformation helps no one.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

Design principles are not legislation, it seems you are unfamiliar with Parliamentary process.

Additionally he (Anthony Albanese) stated that if the referendum is successful, another process would be established to work on the final design, with a subsequent government produced information pamphlet stating that this process would involve Indigenous Australian communities, the Parliament and the broader community, with any legislation going through normal parliamentary scrutiny procedures.

The final design being the legislation.

I hope that clears things up for you.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 0 points 1 year ago (6 children)

The exact wording of the Constitutional amendment was released 6-7 months ago.

The Legislation has not been, and likely won’t be seen.

If you have seen the legislation somewhere please share a link.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

For progressive no voters, that is correct.

There is of course an element of society who want to ignore or bury any discourse on issues impacting ATSI Australians but they’re not the full picture either.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A few of the arguments or concerns voiced by Australian’s included:

-A Voice with no power is pointless

-Lack of detail in the proposal

-Separating Australian’s by race is divisive (note there’s already constitutional race powers, which I disagree with and hope will be scrapped)

-ATSI people would have more representation than others (they actually have proportionally higher representation in Parliament today than their percentage of population)

-Leaving the exact details of the Voice to legislation means any future government could gut it without violating the constitutional amendment

-concerns this is the first push on a path to treaty and reparations as a percentage of GDP (which WAS discussed as a possibility by the people who worked on the Uluru statement)

I’ve left out the outright lies, though I guarantee someone will take issue with me simply mentioning the talking points to give you context.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

There were many ATSI people who voted no because they want treaty, not an advisory committee with no veto powers.

Not everyone who voted no is racist and proclaiming they are is far more reminiscent of US divisive politics than how Australian politics works.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 9 points 1 year ago

The only Territory to vote yes, out of all our States and Territories, was the Australian Capital Territory which is the most educated and most involved with governance.

[–] Cypher@aussie.zone 10 points 1 year ago (12 children)

There are essentially two parts to what was proposed, the first is that having mention of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island (ATSI) peoples in the constitution is recognition.

The second part, which is actually the exact mechanism which was proposed, was a permanent advisory body made up of ATSI representatives with constitutional power to give advice to the Government on issues related to or impacting ATSI people.

The exact details of the advisory body were up to legislation which we will probably never see.

view more: ‹ prev next ›