• CalamityJoe@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Because even with that additional wording was in the constitution, any law or changes that prevented the Voice from existing, and being able to make representations to Parliament, would be unconstitutional.

    • FaceDeer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Alright, its sole function is to present that pamphlet to Parliament itself. Still pointless.

      • CalamityJoe@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Not pointless at at all, and I’m not sure why you believe that.

        Do you think mining companies and large corporations spend the 100s of millions of dollars they do on political lobbyists, to approach parliament and put forward the companies’ views on their behalf, if it was pointless?

        No. Lobbyists achieve results, and at a minimum, make the companies feel like they’re part of the political process, and that their concerns and needs are being voiced, and a much healthier chance of having proposed legislation amended due to that lobbying. It’s political participation.

        Lobbyist don’t get to change laws either. They don’t get to amend or dismiss laws, or sidestep the political process. They communicate and voice their concerns to those that do have that ability. I don’t see anyone saying lobbyists are useless pamphlet sellers.

        The Voice was essentially a proposal to enable the creation of a constitutionally recognised lobbying entity that would work on Indigenous Australians’ behalf, since Indigenous Australians don’t have the financial or organisational capacity to create such an entity themselves, and