What is the Voice referendum?
On October 14 Australia will be asked to vote yes or no to the referendum question regarding the Indigenous Voice to Parliament. As a party we have found this issue difficult to engage with. On one hand, we love the idea of the voice as it will allow Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives to be heard by those in power, hopefully leading to better policies and better outcomes, which are desperately needed. On the other hand, placing a race requirement for a body into our constitution cuts against some of our egalitarian values. Alongside this, while we would prefer that ideas are judged on whether they are correct rather than who is saying them, we are also aware that our party is predominantly white and are mindful of the negative impacts a no vote may have on indigenous people and reconciliation.
The question we will be asked to vote on is as follows:
“A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.
Do you approve this proposed alteration?”
If the yes vote wins the following will be added to the constitution:
In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:
- there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice;
- the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples;
- the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.”
Essentially, this means that an advisory body would be created that the parliament has the power to shape and change, but would need a referendum to abolish. Constitutional recognition of Indigenous peoples is therefore given through this Voice to Parliament being established in our constitution.
There are a lot of misconceptions out there and we thought an FAQ may be a helpful way to address the issue.
FAQ
Where did the idea for the referendum come from?
The question of constitutional recognition for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people has been around for decades, including during the 1999 republic referendum. The idea for a constitutionally enshrined Indigenous advisory body was first proposed by Aboriginal lawyer Noel Pearson in 2014. In 2016 a Liberal government appointed Referendum Council delivered a discussion paper on constitutional recognition and the voice and this was endorsed by First Nations leaders in 2017 in the Uluru Statement of the Heart. A Voice co-design process culminated in the 2021 report Indigenous Voice Co-design Process panel final report, also referred to as the Calma-Langton co-design report. This process has led to the current referendum.
Why haven’t we been given more information about the laws and why aren’t we voting on them? What would the Voice actually look like?
Parliament has made the decision that the referendum will only be about whether the Voice will be put in our constitution and not the specific legislation. If approved, it will then be the job of the parliament to decide how the Voice is composed and the parliament will also be able to change the structure of the Voice in the future. The suggested model described in the Calma-Langton co-design report, which describes a 24 person National Voice, with 2 representatives from each state or territory, an additional 5 members for identified remote areas in the NT, WA, QLD, SA and NSW, and a representative for Torres Strait Islanders living on the mainland. This document also proposes that members of the National Voice being determined by smaller local and regional Voice bodies. While the government has not formally committed to any model at this point, we think it extremely likely that this proposed model would be adopted.
What does the Voice do? What power will it have?
The Voice will be able to make representations to the parliament and executive about laws and policies that relate to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. It has no power to compel the government into any action, introduce bills, vote, delay voting, or veto any legislation.
How would the Voice referendum pass?
The referendum will pass if there is a double majority - a majority of voters who support the referendum nationally, and a majority (at least 4) of states in favour of the referendum.
Do Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people support the voice?
While it’s challenging to get a representative sample of Indigenous people and it is possible opinions have changed since, two polls of 300 and 738 indigenous people conducted in January and March showed that 80% and 83% were in favour. Despite the limitations of the data, this is a strong result and we would expect that there would currently be a strong majority in favour amongst the Indigenous population.
How does the Voice relate to Treaty?
The Voice referendum is not considering the idea of treaty - a binding agreement between the government and First Nations peoples that sets out the terms of engagement and obligations of all sides. Consequently the treaty is not relevant to the current debate.
What is great about the Voice and constitutional recognition?
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have a unique place in our country as our First peoples and it is right that we recognise this. Our First nations people have a rich heritage and so much to offer, but they also have the unique position of having experienced significant violence, oppression and human rights atrocities such as genocides and the Stolen Generations. It is right then that we have systems in place to ensure the evils of the past are not repeated and current inequalities in areas such as health, life expectancy, income and employment are addressed.
The Voice has a potential role to help do this. Firstly, by ensuring governments always consider the perspectives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in laws that affect them, it helps shift the dial further from paternalism and towards self-determination and reconciliation. It is clear from current evidence that collaborative action with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people on the issues that affect them is more effective than any imposed solutions. (1)
Secondly, a constitutionally enshrined Voice means that governments will always be compelled to consult Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people on important issues. This is significant given five Aboriginal advisory groups have come and gone at the will of different governments over the past five decades. The Voice will mean an instrument for consultation will outlast any particular sitting government, giving stability and certainty to First Nations people that their perspectives will be heard.
Lastly, it is not insignificant that the majority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are in favour of the Voice - approximately 80% in the polls mentioned above. As we seek reconciliation, self-determination and a more compassionate approach to our First Nations people, a yes vote would demonstrate we are listening carefully to what Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people say will help them to have the same opportunities and experiences as every other Australian.
What are our reservations?
Despite the potential positives, there are significant concerns held by some of our members.
Primarily, while the Voice will not have any decision making power itself, it will be a form of political influence and power that is constitutionally given to one group of racially defined people, which cuts against our desire for equality. Governments, according to this view, should not legislate on the basis of race even if the goal of race based legislation is to put everyone on equal footing. This is because in some sense, this kind of legislation elevates the inherited (and not chosen) characteristic of race so that it determines a person's eligibility for participation in some societal programs. This may then actually have a counterproductive effect of contributing to the concept of racial distinction as being relevant to a person's societal worth or role and many jurisdictions such as France and Germany do not practise affirmative action for this reason among others.
While the power to legislate based on race has always been in our constitution, the solution to this should not be seen as adding more race-based content, but rather by amending the previous content.
In addition to these philosophical objections, while we hope that any Voice created will be a force for good, there are no guarantees about what the Voice might become in practice. It is possible that it could become politicised, not represent indigenous people fairly, or even result in parties and factions lobbying for positions in the voice to push particular political agendas.
The Voice will create bureaucracy and also cost some money and there are questions over whether the Voice will always remain relevant. Might it be possible that over the course of a century or two we actually move past race as a division in our society and we are left with a constitutionally enshrined body unsuitable to the context that we are unable to remove? As can be seen it is hard to change the constitution, but especially to take something away.
So where does the Common Good Party stand?
The majority of Common Good Party members are likely to vote Yes in the referendum. 65% of those participating in our recent poll indicated they were in favour or leaning towards the voice. In that sense our party is in favour of the Voice. A further 16% were unsure and 23% were against or leaning against. While those voting No constitute a smaller proportion of our party, we want to acknowledge the concerns of those voting No and don’t believe that this issue becoming divisive is likely to be beneficial for our nation. Ultimately we would like to encourage everyone to vote with their consciences for what they think will be best for Australians. We would urge everyone to consider deeply and compassionately the impact on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as they do this.
1. Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2020. Productivity Commission. Chapter 3. https://www.pc.gov.au/ongoing/overcoming-indigenous-disadvantage/2020