21 Comments

This is very helpful. Thank-you.

Expand full comment
Aug 30, 2023Liked by Katy Barnett

Thanks Katy, I'd forgotten about Hindmarsh and hadn't realised ATSIC had gone the way of the doddo. Too long in Blighty...

Expand full comment

A classic case of whether doing something is worth doing anything, or at least this specific something.

I have thought for 20 years that this should be basically our biggest national priority (even better if it distracted politicians from everything else) but I admit that I still don't have the answers.

So on balance I support this.

As for judicial review of the executive, Australia has long been blessed with a very (judicially) conservative judiciary, long may that last, in which case this should be a rather theoretical risk indeed.

Expand full comment
Jul 5, 2023Liked by Katy Barnett

Thanks for the great summary.

Two legal / practical questions:

The justification for a constitutional change rather than a legislative one, is that it can't be reversed (as easily). But under the proposed text, can parliament effectively put the voice to sleep, so make it dormant and non-functioning? I have seen references to the Interstate commission floating around, so if it is in the constitution, does it mean it actually will exist in a meaningful way?

And a second (politically completely unrealistic) option, could parliament decide that the minister for aboriginal affairs is the Voice?

Expand full comment
Jul 5, 2023Liked by Katy Barnett

thanks indeed! a concise summary.

Expand full comment
Jul 3, 2023Liked by Katy Barnett

Thanks! I need this.

Expand full comment

Thanks. I will send the url for this page to others. Hopefully this will help their understanding.

Expand full comment
Jul 3, 2023Liked by Katy Barnett

Could you please define the Executive? I don’t understand how it’s different from the Parliament (presumably house of reps and senate).

Expand full comment