Albanese’s double talk is more hot air than argument
The Prime Minister’s belief that emotion and goodwill from people towards Indigenous Australians will carry the voice to parliament is leading him into serious mistakes.
The Prime Minister’s belief that emotion and goodwill from people towards Indigenous Australians will carry the voice to parliament is leading him into serious mistakes.
My message is simple: You can believe passionately in human rights, equality and reconciliation and decide to vote No on the Indigenous voice to parliament.
The PM’s evolving argument on the voice suggests he can recognise the threat to the referendum success if there is too much confusion.
Indigenous leader Noel Pearson says he is ‘heartbroken’ by the behaviour of opposition legal affairs spokesman Julian Leeser and his criticism of the voice.
Tony Abbott writes so clearly and cogently about the voice.
The Greens have upheld the need for the voice to provide advice on policies such as the safeguard mechanism in a rebuke to Anthony Albanese.
Australians will vote on the Indigenous voice to parliament with two pages of details from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s referendum working group about the body’s functions and limits.
The government’s effort to explain the Indigenous voice to parliament’s reach won’t be helped by contradicting messages from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Attorney General Mark Dreyfus.
Attorney-General says voice representations to the governor-general will be made when ‘relevant’, but its focus will be on pressing issues like health and education.
Broadcaster Neil Mitchell has lashed former ABC host Jon Faine and the ‘media elite’ over its treatment of voice critics.
In opposition – federally and in the mainland states – the Coalition must now stand up for energy security.
Paul Kelly’s powerful contribution to the voice debate at the weekend should be a ‘mind where you go’ warning to all Australians.
I’d prefer to avoid the moral scorn that will be directed at Indigenous voice to parliament critics. But in the absence of an 11th-hour prime ministerial change of heart, it’s absolutely necessary that Australia vote No.
The point of the Indigenous voice to parliament was it would be conservatively acceptable. But of course, it required progressive sanitisation, as the Left began to ideologically colonise the concept.
How will it make us feel, as a nation, if the Indigenous voice to parliament doesn’t pass? Embarrassed, ashamed, small, I’d hazard a bet.
Let us hope the voice debate becomes more high minded. There have been nasty slurs by Yes advocates, describing No advocates as being driven by racism. But conservatives cannot claim victimhood.
Two days after warning his colleagues that no referendum had passed without bipartisan support, Anthony Albanese virtually ensured there will be no bipartisanship.
The Australian tragedy of 2023 is about to unfold. Anthony Albanese has conflated the just cause of Indigenous recognition with a model that breaches too many principles to be supported.
Readers have their say on the Anthony Albanese’s emotional voice appeal, Lidia Thorpe’s latest look-at-me stunt, and the residential secrets of the super-rich.
The voice does not exist and yet it has already had a massive victory in entrenching its ability to intervene in advance, without limit, in any commonwealth decision.
Original URL: https://www.theaustralian.com.au/topics/indigenous-voice-to-parliament/page/60