There are many compelling reasons for casting a 'No' vote to Albanese's proposed racist Voice. Many of these reasons are rooted in the very foundation of the Voice concept itself. Despite assertions to the contrary, it's essential to look at the potential consequences of this proposal honestly and openly, especially since every single ‘Yes’ campaigner has linked Voice to ‘treaty’. 

The Link Between Voice and Treaty:  

One key aspect of the debate centres on the connection between the proposed Voice and the concept of ‘Treaty’. Advocates argue that the two are "inexorably linked." While the intention may be to address historical grievances, it's vital to consider the potential consequences.

Legal Challenges and Taxpayer Burden:

There are decades of costly legal challenges associated with Treaty negotiations. These legal battles, when they arise, will place a significant financial burden on taxpayers. The question becomes, who will bear the brunt of these expenses?

Demands for Land Control and Reparations:

As Treaty discussions progress, some fear that demands for control of land and requests for further taxpayer dollars in the name of "reparations" could emerge. These potential demands raise important questions about the distribution of resources and the impact on the broader Australian population.

The Quest for Unity and Fairness:

Amid these concerns, there's a shared desire among many Australians for unity and fairness. The question then becomes whether the proposed Voice and Treaty concept aligns with these values or if they risk perpetuating division, conflict, and resentment.