Beyond the First Nations Voice to Parliament: Who “owns” the state?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In 2023, Australian voters defeated a constitutional amendment to establish a First Nations' Voice to Parliament. This representative body would have been empowered to make representations to parliament and executive government. It was proposed by First Nations people as the first stage in a Voice, Treaty, Truth process of political and constitutional reform. As the implications of this defeat are considered, it is instructive to examine what lessons New Zealand's politics and policies of Māori self‐determination may contribute to local deliberations, including on the principles that could inform treaties such as those under consideration in the state of Victoria. The ongoing point of contention in both countries has profound implications for how and why policy is made, for whom and by whom. The point of contest is over who, in practical political terms, “owns” the state and, therefore, its policymaking systems? Are First Nations people shareholders in state authority, or should they reside always on its periphery? If not, what are the terms of their inclusion?
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it