, dismissing concerns that its wording could open a floodgate of protracted legal battles.
"It will be the parliament that decides the details about how the Voice is set up. It will be the parliament that decides how its representations are dealt with … And to my mind, that is exactly how it should be," he says.
Why? Get paid.
Some have expressed concerns. The only solution is to take the contest to the High Court and have it resolved there. It will be a long and expensive case without a fully resolved outcome. auspol auspol2023
It may be a sad reflection of the state of our culture, but I'm fairly sure High Court Justices, former and present are not held in high esteem by the average person. Their opinions may carry weight in law, but not in people's hearts.
Free promo for the Voice again ABC.
We don’t want race in constitution, and we don’t want our national broadcaster peddling the First Nations lie. Vote No.
Cherry pick one judge when others have said the exact opposite! That immediately confirms that when matters are brought before the High Court, which would definitely happen, the decision could go either way. Albanese could have changed the words to avoid that, but chickened out.
What’s the chance our fear is justified? 1%, 2%, 3%? Any more than zero, it’s a no. High court judges are conflicted here…what’s their day rate? VoteNo
the Voice says 'Aboriginal lands should be mined'. LNP in power says 'Absolutely' - first nations peoples screwed over for a buck. Isn't it that, and similar argy-bargy - a problem?
Canberra is a ghastly, oppressive bubble in which groupthink is mandatory, otherwise you’re ‘disinvited’ to everything, omitted from lucrative posts and committees, and generally shunned. The grovelling compliance of retired judges is entirely predictable.
He says he “thinks” there is no bullshit. Can’t be held against him if it all goes pear shaped, cos it was his opinion, slimy is, as slimy does…..
It is NOT misplaced Give the high court an inch they take 3 miles! Our country will never be the same if this gets through
The fear is real and I'm voting NO
Who gives a flying F%$K what Kenneth Hayne backs say NO to the voice
But lots of eminent lawyers and judges are not backing the Voice
lawyers are always happy for vague referendum/laws like Mabo n now the voice Just look at Mabo 100s of cases They want to claim Perth park n Botany bay
YES. YES, and YES.
'Hayne, who is part of an expert legal panel that has been advising the Indigenous working group on the Voice, also hit back at calls for more detail.' What else did you expect him to say?
It's not fear, it's a lack of clarification. What will be the ramifications and why even put it in the constitution in the first place? Why give one racial group more rights than every other Australian. Unnecessary and divisive.
Voice treatyquotasland taxwatertax income tax . It will never end and it won’t fix indigenous issues. voteno votenotoapertheid
The fear is misplaced. Everybody knows that is the case. LNP Political expedience and rascism drive the no vote. Nothing else.
A current judge, a former judge or Pat O,Shane, backing a Leftist thought bubble, Really! Now that is a staggering, revelation.
If the fear is misplaced then release everything on 'the voice' be transparent and show us what we are voting for....
He literally admits that unelected activists will be able to hold the government to ransom.
An activist judge backing a lawyer's picnic - somehow, I remain unconvinced on this racist amendment. VoteNOAustralia
ABC is just another propoganda machine overtaken by the government. Let the former high court judge advise if what the exact change will be... Then let him also provide detail on what happens next, such as: * cost of the Voice administration; & * the implications of treaty
'Fear is misplaced'? That assumes that it's a morally right to thing to do to even begin with. It's giving a particular race special privileges over others. It's racist, therefore it must not proceed.
He is backing the government, because he knows that nothing will change. Look at the Royal Commission into deaths in custody, where is justice?
The Voice centralises power to those who say trust us to do the right thing. History teaches us that centralising power in a few leads to corruption, inequality & abuse. Vote No to TheVoice
He wants his lawyer mates to be able to own more than one Porsche too. It’s only fair.
Again, like everyone else arguing for the voice, he’s not addressing the central concerns raised by the majority of people.
Look hard enough and you'll also find a former priest who backs sodomy.
There’s only ever been one ‘The Voice’ and that’s John Farham.
Wouldnt trust Albo with my dog.. hes lied about everything since the election.
Meanwhile in reality
Trust me I'm a politician
Here we ago again with your daily dose of wokeness from yourabc
Curious only publishes items positive towards the voice. OK not 'curious'. 'Endemic'.
The fear is not The Voice itself....it is Albo who is the source of the fear. He should be telling us the full detail, not a vague conceptual vision which eventually proves it to be a lie...just like his election campaign promises were proven to be lies.
We will be the judge, without try-hard peer pressure.
If the executive 'ignores' the voice then the courts can decide. Decide what? Will the Federal government be bound by the courts, or will they have to go back to the courts to argue their case? Can the federal government veto the High Court decisions if they disagree?
Well, obviously the judges & others in the legal profession would be supporting VOICE2023 . They’ll be revelling in new-found wealth as the legal cases roll in. Never stand between a lawyer & a stack of money.
It is not a case of fear but rather relevance. A voice without power can be easily ignored, who's voice is it? A treaty can't be ignored and enshrines rights. A voice is a white guilt solution to put off change as long as possible.
Hardly.... the words you should always fear most.. 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help'
Look at what happened to NZ. It’s a back door to sell Aus to globalists. National parks, water ways, all will be privatised.
Did he preside over the bad decisions in relation to native title?
Another WEF communist sell-out happy to destroy the west
We all know there is some BS afoot. Nobody trusts the Gov, the corporate media or the pedo laced judiciary.. unless they cook the election, no way it’s getting through.
There are a number of articles where some do and others don’t. So what?
The high court judges know that they will have much more control over government's in Australia via the second Aboriginal voice. Every move our elected leaders make can be challenged in the high court. Why would a high court job be against such a control?
The ABC in full advocacy mode for Albosleazy’s vanity project VoteNo
Former
If you want a reason this is problematic we have 2 highly qualified legal eagles on the same panel that disagree with each other. Proceed with caution.
Nonsense
Your coverage is SOOOOOO impartial.
Misplaced DOUBT it the 4% ABC again pushing native interest as usual , NOTHING done to one of its star whose outbursts are absolutely disgraceful, if was a white be sacked , why favouritism?NO wonder u lot are if NOT aleady heading to be CLOSED down
Wanting to know what we are voting on is a ‘distraction’. 😂
'on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' ... what are the boundaries of scope here?
Inconceivable words from a judge who supposedly makes judgements on facts not hearsay
When asked why we are putting this in the constitution, the answer is always the same - So future governments can't easily cancel it. Why would a future government want to cancel it, if it was working well? Why hamstring them if its a white elephant or worse?
What happened to 'non-justiciable'? They lied. And now they wonder why we don't trust 'voice'. VoteNo
Where ATSIC failed for 30 years, let's create a new bureaucracy for the same people to keep failing. What's the definition of stupidity? To do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result.
VoteNOAustralia to special treatment by race.
Every bit of legislation will be frustrated by the Voice unless the Voice political parasites and grifters get a payoff.
At least they can claim more land stop mining developments as they are built to close to sacred ground Make the call on royalties . Start in WA thats where the big money is High court justice is backing the voice how can you put trust in these courts to be honest .
I'm not afraid. I just know that when the government gets all hot under the collar about creating yet another body of bureaucracy we should say no. (Hint: It rhymes with shmorruption)
His answers to all the 'need more details' scare mongers are clear and precise. Listen to the ABC Law Report and everything is there for you to understand.
This debate misses a fundamental issue. Indigenous Australians already have the same voice to parliament as every other Australian has. This proposal gives them an additional constitutional avenue that no other Australian has.
$275 labor liars .. just cannot trust labor
NO! For decades we have been ridding our institutions of racism, yet the voice will enshrine racism into our constitution! Bestowing benefit to one race is by definition, racist. Labor's the voice is ill-conceived and dividing Australia. Unite as one people, one nation, one flag.
Fear? How about logic? Imagine a politician door-knocking their electorate today and telling Indigenous voters they won't be listened to unless the referendum succeeds.
Here is why only racists support the voice, it apportions extra privileges to people on the basis of race. That's why I am voting NO. How about the ABC lives up to its charter of impartiality and publishes a pro NO article?
The constitution is a rule book for governing. It serves all Australians equally. Singling out any group, no matter how well meaning, is repugnant. We have the same voice to parliament… one vote, one value. With the details hidden until after the vote, you’d be nuts to vote yes.