A bill to alter the constitution and enable the Indigenous voice has passed the federal parliament ahead of Australia’s first referendum in 24 years to be held later in 2023.

The Senate passed the bill on Monday 52 votes to 19, confirming the wording of the constitutional change to be put to the Australian people. The draft legislation passed the lower house last month.

    • ⸻ Ban DHMO 🇦🇺 ⸻@aussie.zone
      shield
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with people, however, it is difficult to see how this could lead to an insightful discussion. Please consider expanding upon your thoughts if you wish for insightful discussion to follow.

    • Dalek Thal@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      …silly duffer, the constitution already empowers the government to make laws about race (s 51 xxvi). This power has been used regularly against Indigenous Australians.

      Or is it only racist when it’s against white people?

      • TheHolm@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Any differential treatment based on race is racism. Only way to stop it is not having it mentioned anywhere in the law. We need to stop this practice not enshrine it.

    • sycamores@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The voice to parliament isn’t about race, it’s about ensuring that the traditional owners have constitutional right to advise parliament.

      • makingStuffForFun
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I have family in the yidingi in Cairns. It’s a separate nation, as are all the aboriginal nations.

        There are many separate nations.

        My family member was just last week asking me how the hundreds of other nations will all agree and find a common ground. I had no answer as, just like he said, there is no one aboriginal nation, rather many individual nations.

        One group of people from a nation or two, or ten even, can’t make a decision for all aboriginal nations. That was his take anyway.

        So he’s voting no.

        I am not aboriginal. I don’t have full info on what the decision means. So I have no idea how I can vote either way.

        Transparency is important. Inclusion of, and working with all aboriginal nations is also important.

    • Bill Stickers@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not racist. There’s no detriment to anyone. I will agree I don’t want this in the constitution for hundreds of years when it’ll be meaningless eventually. But it isn’t racist.