Despite the best of intentions, the prime minister’s determination to take Australians to a referendum on the Voice to Parliament has caused tremendous damage.
The decline in support for the Voice after initial strong polling demonstrates settlers are resistant to the idea of Indigenous peoples as a collective subject entitled to a unified Voice.
A ‘no’ result in the vote could compromise Australia’s moral authority when it seeks to advocate or pressure other states on human rights issues.
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
Despite the claim ‘there is no comparable constitutional body like this anywhere in the world’ many countries have similar institutions to the proposed Voice.
It is notoriously difficult for referendums to succeed in Australia – but there are lessons from those that have gone before about how to improve their chances.
From a legal standpoint, there is a difference between a state and a territory, and for some that justifies giving territory voters less say over changes to the national constitution.
The ‘no’ side is successfully engaging young people on TikTok by combining volume (posting multiple TikToks a day) with authenticity, use of personal narratives and humour.
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.