Prime Minister Anthony Albanese at New Zealand Parliament beside senior cultural adviser to Parliament Kura Moeahu during a Māori welcome ceremony.
AAP Image/Mark Coote
Although both Pauline Hanson and Lidia Thorpe are campaigning for a ‘no’ vote, it’s important to note they are coming from two different sides.
AAP Image/Mick Tsikas
As the referendum date approaches, campaigns may use misinformation to spark emotions in people to get them to vote a certain way. Here are some ways to spot dishonest claims and misinformation.
Legislation is an unsatisfactory way to institute a Voice to Parliament because, among other reasons, it would make the body insecure and vulnerable to the whims of different governments.
It might sound like difficult terrain, but ideas of nationhood can be progressive as well as regressive, and could help bind Australians ahead of the Voice referendum.
The Voice to Parliament is an advisory body, which means neither parliament nor the government is legally required to give effect to its representations.
The Albanese government is moving towards a referendum having Australia voting on a First Nations Voice to Parliament. So how much detail should voters have about the Voice?
The last time the country voted in a referendum on Indigenous affairs was in 1967. Advocates for the ‘Voice to Parliament’ say it is the best way to remedy a long legacy of failed policies.
A Voice to Parliament will not fix every problem facing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. But it is an important step towards moving the nation to truth telling and beyond.
The Uluru Statement from the Heart calls for truth-telling as a crucial step towards reconciliation. What does this process involve, and what are the potential promises and pitfalls?
Multicultural communities could be crucial to the Voice referendum, given their size and breadth. The ‘yes’ campaign will need to mobilise at the grassroots level to be successful.
Decades of government Indigenous Affairs policy has not delivered. A new approach is needed. Policy-making informed by Indigenous lived experience through a Voice to parliament may be the answer.
One crucial question about the Voice to Parliament is how it will ensure voices from regional and remote communities, such as those in the Kimberley, are truly heard in Canberra.
Constitutions are by nature short and incomplete documents. In Australia, parliament puts the flesh on the bones of the Constitution, including how a proposed Voice would operate.
Even though there is strong Indigenous representation in parliament, this does not guarantee Indigenous communities a say in laws and policies made on their behalf.
In their 1881 petition, Aboriginal people from the Maloga mission who sought greater freedom from missionary control called for the government to grant them their own parcel of land.
We now know the wording of the Voice referendum and proposed constitutional amendment. But what may have been forgotten is how we got here in the first place – and why it matters.
Invasion Day rallies across the country included First Nations people campaigning against a Voice to Parliament.
AAAP Image/Bianca De Marchi
Right-wing opposition of the Voice to parliament has been dominating the so-called ‘no’ campaign. First Nations communities calling for more detail and more discussion also have reason to oppose it.
The sad reality is that if the demands of these early activists had been met nearly a century ago, we would not be suffering the severe disadvantage that hovers over Aboriginal lives still today.
Cooper walking on Nicholson Street Footscray. Obtained with permission.
Esmay Mann Collection.