Another Musical dispatch from the front

We’ve been flooded with calls on background to Robodebt V. 1 which was trialed in Ukraine in the early forties. Was it pure Robo-debt or more a nuanced Analog pre- Robo-debt? And why were the units killed off prior to’ processing’? We can only assume that Robodebt V.1 was poorly executed and lacked central planning as occurred with Robodebt V.2. And besides there’s no one left around from Robodebt V.1 to complain. It happened long ago in a foreign land. And in Australia we’re suspicious of foreigners generally.

Another dispatch from our man on the Northwest frontier.

In this un Frank gives us an insight via Forrest as to why the ‘nays’ may have it.

No it’s not the spring racing carnival, but Forrest’s’ considered opinion on the voice campaign which he reckons is not the full bottle. No this is not about alcohol restrictions in the Alice, but a dispassionate reasoning as to why the voice might just be another tokenistic exercise. And we in the editorial department of pcbycp understand tokenism. Just as we understand that the Federal Labor Governments climate policy is not all that different from the Coalition’s. There is a difference. It’s their policy rather than the Coalition’s.

An update on Stuart Robert’s grandfather, who played the role of Dracula in the JC Williamsons, popular ‘ blood from stone’. We think this inspired Stuart to propel Robodebt onto the Australian citizenry.

So its bad climate policy ‘NICE’. Just as the voice might be Tokenism ‘Nice’. And Forrest reminds us that both policies are the brainchild of the Coalition.

What is there to worry about then?

And who can be bothered to read the one print? Just as in Robo-debt, its left to the bean counters to ‘ trust us’. And in trust there is a politician?

We also believe in Bunyips, Unicorns and the Easter Bunny.

Frank writes;

Hola todos,

When I quoted my friend Forrest I did not give the full context of what he wrote. To make amends I include his letter to y’all.

It has also been pointed out to me that when Forrest gave John Howard’s Intervention and suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act as an example of Parliamentary bad faith he did not elaborate on the fact that the Rudd Opposition voted without dissent for this act of political bastardry, Forrest and I knew this, I now mention it in case you didn’t.

Kev did solve homelessness. Credit where it’s due.

Hi folks

I happily gave permission for Frank to copy from a private correspondence I had with him. Keeping in with the theme of trust I’m happy to tell you I trust Frank totally.

I thought I’d follow up with this missive to you all. What I wrote, and that which Frank copied and sent out, is silent on being in support of, or opposed to, the Voice initiative. In nothing that he copied can be found any hint of my position on the initiative.

For what it is worth my position is that I oppose the Voice initiative because in part:

· It relies completely on the goodwill of the Parliament but Parliament has proved it must not be trusted to act in good faith with our first nations peoples, it has proved this many times over the years since Federation;

Kev always kept his genius for over-statement under his scholastic cap.

· If the referendum passes I believe Parliament will deliver a very bitter disappointment to our first nations peoples and those of us who support them, and while it might not do so at the first chance it gets to break faith it will do so within a rather short term;

· If the referendum passes it will be up to the parliament to completely design how the Voice will work, what matters the Voice can provide advice on and who the people will be on the Voice and how and where from they are chosen.

The Voice initiative is an initiative originally of the Federal Liberal/Nat coalition government. The Voice initiative, its terms and conditions were set by Government as advised by an expert panel, only some of whom were indigenous and none of whom were elected by indigenous people. This is not a grass roots initiative.

Parliament remains a very active agent of the ongoing colonisation of Australia.

Parliament has not repudiated its agency as an active agent of colonization..

Parliament can’t be trusted because it serves a very different master.

If our first nations peoples decide to proceed with the referendum I will vote Yes, and hope like hell that I am wrong in my assessment of parliament.