It is good that the debate on the so-called aboriginal Voice to parliament is taking shape. It is therefore time for a trial balance, to see what is on the credit side and what is on the debit. Here are a few pointers to take into account when we make that assessment. We started with a general proposal that aboriginals should have some sort of vehicle by which they could express their opinion on issues that directly affect them in their daily lives, or what you might call strictly aboriginal affairs.  Hence, a Voice. But the activists and their supporters have dragged the debate to where it is now: a demand for a Voice on everything, and by rewriting our entire constitutional system. They have been urged on in this exercise by Anthony Albanese’s announcement that the Voice will now be on ‘matters relating to’ aboriginals, which, if words have any meaning, must surely mean everything, for everything that governments and parliaments do must relate to aboriginals, just as much as it relates to non-aboriginals. How could it mean anything else? Point one, therefore, goes on the debit side. Then, the referendum question has been widened so that the parliament will legislate on ‘the composition, functions, powers and procedures of the Voice’. But what functions? What powers? So far, we are left completely in the dark despite the enormity of the proposed change. Not to worry, Albanese tells us, because it is all subject to the constitution. Of course it is, but the inevitable argument on what is within the constitution and what is outside it, and then whether the Voice has acted within its ambit or gone off on a frolic of its own, will be decided by unelected judges. The High Court, in particular, will ask: what did the parliament intend when it set up the Voice and the answer will be that the parliament intended to give it the widest possible power, because that is where the public debate has gone and the magnitude of the change the public would expect. That can only mean the end of a lot of the constitutional balance that has made the Australian system the stable one that it is. Point two is therefore also on the debit side. Next, we have learned a lot about the real motives behind the Voice which have introduced a new and disturbing element. Albanese’s demeaning enlistment of the African American Shaquille O’Neal gave the game away. It is, at least in part, an attempt to drag Australia into the whole Black Lives Matter movement spawned in the United States, and the divisions, hatred, cancel culture, riots and deaths that are its inevitable consequence. And with it, of course, is the fact that none of it has or will ever improve the lot of aboriginals one iota. But it gives a big lift to gambling, surely something that should not be idolised or encouraged. Point three is therefore also a miserable debit. Then there is the gathering enthusiasm of the business community to get on the bandwagon, it being the latest fashion. This can only be intended to soften us up for the referendum and the whole restructuring of society that the Voice will usher in, unless it is clarified and restrained. Thus, Coles has printed the reconciliation mantra on the back of its customer receipts, by which it means that we should all vote for the Voice.  And the final insult: the virtue-signalling is separated only by a dotted line from the Liquorland advertisement – $7 off every $70 spent on wine and a special price for whisky! But just in case anyone get ideas above their station, the discount does not apply to champagne. Point four is therefore another debit, with a bonus point for bad taste for associating aboriginals with alcohol and the damage it has wreaked on indigenous communities.

Then, the last thing that aboriginals need is more tokenism and symbolism that simply alienate the wider community. We started off with only a few Green and left-wing councils like Moreland and Yarra who took this condescending approach through a burst of name changing. It seems endemic, as councils examine every nook and cranny of their municipalities to find a park or statue they hate because of a colonial name. Now, the latest news is that Melbourne Girls Grammar, formative institution for so many pillars of society, has discovered that one of its houses (horror name approaching) is named after John Batman, the explorer whose deal with the local tribes was the foundation of Melbourne. Naturally, the house had to be renamed – and after a local mythological bat! However, the school will keep the South Yarra land on which it is built. Point five on the debit side, with a bonus point for hypocrisy.

It has now emerged that there will be regional mini-Voices and local and regional versions of the Victorian aboriginal assemblies with their own electoral rolls and treaty-making bodies and all the paraphernalia that goes with them. Point six is therefore on the debit side for more bureaucracy that will not save a single aboriginal from sickness, incarceration or rape. On the contrary, Albanese has abolished the cashless debit card that at least kept some individuals away from grog and gambling. Overall, a big debit for keeping indigenous Australians in their mendicant state and a trial balance with a miserable bottom line.

What should the Coalition do about all of this? It should stop its apparent support of the Voice and sack its shadow minister Julian Leeser who continues to dig an ever-deepening hole for his party with his equivocation. It should make the clearly intelligent and sensible Senator Jacinta Price its shadow minister. We might then get some common sense into the issue, and with it, some real steps to improve the life of aboriginals in their health, education and opportunities for employment and an end to this assault on our constitution.