Comments by "" (@pwillis1589) on "‘No surprises there’: Support for Treaty processes ‘plunges’ following Voice defeat" video.

Factually incorrect. They voted against a voice. Did you even read the ballot paper?
3
@VK6AB- Some of your reply is factual and some of it just made up fantasy in your head. I'm not a psychologist so it's hard for me to determine. The Uluru statement was a public document. There was no conspiracy to hide anything as you yourself admit it was declared publicly. Unfortunately in your ignorance you have no understanding of how a treaty is formed or negotiated or indeed how our parliament works. In your frightened panic of almost total ignorance I understand why you voted no. It makes perfect sense. Thanks for your honesty.
1
@MichaelIrwin-j3m Another person who clearly didn't read the ballot paper and the question, but thank you for your honesty. Proudly being ignorant is certainly a particular kind of character.
1
@user-mm5ot2tc4l So the 26 pages you refer to relate to the individual thoughts, opinions, and ideas of all those who were present at the Uluru summit. Only the statement itself was agreed to by those who signed it. The accompanying 26-page document had no legal bearing as all it was is a record of discussion and conversation. Your inability to understand this explains to me alot about the mindset of the no vote. Along with the Uluru statement was a significant document of approximately 250 page document which explained in detail the suggested process and structure of a voice. The indigenous community didn't wish to put forward one specific plan as they understood unlike you it was up to the parliament to decide what the voice would look like. Next there were two comprehensive reports delivered to the LNP government that set out exactly how the indigenous community suggested the voice be structured. This was all lost on you in your infinite ignorance.
1
@user-mm5ot2tc4l In my day the saying was take a bex and have a good lie down. Sound advice.
1
@franktully3065 DId you read the Uluṟu statement? and understand it? It appears not. Did you read the question put to you on the referendum ballot? Do you understand neither treaty or truth telling were on the ballot question? Treaty merely requires a negotiated settlement between parties and truth telling merely requires legislation, do you understand this? Nobody ever denied that the Uluṟu statement requested three things, you only had to read it. Your comment is just stating common public knowledge. What’s your point?
1
@franktully3065 Thankyou for your honest and revealing answer, or lack of it. This explains much about the no vote.
1