Voice then Treaty
Despite the pacifying words of the ‘Yes’ campaign, the proposed Voice is divisive and it is racist,
There’s nothing more important to the country's future than the Voice.
I say that not because it will make a positive difference to the nation but because it will irreparably change our country for the worse.
Despite the pacifying words of the yes campaign, the proposed voice is divisive and racist.
Opening up a constitutional role available only to people of a certain race is the very essence of racism, and yet they will openly deny that.
To be so openly dishonest about such a transparent element of their proposal begs the question, what else are they lying about?
The yes camp will tell us race is an outdated concept, yet they are hanging their shingle on it. In their eyes, many Aboriginal communities' failures are due to racism.
The substance abuse and sexual abuse is due to racism. The domestic violence is due to racism. The incarceration rate of Aboriginal criminals is due to racism.
It’s all racism, all the time, and yet they keep saying race is an outdated concept and plays no part in this proposal.
It’s pure bunkum and is demonstrable when you review the background papers leading to this referendum.
Unlike the Prime Minister, I have waded through the minutes of meetings, and it makes things very clear.
The Voice is not the endpoint. It is just the beginning. It says so very clearly in the document.
This is the beginning of an assault on our nation by activists who want power and money enshrined in perpetuity.
It also makes clear that this referendum is wholly unnecessary.
The Voice could be legislated through parliament this week if the government wanted to.
They don’t and won’t because then the full horror of what’s to come will be on display, and it could be undone by a future government that is genuinely committed to the unity and betterment of all Australians.
Instead, the Yes mob want a constitutional claim that can never be realistically undone and where the real influence of the Voice will be determined, not by people or parliament, but by the High Court.
But as I said, that’s just the start.
Some of the demands in the meeting minutes include.
- Designated Aboriginal seats in the Senate
- An Aboriginal elected body.
- Prohibition of Racial Discrimination.
- Treaty within the Constitution.
That’ll indicate the end goal: racial preference, racial division and a race-based parliamentary system.
They want a treaty that includes:
- Land and sea rights
- A fixed percentage of Gross national product.
- Rates/land tax/royalties
- Right to self-determination
- Timeline to achieve Aboriginal control
And the methodology for achieving that goal is all laid out.
Once the voice is done, we will move on to the Makarrata commission…whatever that is.
Following the report of the Special Joint Parliamentary Committee on a Bill establishing the Voice, the Committee should undertake an inquiry into a second Bill establishing an appropriate institution (to be called the Makarrata Commission) to supervise the making of agreements between First Peoples and Australian governments.
The Bill establishing the Makarrata Commission should confer all necessary powers and functions to facilitate the settlement of a National Makarrata Framework Agreement between Australian Governments and First Peoples, as well as subsequent First People Agreements at the local level…which should have as one of its functions the role of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to enable all Australians to face the truth of the past and to embrace a common hope for the future.
The graphic describes the Makarrata Commission as the umpire to make agreements between the government and the tribal groups now known as First Nations.
Incredibly, the term First Nations was adopted from Canada and has only recently been applied here. It’s entirely made up; like so much other ancient tribal mythology we are repeatedly told is truth.
Anyway, back to the umpire bit.
Doesn’t it bell the cat on how a group of racial elites will decide what’s right and wrong, what’s fair and not fair over the rest of us?
They’ll be the umpire…determining the who, what and how much of almost everything that touches our parliament.
Maybe it’s an old-fashioned notion, but I thought the parliament was meant to make those decisions. And then we already have several umpires in that regard….elections for one, they enable all of us to render our verdict on how we are governed.
Then we have the court system as an independent upholder of the rule of law.
We are supposed to accept a race-based umpire, which is clearly on the agenda if the racist Voice is installed in our constitution.
This process is a trojan horse for further racial divide. It says as much in the hundred and twelve pages of meeting notes that the Prime Minister…and I suspect many others in the yes camp, couldn’t be bothered to read.
Vote No to the Voice.
Read the document for yourself.