Tamika Biddlecombe’s Post

In our special briefing published over a week ago analysing the shock defeat of Ireland's Family & Care referendum on March 8th, International Women's Day, we wrote the following: “Political systems don’t collapse immediately in one go. The process is, at first, a slow one. But when it gathers momentum the pace can accelerate with a suddenness that is shocking, and for businesses trying to make decisions and anticipate the future, threatening.” Persistently and with growing accuracy we have warned over the last 4 years that Ireland's policy making and political system was leaving too many citizens and stakeholders outside it's radius of consultation, recognition and respect. In our analysis of the referendum defeat, we starkly warned of the need for political narratives to become more inclusive. And where we have led in promoting the case for supporting and promoting the great work done by immigrants in Ireland, we have equally called for an end to the toxic and grossly irresponsible overuse of the "far right" term - which needs to be confined to and targeted at a real and undeniable minority that does exist - to describe majority viewpoints and, instead, for the need to listen and engage with - rather than belittle - what is now clearly established as a disaffected majority of Irish voters. This is not good for business. Government losing the confidence of the people is one thing. But the opposition also backing a referendum that - as shown by our partners "Ireland Thinks" - was rejected by 88% of its own voters suggests a future Sinn Féin government could be equally unstable. Business has spent the last decade engaging in ESG, a trend we have supported, analysed and been part of. But in this latest analysis we analyse the deep roots - and grave consequences - of yesterday's resignation by Leo Varadkar. And we issue a clarion call for business representatives to wake up and start resourcing serious engagement with Ireland's electorate. Before it's too late. #LeoVaradkar #Taoiseach #Ireland #Irisheconomy #Irishgovernment #finegael #politicalstability #Referendums2024 #VoteNoNo #VoteYesYes #Ibec #Isme

Yesterday (26 May) was national Sorry Day. The "Bringing Them Home" stolen children report was tabled in Parliament 26 May 1997. Today (27 May) is the anniversary of the 1967 referendum to give First Nations people of Australia the right to vote. 3 June is the anniversary of the Mabo land rights decision. In light of last year's referendum on a voice to Parliament, I find this week's Reconciliation Week theme "Now More Than Ever" both energising and depressing. The great work of the Uluru Statement from the Heart didn't finish with last year's Voice to Parliament referendum. Australia has had work to do - the referendum would have set us in the right direction, with an enshrined ability to listen when shaping the laws that shape our nation. The latest Closing the Gap report shows 5 important targets are "on track" - leaving 19 vital targets without a clear path. Why? The Productivity Commission thinks Government approaches need to fundamentally change - to create the incentives to do things differently, and hold government to account when it fails. Without The Voice to Parliament, the task that faces Australia will be so much harder. Now More Than Ever, we need systemic, long term investment in doing things differently. Marginalised voices, perspectives and impacts need to be up front in policy and system design - measures intended to benefit all Australians must be specifically tailored to maximise opportunity and minimise harm for people facing systemic barriers. I heard on the radio this morning that Queensland is trialling 50c public transport fares to encourage people to use public transport and leave their cars at home. The pilot has been criticised as likely to benefit those who already use public transport, that live in wealthier areas supported by good public transport systems - potentially further marginalising other communities. Good initiatives need to recognise and change underlying biases and inequality in social, policy and physical infrastructure. New Digital ID laws were passed recently, with changes agreed in the Senate to promote inclusion. This is a good sign, as is the development of Commonwealth inclusive design principles. But this needs to be an ongoing focus of public policy across the board.

In today's mail ... "I’m excited to share with you today an update on our ongoing campaign to end Canada’s equalization program. We reignited the idea here in Alberta, we pushed for an equalization referendum, and then we won that referendum. It’s now official Alberta government policy to abolish equalization. Since then, we've been working tirelessly to spread the message beyond Alberta. Recently, those efforts took a huge step forward. First, in May, Newfoundland and Labrador launched a legal challenge against the constitutionality of the equalization formula. Newfoundland and Labrador Minister of Justice and Public Safety and Attorney General John Hogan pointed out that a lack of consultation had left the Province no choice but to take legal action. “The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is challenging the current equalization formula as being unconstitutional. When the Government of Canada dismissed our concerns and extended the equalization formula until 2029, we were left with no other alternative except to launch a court challenge.” Next, the Saskatchewan government announced they would be supporting Newfoundland and Labrador’s case. Then, last week, British Columbia Premier David Eby announced that his province would also be supporting Newfoundland and Labrador’s constitutional challenge. That's right - even the NDP in British Columbia are opposed to equalization now! In fact, Eby went a step further and said that BC is considering not only just supporting the existing case, but potentially filing a separate lawsuit of their own. His announcement came during the annual Council of the Federation meetings in Halifax - a gathering of Canada’s 13 premiers: "I will acknowledge it is very hard for British Columbians to be paying into a program right now at a time when they are facing serious cost of living concerns," said Eby. "Every person in every province deserves high quality health care and schools and so on. But that is clearly not what the program is doing anymore," he continued. The equalization program has once again become a flashpoint in federal-provincial relations across the country - tearing a hole in national unity and forcing the provinces to launch legal challenges in an attempt to ease the divide. It's incredibly pleasing to see premiers of all political stripes coming together in opposition to this failed policy. This is proof that our hard work is paying off, and that our strategy is working. For updates and more information ... https://lnkd.in/gXWWwCk8

Moving on from the Referendum ... With the rejection of changes to our Constitution to incorporate substantive recognition of First Peoples in Australia, we need to put the Referendum behind us and determine new ways forward. There are two broad elements requiring attention: • Recognition, truth-telling and agreement-making • Closing the gap and reducing the impacts of racism State based activities are one of the keys to making progress for a number of reasons: 1. State based activities, particularly those around truth-telling and agreement-making are already progressing in Victoria, South Australia, and Queensland. 2. Progress in these states is likely to build momentum and pressure for other states to follow suit, with all bar Western Australia having at least made some form of commitment to advancing treaty. 3. There is a significant portion of systemic racism that revolves around state-based systems (in justice, health, education and child protection), which should be addressed as part of state-based treaty negotiations. 4. Addressing systemic racism is also likely to assist in making significant inroads into closing the gap. More importantly, it is essential that there are actions that advance reconciliation on a more personal basis. Over 60,000 people advanced reconciliation by contributing to the Referendum Yes Campaign. These people are members of Yes23 and represent a powerful force for advancing reconciliation on an individual basis. Over 6.2m people voted Yes in the Referendum and represent an even broader force for making a tangible difference. These people could be engaged through local reconciliation groups. There is scope for significant expansion of such groups, with very few existing in South Australia, Western Australia, Tasmania, Northern Territory and ACT. Even in States having more substantial numbers (NSW, Victoria and Queensland), there is plenty of scope for growth. Existing groups provide practical examples of what can be achieved and how they might be organised. Activity by such groups is self-determined. Yet, it is reasonable to expect that they would: • Provide a more tangible presence and commitment in local communities, building relationships and familiarity • Build a groundswell of support for voice, recognition and reconciliation in general • Provide support for extending the reach of truth-telling and a better understanding of treaty • Advance events supporting recognition and reconciliation • Advance reconciliation in a manner that does not attract the type of attention and opposition that occurred on the journey to the Referendum as the groups are much smaller and more diverse These actions should complement existing strategies such as Reconciliation Action Plans which should continue to be pursued. When combined, these will all provide a substantially different context in which national strategies might continue to be developed.

→ If we want to rejoin the #EU, we must properly explain why 𝗠𝗜𝗟𝗟𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗦 𝗔𝗖𝗥𝗢𝗦𝗦 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗨𝗞 𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗟𝗟 𝗛𝗔𝗩𝗘 𝗡𝗢 𝗜𝗗𝗘𝗔 𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗘𝗨 Over eight years since the referendum and many Britons still don’t know why the EU exists, what it does, and how it’s democratically run by its members for the benefit of members. Brexiters keep claiming that the EU is a failed project. But the truth is that most European countries are now in the EU or want to be. No member state wants to leave or is planning to leave. That’s hardly a failed project. ▪ Unfortunately, the Remain campaign, starting in May 2015, was inept, disorganised, and without a dynamic and effective strategy. ▪ Just as unfortunately, the Rejoin campaign is the same. There isn’t a proper Rejoin campaign, just as there wasn’t a proper Remain campaign. It could have been very different. We should have won the 2016 referendum without much difficulty. But the Remain side was smug, ineffective, and not at all prepared for the panzer warfare launched with such brilliant effect by the Leave campaign, albeit all based on lies, deceits and false promises. Remainers lost forty years of opportunities at awareness raising since Remain won the first referendum in 1975. For most of those forty years it didn’t seem to matter. Leaving the EU was not a mainstream call or promise of the main parties. Brexit didn’t seem at all likely, despite the lies propagated by some of our press. It was a huge shock that Leave ‘won’ the referendum – a shock to Remainers, and a shock to Leavers. We must not be caught out again. Misinformation about the EU still prevails. And there is still no effective counterattack. This could all be undone by a proper, professional campaign to explain why rejoining the EU would be in Britain’s best interests. What’s stopping us? © Report and graphic by Jon Danzig ▪ 𝗝𝗼𝗻 𝗗𝗮𝗻𝘇𝗶𝗴 is an independent campaigning journalist and film maker who specialises in writing about health, human rights, and Europe. He is also founder of the information campaign, Reasons2Rejoin #Brexit #EuropeanUnion #referendum European Union European Parliament European Commission

NATIONAL SORRY DAY With Sorry Day upon us, and seven months passed since the Voice Referendum, I’ve been moved to reflect on where we are now. You will have noticed how active the NO voters who agreed ‘we need to do something, just not this’ have been. There’s been a Royal Commission launched into conditions in remote communities. Senator Price, mooted at the time as a ‘future Prime Minister’ has risen to play a significant role in the Opposition’s far-reaching policy proposals, and the Government has shown their commitment by staying the course signalled by the Referendum in the first place. Of course none of this is true and the almost total radio silence on these issues is both underwhelming and unsurprising. So where are we now? I was told by a student yesterday that she experiences racism on a daily basis, instances of overt racism are on the rise, and colleagues claim to have different versions of history they adhere to (ones which tend to make the white guys look good). The LNP in Queensland withdrew from the Truth and Treaty process (having ‘listened’ to the voters in North Queensland - just not the black ones who overwhelmingly supported the Voice). It would be easy to think we are lost - if we didn’t have tens of thousands of years of evidence of the resilience of our First Peoples! The next logical step seems to be truth-telling. The optimist in me says most non-Indigenous Australians simply don’t understand the process and implications of colonisation. The pessimist says they know but they don’t care. But while I’m an optimist at heart, I’m not a naive optimist. If we are to embark on Truth-Telling, a process which will be challenging and damaging, then the Truth-Telling needs Truth-Listening in equal measure! And make no mistake the Truth-Listening will be equally challenging and damaging. But it is necessary. If we are to genuinely move forward towards reconciliation, we need to do so from a place informed by truth, with acknowledgement of the past, and with genuine commitment to an improved Australia for all Australians. Non-Indigenous Australia can no longer take a laidback attitude towards reconciliation. Reconciliation can only be achieved with genuine commitment, from everybody. We might be famous for saying ‘she’ll be right’, but let’s face it, since colonisation, she never has been!

A Goldman Sachs analysis indicates that the UK economy has grown about 5% less over the past eight years compared to similar countries, with Brexit being a significant factor. The potential real GDP impact is estimated to range from 4% to 8%. The UK is the only major affluent economy that has not rebounded to pre-pandemic levels, partly due to the cumulative impact of Brexit. Britain is in danger of becoming economically and politically isolated, and much poorer than its continental neighbors. For 900 years, England, and later, Britain, was able to play off the continental powers against one another. This policy, often referred to as "splendid isolation" or the "balance of power" strategy, was particularly prominent in the 18th and 19th centuries. This largely ended with the creation of the European Union. It was faced with the choice of becoming full partners, or exiting entirely. To their detriment, they chose the latter. Britain faces an existential choice at a vulnerable point in its history. We will see how the new Labour government deals with it.

1967 Referendum - Recognition. My mother is the baby of 12, and first daughter born after Australia’s most successful referendum. More then 90 percent of Australians voted YES to have Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples recognised in the census - Counted. My mother was born in 1972, in a small town on Country called Peak Hill. Although she would be born and recognised as a human being she was still born in the back shed and not the main hospital. The back shed was also called “Blacks shed”. Let us recognise this truth. Let us recognise that systems and mindsets do not change overnight. Let us recognise NOW MORE THEN EVER that the work continues. In treat making, in truth telling, in understanding our history, in education, and in tackling racism. We need connection. We need respect. We need action. And we need change. #reconciliation #truthtelling

I have a question. Do you remember before the Referendum we were told by those who opposed the YES vote that the 'real work would start on Monday'? Where are those people? What work did they start? It seems that we are still waiting for THAT Monday... It was all rhetoric designed to divide and give those people a platform. The people who have continued to do the hard yards are those like Professor Megan Davis and Aunty Pat Turner. They've had to pick themselves up and continue the fight on behalf of all of us and in the hope of a better Australia. Megan gave this #NAIDOC Week address at The University of Queensland. In this article, she shares her thoughts about the NO vote and most importantly her hope for the future. This is not a short read. But grab a coffee and do yourself a favour. You won't regret the investment. FYI, an abridged version was also reprinted in a major masthead under the title "It's time for the lion to roar: I'm ready to speak about the No vote". If you want an abridged version you can look that up but it's behind a paywall, and within two days of publication, that masthead came out with disparaging articles on this speech. I won't share that link. I knew that a NO vote would feel like a sucker punch to so many people who worked so hard across the campaign (for years not just 6 months), and to the majority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Across my organisations, before the Referendum, we had discussed at length what we would do in the event of a NO vote. We had consulted First Nations people and were ready to offer leave and counselling and we prepared official statements confirming support for First Nations peoples. In the immediate aftermath, we could only offer love and friendship, and our unrelenting support. But we need a path forward. Ultimately, all any of us want is to belong. Can you even imagine what it feels like to be told that you don't belong in the country that your ancestors have cared for and that you have been connected to for over 65,000 years? Or worse, that whilst you might feel like you belong, we as a Country refuse to recognise it. In a world where our politics are becoming increasingly divisive; where we are becoming increasingly negative and polarised; where we struggle to have respectful debates about our differences, and instead exploit opposing views with lies and rhetoric to confuse those who don't understand, perhaps the Voice didn't stand a chance. I'd like to think that's not the case and that now with a period of uncomfortable (but necessary) truth-telling, we will see the light and create real belonging for everyone. My deepest thanks to Meg Davis for sharing her thoughts. We owe you and others an incredible debt of gratitude. #Indigenous #Reconciliation, Directors for the Voice

→ #Brexit only ever had minority support 𝗕𝗥𝗜𝗧𝗔𝗜𝗡 𝗜𝗦 𝗡𝗔𝗧𝗨𝗥𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗬 𝗣𝗥𝗢-𝗘𝗨 For all the UK’s five decades in the #EU, most Britons were happy for us to stay in. They didn’t want us to leave. The issue was settled in the 1975 referendum when, by a massive 2-to-1 landslide, the electorate voted to remain in the European Community. In the years that followed, calls to leave were on the far side lines of politics. Yes, Brexiters will argue that the 2016 referendum settled the issue for Brexit. But it didn’t really. Unlike in the 1975 referendum, when all the four nations of the UK positively voted to stay in the European Community, in 2016 half of them didn’t. And whilst the margin win for Remain in the 1975 referendum was a stonking 35%, in 2016, the margin win for Leave was an abysmal 4%. A mere 37% of the UK electorate gave their support for Brexit in 2016. A minority, which did not reflect the true feelings of most of the country, and certainly not all the countries of the UK. Today, poll after poll show that a significant majority of British voters think Brexit is a mistake, and they would now vote to rejoin. If the 2016 referendum had been held just a year or two earlier, polls indicate that Remain would have won by a landslide, just like in 1975. ▪ 𝗧𝘄𝗼 𝘆𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘀 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗱𝘂𝗺, 𝗶𝗻 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟰, Ipsos UK polling showed that Britain’s support for wanting to remain in the EU was the highest it had been in 23 years – 56% in favour of remain, just 36% for leave. This, despite the apparent rise of UKIP, that the Tories and Labour seemed so scared about. ▪ 𝗢𝗻𝗲 𝘆𝗲𝗮𝗿 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗱𝘂𝗺, 𝗶𝗻 𝟮𝟬𝟭𝟱, the Ipsos poll showed that support for continued EU membership was even higher – a staggering 61% in support of remaining, with just 27% supporting leave. The 2016 referendum now looks like an aberration, a statistical quirk that didn’t, and now certainly doesn’t, represent the nation’s feelings as a whole. Every year since the EU referendum, thousands of pro-EU supporters have peacefully marched in London and other cities. In March 2019, it’s estimated that the People’s Vote march in London attracted over a million marchers demanding a new vote on Brexit. 𝗕𝗿𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀, 𝗯𝗲 𝗵𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘁: 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗻𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝗱𝗶𝗱, 𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗻𝘂𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗽𝗿𝗼-𝗕𝗿𝗲𝘅𝗶𝘁 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻; 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗮 𝘀𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗳𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝘀𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗻𝘂𝗺𝗯𝗲𝗿𝘀. Why? Because Brexit only ever had minority support, and today, that support has collapsed. Of course, Britain now needs a new vote on Brexit. In a democracy, no decision is permanent, and any decision can be changed if that has the support of the electorate. Keir Starmer: 𝗔𝗿𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗸𝗻𝗼𝘄 𝘁𝗼𝗱𝗮𝘆’𝘀 ‘𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗼𝗽𝗹𝗲’? 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗮𝘀𝗸 𝘂𝘀. © Report / graphic Jon Danzig