DEAR News Of The Area,

I AGAIN thank the NOTA for enabling discussion on this important issue.

My fellow correspondent, Jean-Paul (NOTA 20/1/23) infers that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament will have no say over such things as capital gains tax, negative gearing or franking credits.

How does he know that?

Don’t these things “matter” (as stated in Clause 2 of the proposed Referendum) to our Indigenous people?

Our New Zealand cousins in 1975 established the Waitangi Tribunal.

It was a body intended to have purely non-binding advisory functions in redressing grievances by Maori people.

Thus, in this respect, it is similar to our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament.

Since that time New Zealand’s courts have interpreted the Tribunal’s role very broadly.

It is now a quasi-judicial body with significant influence over the elected parliament.

It now, according to the Institute of Public Affairs, has “become a vehicle for allocating (among others) critical social and economic resources such as health, education, and job opportunities on the basis of race, not need”.

The IPA goes on to state that it “exceeds the advisory role, and now wields veto over parliamentary debates and government decisions”.

With this influence, New Zealand’s current constitutional arrangements have become unfair, undemocratic and politically divisive.

In short, it has become a judicial and constitutional horror story.

Former High Court Justice, Ian Callinan, has stated that “the (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Voice to Parliament could lead to years of constitutional and administrative law litigation”.

We should learn from our Kiwi cobbers, as well as listen to him.

Australia has, at present, 30 Aboriginal land councils and 2,700 Aboriginal corporations plus the PM’s Indigenous Advisory Council and a Council of Peaks representing about 70 big Aboriginal groups.

Almost every one of those has a lobbyist in Canberra.

The Voice will have 24 members representing more than 250 Aboriginal tribes.

How will all these organisations interact with the Voice?

It begs the question: If all of those organisations are unable to lift the Indigenous out of their present situation(s), what guarantee is there that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament will do it?

The concern is that if implemented, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament will also be susceptible to judicial activism, and will grant special privileges to Australians based on their race.

This is contrary to the present rule of law.

It must also be understood that if implemented (in the Constitution), and subsequently found to be ineffective, it will be impossible to repeal, defund, or effectively reform it.

The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament is a top-down national bureaucratic ideologically-driven solution to issues that are fundamentally local.

The Prime Minister is well-intentioned, but he, and his Ministers, are obscuring the truth, and he is being rather timid in explaining all the facts.

Think carefully about this vote.

Regards,
Peter WEYLING,
Corindi Beach.