
Today is the day of the Voice referendum vote (written 14 Oct but published 15 Oct, so the outcome remains unknown if predicted). It's quite cloudy and dark and windy. Not too pleasant a day, but not raining. I walk to the local primary school to vote with
our two dogs. They are stubborn and slow
but not too bad this day despite the distance.
There are two sides of the vote, of course, Yes and No, and we've heard
lots on that over recent months. Coming
in there were two reps plugging their positions but none too intrusive. A middle aged man wore the No t-shirt; a
younger woman wore the Yes t-shirt. They
both responded to our dogs (they are cute; it's common) and the woman offered
to care for them while I went to vote.
There were some other dogs tied up so I took her offer. Nice to see they were civil enough and we
could all chat about dogs. I handed over
the dogs and some treats. Voting was
quicker than usual. Maybe I chose the
time well or most were off to MOAD = Old Parliament House to vote. Certainly voting there would be interesting. I came back and the two chatted with me,
about how the dogs went, how he'd had a long hair as a kid, how dachshunds were
bred to hunt badgers, how they'd got a treat.
Then a walk home. I'm awaiting an
expected win by the No-s. I remember the
last referendum, on the Republic, and how Howard had managed that one and how
the Republican movement had split. Like this
time. And how "don't know, vote no"
is a mighty river to cross. For
something so little and so undemanding, so powerless. So what of the twos? First up is two choices, Yes or No, an inevitability
but a demanding hill to climb for any change, especially with two opposing political
sides taken. Second is disagreement on
each side, especially the call for a more radical position that results in no
change, so no Voice but also no Treaty.
Third is our two dogs and the pleasure of seeing the local reps for Yes
and No able to talk to each other. It's
a sign of a relatively healthy democracy and country even while others
despair. Fourth is the two most recent referendums
that have failed and how they have choked our ability or readiness to attempt
constitutional change (you can add a third referendum under Hawke that also
became a political football). Maybe a
fifth, for the ex-British colonies that have found some agreement with their
indigenous peoples (Australia is one of the only Commonwealth countries without
a treaty with its First Nations peoples ATNS)
and ex-British colonies that remain with British royalty as their head of state
(Commonwealth realms Wikipedia). I just wonder if the old joke of
Britain getting rid of the monarchy before Australia will come to pass. Thus was my outing this morning to vote. Sadly I missed a pic of our Yes and No reps with
our dogs so just a pic of Truffles and Chopper in their more normal habitat.
PS. Here's my recent letter to the Editor, Canberra Times
(28 Sep 2023) relevant to the Voice, if slightly tongue in cheek: "Maybe
we need more voices to Parliament, not fewer. The Aboriginal Voice will
have no power and presumably its arguments and requests will be reported with
its own Hansard and Government and Parliament will make open decisions informed
by this input. But there are others with access to Ministers and pollies
of which we know virtually nothing. Why not create a Big Business Voice
to Parliament so we know when and what they are asking for. And why not
others for miners, private schools, property developers, banks, professional
services, unions, lobbyists. Any other suggestions?"
PPS. It's morning after the Referendum as I
write this. I am not surprised but I am disappointed. What
thoughts? The ACT is the only area (not state, but territory, so
somewhat impotent given the constitution) that voted for the Voice at
individual and community level (~2/3 Yes). Every other state and NT
voted No and overall Australians voted ~2/3 No. It's noted the ACT
is the youngest and most educated population and this is some measure of why I
like it here (despite the tram!). As for politics, Albanese spoke of
being "ambitious". Surely, a Voice, an advisory committee,
with no power is not ambitious (stop and think: how much less could our Indigenous peoples have asked for?). It reminds me of Labor's climate
action and more. Maybe, ultimately, it's a winning strategy but it's
disappointing in the meantime and I can only hope we don't lose it all from
being too meek in the interim. As for Dutton, his call for reviews
on child sex abuse and expenditure smacks of blaming the underdog and he's laid
plenty of blame, especially on Albanese. All pretty obviously
political to my ears. Given recent politics here and overseas, all
this is not unexpected. And as for the radical No-s, what
now? If you can't get a powerless advisory committee in place, what
can you achieve from a position dependent on 97% of others? And as
for our media and think tanks (both Warren Mundine ["symbolic declaration
of war"] and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price ["... no ongoing negative
impacts of colonisation"] are associated with the Centre for Independent
Studies) and broader politics, I tend to desperation as with much else these
days. But desperation is easy: what action did I
take? Not much was required here in the ACT, but I was surprised by
the misinformed elsewhere and did my little to carry out my "talking
cure" (see The Pots!). I doubt it worked. And I did
write my letter to the editor. So Australia wakes up once again
unchanged with the naysayers claiming just the approach was the problem, then
presumably applauding their works at conservative conferences or on relevant
boards. Australia's basically a good place and Australians are
basically good people, but it's easy given our wealth and we can be fearful and
untrusting and so easily misled. Referenda are big symbols so they
can stop us in our tracks to ask of us and our future. Our Brexit? If so, just what
is our future?