web analytics
≡ Menu

 Ken Wyatt: a snake in the grass?

11.07.19.  Morning Mail had a bit to say about this socially divisive act of secret act of bastardy between the now Minister for Indigenous Australians Ken Wyatt and Scott Morrison in this plot that was arranged in February, BEFORE THE ELECTION!
We described Ken Wyatt as a fox dressed up as a benin kangaroo but a dangerous snake in the grass is more appropriate for his new role. If there is anything that has the capability of tearing this nation apart it is this paragraph:
“The body could be created by legislation without being part of the referendum process that would seek to recognise indigenous Australians in the nation’s founding document.”  A must read here.
Minister for Indigenous Australians Ken Wyatt will lead a historic push for a referendum in this term of parliament to recognise Aborigines in the Constitution, vowing to put forward a “pragmatic” model that will receive broad public support.
Source: Greg Brown, News Corp
Wyatt presents road map for recognitionAustralia’s first indigenous cabinet minister yesterday declared he would “walk with people on all sides of politics” to find a consensus model that could achieve the required support of a majority of people in a majority of states for a successful referendum.
In his speech to the National Press Club in Canberra yesterday, the West Australian MP, who was given the ministry by Scott Morrison after the May 18 election victory, also revealed the government would create an indigenous voice to parliament, which would advise government on Aboriginal issues.
The body could be created by legislation without being part of the referendum process that would seek to recognise indigenous Australians in the nation’s founding document.
“The world is an oyster in terms of options that we have to ­seriously consider,” Mr Wyatt said.
With Labor and indigenous leaders pushing for the voice body to be enshrined in the Constitution, Mr Wyatt warned he would cancel his referendum plans if the final model was too controversial.
He said he would need to navigate the requests of indigenous activists and people who were sceptical of the need for constitutional recognition, including “reticent colleagues” in his own partyroom. “I’ve got to find common ground,” Mr Wyatt said. “And there are diverse views. It is about how do you bring the majority to common ground that is acceptable that we can win a referendum? That is the challenge. And I am up to that and I am prepared to walk with people on all sides of politics and all sides of the community to hear their view and reach a point which we can agree.
“Sometimes we can aspire to an optimum outcome but we also have to accept there is a pragmatic element to constitutional referendums. I would rather us, in the psyche of this nation, have a win on a referendum than have a loss.”
Opposition spokeswoman for indigenous Australians Linda Burney said Labor wanted the indig­enous voice enshrined in the Constitution, as recommended by indigenous leaders in the Uluru Statement from the Heart in 2017.
“Labor has been saying clearly that we would like a voice entrenched in the Australian Constitution, and I know that there are many people on the government benches that also believe that,” Ms Burney said.
“I think that is ultimately what we would want to see.” She acknowledge­d there would be “points of difference and we will have to work through those points of difference”. “Bipartisanship is not a race to the bottom,” she said.
While leaving the responsibility for treaties between indigenous people and governments with the states, Mr Wyatt said he would ­investigate the establishment of a “truth-telling” agency that would raise awareness of historical ­atrocities committed towards ­Aboriginal people. “History is generally written from a dominant society’s point of view and not that of the suppressed and therefore true history is brushed aside, masked, dismissed or destroyed,” he said.
Mr Wyatt said he would undertake a period of “co-design” with indigenous communities and ­consult on the best form of ­constitutional recognition. He would also call on corporate Australia to get behind the recognition push. “Constitutional recognition is too important to get wrong, and too important to rush,” he said.
“I plan to establish a working group of parliamentary colleagues of all political persuasions to assist me in considering the role of ­engaging on many levels to bring forward a community model.”
Indigenous academic Marcia Langton, who has been a vocal supporter of a constitutionally ­enshrined voice, was among the Aboriginal figures who praised Mr Wyatt’s commitment to a referendum. “I think that Ken has achieved bipartisanship and nothing at all will be achieved without bipartisanship,” she said.
Professor Langton would not say whether Mr Wyatt should put forward a constitutionally enshrined voice in the referendum.
“I don’t think we are at the stage where we can answer questions like that yet,” she said. “Everything hangs on this co-­design process now. He has committed to that so that indicates to me that he is being utterly genuine and he has achieved more than any other politician because he understands the problems ahead of us.”
Ms Burney sounded a note of caution, declaring she was not sure a consensus was possible.
Former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull rejected the voice proposal when it was presented to him by the Referendum Council in 2017. He said the body would become a “third chamber of parliament”, a phrase repeated by Mr Morrison early in his leadership.
Mr Wyatt said if the referendum failed, the issue would “gather dust” like the republic. “I don’t want to proceed if we don’t have the right question,” he said.
Indigenous academic Megan Davis, who was on the Referendum Council, said the voice was the “only constitutional model on the table”.
Mr Wyatt said he would listen to the concerns of people opposed to constitutional recognition, ­including One Nation leader ­Pauline Hanson, who claimed that she was indigenous because she was born in Australia.***********************************

Andrew Bolt on Ken Wyatt’s madness

But speaking of idiocy, can anyone go past what the Morrison Government’s new Indigenous Australians Minister, Ken Wyatt, said today?
Australia had to change its constitution, Wyatt brightly announced. He would work to give us this Aboriginal-only advisory parliament — the one demanded by the NRL — because Aborigines around Australia were saying “we need a voice so that we can be heard”.
To hear Wyatt say we must finally give Aborigines a voice in politics requires a suspension of eyesight.
You see, Wyatt himself identifies as Aboriginal. What’s more, he’s a politician, and around him in our national parliament are four other politicians who identify as Aboriginal, plus others who got there with the help of Aboriginal voters.
Wyatt even comes from a state whose Treasurer identifies as Aboriginal.
Is Wyatt not walking and talking evidence that Aborigines already have that voice in politics? That voice is called a vote, and every Australian adult has one.
So don’t be fooled. What Wyatt and — it seems — his boss, Prime Minister Scott Morrison, want is more than just a “voice” for Aborigines.
They want an Aboriginal-only parliament that will inevitably give Aborigines more formal political say than any other tribe in the country — Chinese, Muslim, Jewish, Italian, Greek, Sudanese or Sikh.
Under Wyatt’s plan, this Aboriginal parliament would discuss legislation that affects Aborigines, but which legislation doesn’t? Aren’t Aborigines also Australians, affected by everything from defence policies to tax?
And watch out: such an “advisory” parliament is likely to develop an effective veto power over the real one. Until this Aboriginal parliament is consulted, could legislation be passed by the real parliament?
Then will come the backlash. When one “race” of Australians gets handed more power over the rest, other Australians will identify with their own “race” or ethnicity, to defend their interests.
Such race politics is a highway to hell, just when this fractured country needs to limp back to unity instead.
Surely our best hopes lie in judging Australians not by their “race”, colour, class, birthplace or gender, but by their character and talents.
So who cares if a mine safety expert is a woman or a man?
Who cares if a rugby superstar is a Christian or a gay?
Who cares if someone in parliament has Aboriginal ancestors or none?
Ask instead whether they’re doing a good job. Or whether they’ve gone mad with identity politics — and power


Peta Credlin Sky News on this matter here.

{ 34 comments… add one }
  • Graham Richards 11/07/2019, 6:44 am

    How many referenda will we have before he concedes that 3 yes votes does not mean a majority??
    He’ll probably try to follow the EU example of continuous voting until the desired result comes up.

  • Pensioner Pete 11/07/2019, 7:24 am

    Ken Wyatt’s plan is pure Apartheid, nothing less.

    • Graham Richards 11/07/2019, 8:30 am

      Will Australians accept MINORITY RULE??

      • ibbit 12/07/2019, 9:09 am

        NO! That’s my beef – we are already to a large extent ruled by minorities which seems to be the only voice the PM and government listen to.

    • TommyGun 11/07/2019, 3:10 pm

      That’s a big “NO” coming up from me in any referendum they have on this nonsense. More Leftard cr*p.

  • Muphin 11/07/2019, 7:28 am

    According to the Constitution we are ONE NATION and ONE PEOPLE.

    Why change it to favour one race against another race, that is akin to apartheit ???

    • Brian Macmichael 12/07/2019, 8:37 am

      Here here!

  • Honeybadger 11/07/2019, 7:50 am

    This is about more preferential treatment of aborigines/part aborigines. The quiet Australians will ensure it is rejected no matter how Wyatt tries to dress it up and no matter how many politicians/elites/sports bodies/corporate entities clambor on board in fear of the dreaded Racism word.

    • Sword 11/07/2019, 8:02 am

      Ken Wyatt trying the dress things up? What makes you think that?

    • Cliff 11/07/2019, 8:07 am

      HoneyB, they’ll phrase the question is such a way that anyone who votes ‘no’ will be made feel to be a social pariah.

  • Cliff 11/07/2019, 8:03 am

    I honestly think we’ve reached the stage where to be accepted as Aboriginal, that person must be able to prove he or she is of at least 50% Aboriginal ethnicity. Anything less than 50% and you’re classified as whatever that majority mix is.

    Another way to resolve the confusion would be to treat all Australians, whatever their ethnicity, exactly the same – i.e., stop all the handouts and privileges available only to those who declare themselves to be Aboriginal and make all Australians equal.

    I’m not planning on holding my breath waiting for either of those suggestions to be introduced, by the way.

    • Richard 11/07/2019, 9:27 am

      DNA proof should be required to claim Aboriginality.

      • ibbit 12/07/2019, 9:12 am

        There should be a legal definition of what constitutes aboriginality. Anyone claiming aboriginal ancestry should be made to prove it as do Maories.

  • DT 11/07/2019, 8:04 am

    The request was granted in 1967, we are all Australians now.

    Another referendum will fail, wasting $167 million preparing for it is a waste of time and money.

  • Thunder 11/07/2019, 8:09 am

    HF !! Enough is Enough…….when I first saw this fickwut in the kanga skin I said to friends this does not bode well………

    This Garbage has had Billions, if not already Trillions of Taxpayer money.

    What have these Useless Bastards ever done for Australia ??

    Except WHINGE ??

  • Peter Sandery 11/07/2019, 8:23 am

    I noted with interest this morning that Barnaby Joyce appears to be banging the drum about improving the geographical representation of the Senate, in the form of geographical regions as another solution to the so called “Voice” problem – at last someone talking a bit of sense on Senate reform!

  • Jarrah 11/07/2019, 8:47 am

    The indigenous already have a voice, our Parliament. There are currently 5 declared aborigines sitting in parliament, aborigines only make up 5% of the population. Ken Wyatt is a dangerous divisive fool, stoking racism in this country. Morrison, as I keep saying, is untrustworthy and his support for this nonsense shows how left and untrustworthy he is, Malcolm, anybody?

  • Susie 11/07/2019, 8:49 am

    It’s apartheid. I’ll vote NO!

  • Maryanne 11/07/2019, 9:01 am

    I know whose history has been “brushed aside, masked, dismissed or destroyed” in favour of an absurd noble savage narrative that aborigines lived in perfect harmony with one another and the environment enjoying their rich culture. Here’s some history that has been thoroughly brushed aside, masked, dismissed: https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/bennelong-papers/2016/04/genuflecting-savagery/

  • Gregoryno6 11/07/2019, 9:06 am

    Fur Man’s energies would be better spent connecting with Jacinta Price and working on the problems that face aboriginal communities in the here and now. That doesn’t need a tweak to the Constitution, or ATSIC Mk 2.

  • Botswana O'Hooligan 11/07/2019, 9:23 am

    You have to feel a sense of shame when a bloke wears a kangaroo hide into our parliament, and even more shame when they wave smoke at each other. Ernie dingo must have tears of laughter running down his legs each time they really do prove that the joke is on them. Morrison et al didn’t learn any lessons did they but they will come next election if they don’t pull their bloody socks up.

    • TommyGun 11/07/2019, 3:08 pm

      Yes Bots; the HIDE of the man!

  • Richard 11/07/2019, 9:28 am

    I note that 30% of Australians were born overseas and call Australia home (https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/previousproducts/3412.0main%20features32015-16) – I wonder how they feel about a tiny minority of 2.8% having special inclusion in the Constitution.

    Who is driving this push to discriminate between Australian citizens? And why?

  • Albert 11/07/2019, 10:11 am

    Those who scream racism at every opportunity are those hypocrites that are now calling for and backing this divisive piece of pure racism. The argument and the con job being employed by Wyatt and his schemers, including Scott Morrison, is built on a truck load of lies and relies on the ignorance of fact of most Australans. Wyatt yesterday during his divisive and craftily engineered address to the nation even went so far as to redefine the meaning of the word ‘indigenous’ so as to apply to Aborigines only. That in itself is a lie.
    I for one will fight tooth and nail to see this divisive nonsense flushed down the toilet.

  • Lorraine 11/07/2019, 10:21 am

    The quiet Australians that put SCOMO and fur man back into Government, will not be silent on this piece of Lefty crap. I was just settling down for 3 years of a Government with out the press pushing Shorten on TV daily with his words of wisdom. Ken Wyatt runs the lefty line putting 1st peoples ahead of any other….The Muslim will whinge, the white Australian will not be happy, so we fight an bicker for another 18 months over this garbage that will divide us on the colour of our skin. The Government better get a hold on this quick or that win they had in May will blow up in their face before they can say Jack Robinson. Really very foolish politics as nothing said before the election, not mentioned at all. My Vote as with the “R” trash, is a NO

  • Geoff Unicomb 11/07/2019, 3:20 pm

    Wiki states: ‘Wyatt is an Indigenous Australian, also of part English, Irish and Indian descent.’
    There is not a lot of Abo there. IMHO, to be rated as indigenous, the subject should be 100% Abo. The rest are ‘partly indigenous’, and should only receive benefits, commensurate with the Abo part.
    Another point, I am surprised that the animal libbers didn’t jump up and down, because Wyatt had kangaroos killed to make the coat. Or, is the coat fake, just like its wearer?
    A further point, if Abos want to be recognised as Abos, why don’t they use their unpronounceable Abo names, instead of using names of the people they hate?

    • TommyGun 12/07/2019, 12:57 am

      All good points there, Geoff.

  • Cliff 11/07/2019, 3:28 pm

    I strongly suspected that many conservative-leaning voters (like moi) would be disappointed by Morrison. But this idiocy takes ‘disappointment’ to a whole new level.

    As others have said before me, this is apartheid, pure and simple, and incredibly, many people, particularly the younger generations, thoroughly schooled in ‘White Guilt’, are rushing headlong onto accepting it because Virtue Signalling dictates that it is “the right thing to do”.

    It is, in fact, cultural suicide.

  • Peter W 11/07/2019, 4:59 pm

    Perhaps in the next Census we should ALL put ourselves down as “indigenous”.
    Surely at least 20 million of us will put an end to this apartheid!

    • Graham Richards 11/07/2019, 6:25 pm

      Give that man a medal. Who said whitemen can’t think straight.

      That means We can take over the parliament because they’ll never deny the Aboriginals a win!!!

      • Geoff Unicomb 12/07/2019, 12:41 pm

        Also, do the same when you complete forms, wherever you are required to answer the stupid question.

  • Volkswagen 1941 11/07/2019, 7:38 pm

    Message for Scomo: sink this idea and the minister for aboriginal affairs. The whole idea is pathetic, and racist.

    • TommyGun 12/07/2019, 12:59 am

      Yes; divisionist politics at its best.
      How to create division and sow discord in the population?
      Float an idea like this one.

  • DT 12/07/2019, 3:37 pm

    Hey people, that ain’t no fur, that is a hide.

Leave a Comment