Far Enough - Vote Yes 

I have 5 friends who are in a joint lotto syndicate. 3 are yes voters and 3 are no. Of the No voters, 1 has swallowed the line that this is “the thin edge of the wedge” and will ultimately lead to… he’s not sure what, but something bad. The other 2 No voters are out and proud racists. So in answer to the above comment, in my group the No voters aren’t dummies, they are just scared, or racists.

@@richardbellmaines9460 And they are your friends?

Nah, this vid isn't calling no voters dumb, it is just encouraging people who are confused to do some basic research and get good info.

If the shoe fits...weird. same shoe size as the plebiscite no voters. Same style. Still lost that one, didnt ya sport.

@@Ademos5- The plebiscite was way more comprehensive of an idea. The information for the voice is so vague and basically relies only on the idea that if you care about aboriginal people the vote for this… even if it is a bad idea.

It's not all Lefties. It's mainly Progressives. There are still working class 'rednecks' keeping the flame alive. You know ... the kinds of people Progressives sneer at for having the audacity to be unsophisticated and live in uncool places.

Aboriginals should honestly just be happy. It dont get what the big deal is.

When you use the term "lefties", I assume you are referring to people other than yourself. I must conclude that for you, "lefties" are people who know how to construct simple sentences that involve punctuation.

Yes you've spoken using the term leftist, indicating you weren't interested in our indigenous only some pathetic unrelated culture war. Gove yourself an uppercut champ, you're a disgrace.

Nah, most lefties are ignorant AF, if they weren't, they wouldn't be lefties. @@TheBlackDogChronicles

Thankyou for making the world a more depressing place!

It’s funny you have more like than the original comment 😂

@emmagrindrod3465 someone’s a little sad 🥺🥺🥺 the difference is the treaty you refer to from New Zealand came from a time the country was at war with Britain. They were capable of holding their own and demanding a treaty. A treaty now for Australia is stupid and unnecessary. If recognition is all they wanted they could have just made the vote about that. That’s why the vote went out like a sad wet fart

@Adrenalin4Life-ds8ub common sense prevails they reckon. I think this is one of those cases

@emmagrindrod3465 why Aboriginals have higher suicide rate? Some wrong with them?

Every1 watched it 28x ;) So simple for those that CARE & want to progress rather than divide Australia on YES for Love or NO for destruction of Social values (just like J.Howard)

Videos shared on other platforms or accounts included. Also they make stats up

Reposted on IG and TT by celebs, so 5mn total, which probably isn't enough

The Guardian will rot your brain

@@arclux "Will" is not as bad as did, by Murdoch media (Fox, Sky, Daily toilet paper, etc ;)

Yep. Not enough people pointing that out.

Hahahhaha Yaye!

Yep. This little gem will do wonders for Team NO. The doubling down will be spectacular.

This add isn't aimed at people who have serious concerns about the Voice or are opposed to it. It is about people who aren't sure but haven't looked into it. They are different groups, and Briggs isn't saying anything about the former here.

Understand what you’re saying. Though this clip certainly implied that No voters are idiots. With this backdrop across the Yes campaign, the result of the election should not be a surprise. In time it may even be said that the majority of Australian’s are pretty wise to be very skeptical of proposed changes to the constitution.

Yes I and everyone I know have questions better than the mockery he made of the people questioning a referendum that came totally out of the blue. Having an unemotional, critical thought out and logical conversation based on facts is not what this video is but pretends to be, still doesn’t answer our questions. This is coming from left wing right wing, everyone. Do you want to answer the real questions we had? No it’s too late it was rushed through ……..hrmmm

When your local labor party office calls your friend out of the blue campaigning for the voice and she asked questions. The guy called her an ‘anti vaxxer’ and hung up on her. So she called them back twice and there is more to this story but basically they didn’t explain at all and tried to guilt trip her into caring with irrelevant facts about indegnous instead of answering questions that were specific and totally fair. ‘But don’t you care about our indigenous Australians?’ Do you know the statistics?’ Yes she is a left wing social worker who was never the anti vaxxer you accused her of. Briggs you had people like this trying make us vote yes. Why would we trust them to do the right thing? 😂 so blame maree edwards local mp office not us 😂 call her and ask her why she had people yelling at local residents to vote and accusing them of being right wing fascists if they ‘dared’ to ask questions.

Racist much? That 3% managed the land a million times better without all the mod cons....but hey...the white fella just gotta justify his position (just for clarity... I'm an embarrassed white fella. Dad British, mum, 3rd generation Aussie. I bet you that if your family had their land stolen, 3, 4, 5 generations later, good hold more of a grudge than these guys. So sad the new world is all about cognitive bias

@@CamTracey I don't know, at least those that 'stole' the land are giving you $40bn a year, something tells me if all non indigenous left tomorrow another country (China) would be here in seconds and would be far less considerate. If all you do is live in the past, you're never going to make progress

You have joined RU-vid 10hrs ago with the moniker "Angry". 'Nuff said.

Um, I've never seen this ad before 😮

@@mnmmnm8321me neither. Briggs can call me dumb. This was a total blindside I am still catching up. Apparently there was advertising on tik tok Insta, I don’t use any of those. I found an explanation and only resource to be the ABC. Labor representative called my friend out of the blue when no one was aware of the referendum really. She asked basic questions about it and the guy called her an ‘anti vaxxer’ out of the blue and hung up. So she called back twice to get someone to listen to her and it was still nonsense once they treated her with decency after being very nasty and personally attacking her based on an assumption that to question Labor means you are an anti vaxxer?? My friend is not an anti vaxxer so……okkkkkk. Very poor detail and emotional blackmail. Don’t you care about indigenous people? Type comments instead of actually what they were proposing. Sorry Briggs but you got me. Where did the referendum dollars go? Why am I going through parliamentary documents to try and understand what it going on and having to watch the senate and question time to get any info? I don’t watch commercial tv. Hahahaha guess I should have just googled. Oh I did

its important to challenge each others beliefs too. talk to your people IRL and tell them why you think they are wrong. some are stuck in their ways but if they truly want to listen they will.

It's really telling that when you push back and provide them with solid arguments, they just revert to good 'ol fashioned racism. That's why people don't want to discuss this. They know their opinion sucks.

@ben10the10 read the comments there are solid arguments from both camps. Little of what I have seen is racism. Just because someone votes no doesn’t mean they are racist. The problem most No voters have with the proposal is that who makes up the voice and what power it is going to have are being decided later by politicians in parliament. People don’t trust those Canberra polies. Even you shouldn’t because next election cycle the liberals may be in power and they can change the voice to whatever they want as it is currently worded. People actually do want better outcomes for indigenous but are worried by the lack of detail. The yes campaign has tried to fill the lack of detail with stuff they just made up. They can’t know these details yet because parliament hasn’t decided on what those details are. The only legally binding thing is the words in the question itself. I suggest you read it carefully, and only it (not what the yes campaign thinks the voice will be or the ‘Uluṟu‘ statement from the heart which is not a legally binding part of this change) then make up your mind. If it is still yes that is no problems but please don’t disrespect other people exercising their democratic rights by slandering them as racist. This is a solid argument against the voice: ‘I don’t trust the politicians in Canberra to not abuse this and stack the voice with puppets and grant it powers to suit their own agenda. This is not a democratic body and as such is open to corruption. It could have been detailed about how it was formed and the powers it has in the wording of the question just like other parts of our constitution. In my opinion the question doesn’t pass the pub test.’

@@ben10the10 "They know their opinion sucks"? I doubt it. Everyone I know, left right or center, thinks their opinion is the gold standard.

@emmagrindrod3465 1. This was NEVER about indigenous peoples, it was about Albo and the ALP repaying a debt to the Activists who got them in power. The Voice would have been a non Aboriginal stacked undemocratic third house that pushed left wing and green agendas. 2. The Voice would have done NOTHING for the current problems. The last thing we need is another talk fest. We need ACTION. We need to stop the squandering of money of crap an focus on the issues you highlight.

@emmagrindrod3465 OK Emma, tell me where it says online the answers to these questions: 1. How many members will comprise the voice: 10 persons 100 persons 1000 persons 10,000 persons 2. How will they be chosen: Direct election from all Australians Direct election from Aboriginal members of Australia Appointment by the existing government Selected by the Land Councils Selected by the states 3. How Aboriginal will the members be: Aboriginal by DNA Aboriginal by more than 50% DNA Aboriginal by less than 50% DNA Australians who identify as Aboriginal Experts who are Australian Any Australian 4. What will they provide: Recommendations only Guidance and Answers Only Suggested legislation and proposals 5. What areas will they cover: Aboriginal land council matters Aboriginal Health issues Australian land use issues Australian environment issues Australian legal issues Australian external relations issues 6: Wil they include: Refugee issues Environment issues Legal issues Civil rights issues Constitution issues Heath issues All issues 7. How long will members be in the Voice: 4 years 2 years Until death That’s the details we were looking for. Now show me where they were, or STFU.

use your brain?

​@@vanessagoddess1Check first reply.

It looked like a junta in the making. I'm half waiting for the Prime Minister to return with the green light from Xi and Biden to take the next step by force. He does, after all, seem to think (according to that radio interview in Melbourne) that a perfect world is him as Dictator banning social media and deciding what truth is.

Pwnt

You’re glad they can’t literally just give advice? That was scary for you?

@@youarethedancingqueeyour living under a rock like a commie rock spider 😂

@IgnoreNot-qg3ly It literally was just going to be a rotating roster of 24 First Nations representatives GIVING ADVICE to Parliament. They would NOT have ‘got a vote’, only elected Members of Parliament can propose, vote on, or pass laws. The Voice representatives would NOT be Members of Parliament & would have no power to make laws, or to veto laws. They would literally just go into a room & be listened to. That’s it. There wouldn’t have been any obligation on the Parliament to act on anything the Voice members said. They would literally have just had to listen. Equality isn’t the same as treating everyone the same. Equality is about leveling the playing field. It includes providing wheelchair ramps, closed loop sound systems in auditoriums for hearing aid wearers, having Medicare to provide medical care to people who wouldn’t be able to afford it otherwise, charging lower bus fares for pensioners, paying compensation to victims of crime, soup vans for people without food, letting people who’ve been silenced speak.

@@03041976001 It was literally exactly that. Didn’t you read it?

Are all the Aborigines who wanted the Voice also 'commies'?@@timmaslen4766

Exactly!

The same guy that used to turn a blind eye to his brothers and sisters (not literal family) getting blind drunk abusing people at the Flinders Street steps? Oldmate only got this chip on his shoulder when he started getting famous and hanging around with activist class people like Paul Kelly.

Methinks someone feels guilty.

@@TheBlackDogChronicles methinks if you knew me, and what I've contributed ( including creating a music vid for one of Briggs own artists back in 2016 ) you'd realise you're talking out your arse ;)

Haha exactly, painful to watch really.

@@moorspede yes, it was painful to watch.

​@WarningTimes no land grabs? Oh that's rich. 😂

The ad was originally an ad for Tinder. Listen carefully.

That Lurch looking old Trot can give us the silent treatment forever for all I care.

yeah, I disagree with Marcia Langton on that. I believe Australians that voted No are actually selfish and racist. They're not stupid at all. They knew exactly what they were doing

Don't forget all the other expletives she used

@@Migswan Thank you for voting NO in Melbourne and keeping Australia equal for all Australians.

Oh it will go down that path.. but briggs and his mates wont be at the helm at least @@Migswan

That was hilarious, eh? Two middle class urban hipster chicks. As IF such creatures would ever pause to consider how they'll vote.

The yes leaders have refused any offers to debate.

@@arcluxI’m not a YES leader, just a very informed person (or alternatively: a racist, shepple, vegan/vegetarian , elitist, latte sipping, idiot, douche bag - based on the comments, but I digress). When did my (putative) overlords and mind controllers refuse to have a debate . And with whom? I hope it was supposed to be with somebody from Advance (aka Fair Australia).

Nope, they are meant to represent people who are unsure but haven't looked into it. It isn't addressing considered no voters or saying anything about them.

​@@DW_drumsThey've been here for 60k years and invented stuff like curved stick, stick with pointy end, stick with 2 pointy ends and stick with holes in it. Then the white man came and brought civilisation.

worse that than, there's a bunch of sites called "let me google that for you" etc. It's kind of sarcastic what they do.

Yeah I tried it just now and it really works. I was surprised to find that you can search for other stuff like Indigenous treaty and funny videos of cats.

Of course and google will always provide you with the right answers and right information……..

Google this - www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8bj0jbnn1yri9y83lbblg/USOTH-Document-14.pdf?rlkey=0fumbze6godfjoxa0wq5gstjo&dl=0

Yeah mate. Actually google it. Check out part 3 from the actual question: 129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia: 1) there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice; 2) the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; 3) the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.

Peter Dutton also convinced me to vote yes

Yeah, if Dutton and Pauline Hanson both say it's bad, then it must be good. Vote yes! 🤣

Why is that a reason to vote no? It's just a representation... it's advice only. With no veto powers. What's the issue???

@@jesselise1996 because people like Dutton are afraid of losing their life of privilege

@@jesselise1996 exactly

google is heavily censored these days dude.. it’s not like the 90s anymore.. remember all those different search engines we used to have.. even duck duck go is censored now.. you have to keep your wits about you and not just believe anything you read.. online scamming is a thing and it extends far beyond what the average googler would imagine. and have a nice day 😬

Yeah I googled it and found that this is propaganda and lies! Check out part 3 from the actual question: 129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia: 1) there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice; 2) the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; 3) the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.

So good! I love them and Briggs

Yeah that arm touch was perfect! Such an incredible political video. More of these and less of boring political videos. I actively searched for this clip. I’ve never done that about a political issue before.

I agree, it would definitely not be patronising to give one ethnic group special treatment, vote yes!

Who said that? Nobody

​@jonah.donohue Well I said that. I wasn't quoting. Have you not sensed that people in western cultures are growing more weary by the day of the culture wars? That's what I'm seeing in a lot of content. I was expressing my viewpoint on the possibility that people voted no, in part, because they're over the pressure from the cultural left. If you disagree, cool. No problem.

It's funny how people with a guilty conscience imbue something with meaning it doesn't really seem to have. Shakespeare had something to say about that, in Hamlet in Act 3, Scene 2.

@TheBlackDogChronicles well I'm intrigued. I shall have to look that up and educate myself. Thanks for your comment. I'm sure, knowing Hamlet to be renowned for its monologue, which I've seen as a movie clip, what I find will be elucidating.

​@@TheBlackDogChronicles Yes. The 'groundlings'. Poor souls 😂

They get the same recognition as everyone else.

@@arcluxNot according to one of you earlier responses, which implied they didn’t actually fight ( presume it was you, the no campaign reminds me of smoke). Certainly one correspondent suggest the indigenous people who dod fight were on part indigenous, but they didn’t say which part ……right leg, left arm etc.

That's not true at all. The Proposed Section 129 has been written simply and tightly to ensure that the Voice provides advice only. It is actually a constitutionally conservative position that's why constitutional conservatives have joined the overwhelming majority of constitutional experts in supporting the Voice.

@@sandracochrane2155 are you saying the voice CANNOT appeal to the High Court? …

@@sandracochrane2155 Watch "The Constitutional Implications of The Voice Referendum Proposal" by 'Aussie Law'

@@garyandrews5104 I'm saying it's highly, highly unlikely according to constitutional lawyers and constitutional experts including those who have sat on the High Court. Kenneth Haine, who sat on the High Court and ran the Banking Royal Commission, is one of many who have discussed this. He's been interesting on this. He says that he thinks the only serious possibility is when public servants don't administer government decisions according to the law (rather than the Voice than the Voice going to the High Court because advice isn't taken). And, lets face it, given what we've seen from the Robodebts Royal Commission, anything that can help bring into line public servants breaking the law is a good thing. I mention Haine's discussing it because he has such a no nonsense way of communicating things, he's a good person to follow up for yourself. Other people like Twoomey, Saunders, French, Craven, Willams and the Solicitor General have said the same. They're all on the record so you can check them out. Others too.

Chatgpt rules again

The proposed Voice is a body of First Nations people chosen by First Nations communities. Every representative will have a four year term to ensure they are accountable to their communities. The Voice will also be covered by the NACC - the new federal anti-corruption body. It's true we do have some parliamentarians who are from First Nations, but MPs represent their party (and perhaps the people in their electorate) and Senators represent their party (and perhaps their state). There are no parliamentarians directly representing First Nations people. The Voice will be non-political. We have a minister to look after First Nations issues but they still put their party first. It's true there are other bodies that represent groups like health organisations and there are community groups including football clubs, but they don't provide advice directly from communities to the government and parliament. The organisations like the health organizations don't automatically get to give advice to the government and parliament. They are at the mercy of the government. So, it's got nothing to do with being discredited by their communities. There are a couple of other things that I think are important about the Voice. First, we voters will get to hear when the Voice gives really good advice and the government ignores it when making policies and developing programs. So, we'll know that politicians are wasting our taxes to play political games. The second thing is those gaps in the rates of suicide, birth weight, employment, live expectancy, etc will start coming down. That's going to get all Australians thinking that we can have better policies in the broader community if we listen to people and use the research. So, in times benefits will start flowing through to all Australians. But, it will take time to close those gaps so we need to stop politicians playing games, and if the Voice is in the Constitution, we can do that. I can't see a single downside of the Voice. I'm sixty years old and I have been watching First Nations people kicked around like political footballs all my life. To me, this looks like the best opportunity we've ever had to finally start dealing with all the disadvantages so many First Nations people face. So, this old girl has voted Yes because of all the things above and because even the overwhelming majority of "constitutional conservatives" think the Voice will make government better.

@@sandracochrane2155 you can't see a single down side to the Voice? Have you been living in an echo chamber? We already have the voice - we spend billions of dollars on indigenous initiatives covering health, housing and welfare, we spend double the amount on per indigenous Australian that other Australians and we have 11 indigenous MPs. The Voice is only going to bolster big government and give it more power, and will not resolve any of the major issues impacting aborigines.

@@Simon-pl2zi Much of what you claim is actually untrue. I don't live in an echo chamber - I'm here talking to you because I'm interested in how you come to think as you do. But, my work and person lives have given me the opportunities to see a lot and listen to a great many people - I'm 60 years old so that's a lot of observing and listening to a great many perspectives and experiences. The Voice isn't a magic wand and it will take time for various people to adjust, but I have confidence that Australians are just as capable as people in other countries where a variety of models are starting to make a difference.

It's to enshrine the pay cheques of the grifter class.

I know, the yes campaign has been one mistake after another.

The third paragraph of the referendum proposal is completely standard. It is to allow Parliament to improve the Voice over time instead of prescribing a fixed structure that can never change. It’s nothing to create fear over. Check out Section 51 of the constitution that is set up the same way for pretty much all law making. If you don’t think there should be a Voice fine vote NO, but don’t try to scare people into thinking it’s something it’s not. The NO campaign is full of misinformation and distraction aimed at making people anxious - and now apparently trolling. Please let’s debate the issue at hand, not the distractions…

You are copy pasting this everywhere mate. What's ya fucking point? Part three is literally "the government gets to legislate what the voice body will look like and how it will work". Which means that it can be as strong... or alternatively as weak as the parliament of the day wants it to be with the only caveat that it can't be abolished completely. There's no fucking gotcha.

So there's no confusion - I'm in full support of this sensible reform. My comment refers to the FB memes and statemdnts of misinformation, swirling around in social media echo-chambers for those opposed. Should have been clearer about that. Agree - part 3 is perfectly normal. It's actually an important protection, allows the amendment to be inserted without creating any unnecessary legacy. Australians who have looked directly at this change, and actually understand it, will get behind it.

@@lachlanmcvey7885 Your use of the information included in your comments is the literal definition of propaganda.

@80sHEAVYMetalPowerBALLAD-bt3pv Just say you don't understand the proposal mate, or the current state of the Constitution.

Not necessarily. We are going to hear about advice not taken, and if the majority of us have voted Yes, that starts to shift the balance of power in favour of on the ground knowledge and research-based evidence. Even people who don't care about their fellow Australians will start to care about wasting their taxes (assuming their thought processes are not governed by racism).

If it really were going to be toothless, you'd see the Liberal party actually in favour of it rather than pulling out all the stops to make sure it doesn't happen. If it won't matter to you either way, why oppose it?

Sorry but I am trying to keep up here what is "cultural load"?

Oh yes, that reassures me, someone who thinks others they need to be patronised.

Farken let em know aye!

​@@MM54334He isn't saying white people can't read, just that a lot of us have been confused by the lies spreading into believing things that are disproven by literally reading the paper.

​@@thedave7760The idea of cultural load is roughly the feeling of responsibility or onus to explain things, represent Indigenous people and culture etc.

Briggs getting $$$$, air time on ABC TV and radio and some other underhanded goona to be out here campaigning alongside any mainstream poli.... Proudly voted NO

Weak as F

Your argument isn’t that compelling. I’m sorry I don’t speak emoji

It’s a No from me also. It’s divisive and risky, should’ve been legislated before putting it in our constitution.

Funny thing is I didn't see any comedy in that. The ignorance is all too common.

@@wandayonder9772 It's tragicomedy. Tragic for the indigenous & just people, Comedy for the world loughin at our primitivity, if NO (J.Howard's mob) takes over :(

@@lachlanmcvey7885 Do you understand it? Ask P. Hanson - Please explain ;) Even the Western biased BARD understands that: ...The Voice suggestion is significant proposal that has the potential to improve the lives of the Indigenous peoples. We still want to torture them? How uncivilized :(

What a load of garbage. If Albanese won't explain how the voice will work until after the referendum, then there is no way you or anyone else could have any idea of what the true consequences of voting yes are. That is not misinformation it is lack of information from Albo. Blame him.

How much land you grabbed that you don't want to share? @@WarningTimes

Really? Is this your first time on RU-vid? 😂

That's why it's failing so bad 😂

@@blox82 LMAO facts!

Yes, it's very cringe. Will backfire badly. Someone didn't think this through .. at all.

FFS, the no campaign have ADOPTED the trump play book……specifically Advance, backers of Fair Australia, announced with glee at CCPAC (how American - look it up) in August, that they could manipulate the narrative . They have. I hope you enjoy the post- truth world you have just joined up to.

I had the same reaction.

Happy to discuss……

As above, if you are still not sure, happy to talk about what you're unsure about :)

@@LlywellynOBrien They're saying that this vid is so obnoxious, that it has potentially changed their mind.

That clause is completely standard. It is to allow Parliament to improve the Voice over time instead of prescribing a fixed structure that can never change. It’s nothing to create fear over. Check out Section 51 of the constitution that is set up the same way for pretty much all law making. If you don’t think there should be a Voice, fine, but don’t try to scare people into thinking it’s something it’s not. The NO campaign is full of misinformation and distraction aimed at making people anxious. Please let’s debate the issue at hand, not the distractions…

@@lachlanmcvey7885 man you are the NO campaign employee of the month with your effort on this video. Gold star 👏

@@lachlanmcvey7885 So I'd think this would actually reassure no campaigners that the Voice, whilst it can make representations to Parliament, is still governed by Parliament and will remain so. It usurps no Parliamentary powers; it's simply an advisory body.

Spoiler alert...the wise gentleman doesn't like white people anddeep down wants them all to leave ...

My advice is if you don't know, do your own research.

It goes to show how ignorant the right are.

Don't no, read this - www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/8bj0jbnn1yri9y83lbblg/USOTH-Document-14.pdf?rlkey=0fumbze6godfjoxa0wq5gstjo&dl=0

Yes actually find out. Don’t read the first paragraph of the vote yes campaign and actually read the question. Check out part 3 from the actual question: 129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia: 1) there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice; 2) the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; 3) the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.

No one will answer important questions about the structure and powers of The Voice and the official statement is that the details of The Voice will be decided AFTER the referendum. Approving legislation before it is written Is as smart as giving a signed blank check to a 5 year old, no one in their right mind would do either.

This vid has probably given the NO side thousands of votes. Who knows why they thought sneering would work. Maybe they don't get out much?

This video isn't about people who are opposed or the no campaign. It is about people who are unsure but haven't looked into it. It isn't about no voters.

@@LlywellynOBrien Doesn't matter. They're basically saying if you're not a firm Yes, you're some kind of idiot.

@@pm2886 No they aren't there aren't any no voters in the video and nothing is mentioned about them.

You're quite right. It's about denigrating undecided voters. That really worked well, didn't it?@@LlywellynOBrien

@ Lachlan The third paragraph of the referendum proposal is completely standard. It is to allow Parliament to improve the Voice over time instead of prescribing a fixed structure that can never change. It’s nothing to create fear over. Check out Section 51 of the constitution that is set up the same way for pretty much all law making. If you don’t think there should be a Voice fine vote NO, but don’t try to scare people into thinking it’s something it’s not. The NO campaign is full of misinformation and distraction aimed at making people anxious - and now apparently trolling. Please let’s debate the issue at hand, not the distractions…

Funny that they actually wrote it, so, maybe they had control of the narrative. Just saying

Systemic misogyny maybe? Deeply ingrained. I doubt they would have scripted mansplaining in if they were aware of it.

@stevecharles683 Yeah I think (yes they wrote it, but) you’re right, it is (unintentionally I think) reinforcing an unhelpful stereotype. It would maybe be better as a series, with people of different ages/genders/ethnicities/takes on the issue in each one. Even better if the characters’ views worked against viewers’ stereotypical expectations of them.

@@youarethedancingquee if you can do better put your money where your mouth is..

Well that escalated fast

Is that what your Sky News safe space told you? Mr Bolt let you in on the whole story hey. The irony that the whole video you commented on was about just Google-ing it is not lost on me. For anyone reading this, the above commentor is lying 🤥

This is not true.

That's not true. Although different countries have different models, First Nations people elsewhere are making advances in areas like health and education. And they are happy to see that Australia might join the 21st Century, and wish us well if we do. Of course, nothing is perfect, and some countries are adjusting legislation to make their bodies more effective and not all politicians and bureaucrats are open to doing better when they can manipulate First Nations issues to their political or promotional advantage. But, there are always people of goodwill and people who prefer selfish opportunism. Many other countries are watching us. Personally, I don't think we should be swayed by the views other countries have of us, but we do have to recognize that we will have to accommodate a world view that sees us as diminished and we can expect major powers like China to be pointing out our human rights hypocrisy when we are having arguments with them.

@@sandracochrane2155 you are completely wrong on this. We can and should look to see how other countries have done this. The Sami parliament in Finland is disastrous to Sami people . I know because I speak with them. Indigenous leadership should always be local. No official voice can ever do that. That's the European way my friend.

@@joethi4981proof is better than assertion. For example, my indigenous friends in Britain ( the Anglo celt saxon pict dane cohort) are doing ok - discuss.

@@lachlanmcvey7885how is it a lie?

That clause is completely standard. It is to allow Parliament to improve the Voice over time instead of prescribing a fixed structure that can never change. It’s nothing to create fear over. Check out Section 51 of the constitution that is set up the same way for pretty much all law making. If you don’t think there should be a Voice, fine, but don’t try to scare people into thinking it’s something it’s not. The NO campaign is full of misinformation and distraction aimed at making people anxious. Please let’s debate the issue at hand, not the distractions…

*YES MOB ARE WOKE TERRORISTS*

@alansergeant9185 they say the voice will be chosen by indigenous leaders in the communities in the video. The actual question states that the make up will be determined by parliament. When facts contradict a claim then that is the definition of a lie. The video basically ‘googles’ it for you says some stuff they made up and relies on people being to lazy to actually google it themselves. So deceitful.

@@lachlanmcvey7885and what wasn’t accurate about the video?

shut up

Mansplaining never really meant what you seem to imply it does. Mansplaining was just one more way of denigrating white men in particular. It's therefore not applicable in this scenario.

@Heres2The80syep! It had nothing to do with race. We are all beautiful Australians under one flag. We need to support all our first nations people and make sure they have strong family values and great education.

😂 that would shut up the right wing people