#Secretagendas #contextfree #claimsmistaken
There is no sign that the torrent of misinformation surrounding the Parliamentary Voice referendum, which has an early vote next week, is permitted. The debate has seen all kinds of misleading claims spread like wildfire on social media, leaving voters in a haze of fear, anger and confusion. Real checkers have examined both sides of the argument, but many claims are beyond the scope of checking. But there has been no shortage of problematic claims. So, to help you navigate the final two weeks of the campaign, we've rounded up some misinformation themes. hidden agendas Dubious claims emerged during the campaign of hidden agendas. Some of the debate's most common claims warned of secret plans to wink voters, often focusing on supposedly "secret" information. For example, a 112-page set documents released under freedom of information laws by National Agency for Indigenous Australians has frequently been used to falsely claim that a "list demands" would be made from the Indigenous community if voice were established. One Nation senator Pauline Hanson also choked out a separate list of "demands" allegedly found in a cafe by an anonymous member of the public. If these claims are believed, the Voice would lead to a “black parliament,” quotas for First Nations representation in various senior roles, and lower tax rates for Indigenous people. Not only that, it will force Australians to sign a treaty, pay a percentage of GDP to the Ses every year, and pay additional land taxes and royalties. But what documents actually show are minutes from 13 regional meetings held at start 2017 Uluru convention, documenting full range of ideas put forward by any 1,200 delegates as they discussed what constitutional recognition might look like. There is no evidence that some of the above ideas ever occurred, and while others are discussed, they do not reflect the majority view. Another big revelation FOI documents is that "real" Uluru Statement from Heart is not one-pager signed by convention delegates that some commentators have claimed, but a longer version hidden voters. As Fact Check has previously explained, while the authors of the Uluru Statement occasionally referenced a longer, 18-20 page version, they have since stated that they viewed these additional pages as contextual information. However, the length is next to the dot because these pages were not top secret. In fact, drafters statement have been urging public to read it for years many of them are on Uluru Statement website , these for constitutional recognition, and a number "guiding principles" and "reform priorities" also included in Referendum Council's 2017 final report. A further six pages, previously un FOI release, contain a pragmatic "road map" for achieving the objectives of one-page Uluru Statement. As for who is behind these “hidden” agendas, it depends on who you ask. Some criminal communists represent all Indigenous people who would form the
