Exploring the Indigenous ‘Voice’ in Australia’s Constitution: A Look at the Referendum Debate

Does Australia need to change the constitution to ensure Indigenous Australians, namely Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, have a voice in the form of representation in the constitution?

“We will all have an equal voice, we can all have an equal share which I believe will inspire and unite Australia” said Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

As a democracy, this question must be answered by all Australians.

There are only “yes” and “no” answers that will be given by residents who are in the voting age group, through voting around October and December.

But this proposal has already caused debate in Australia, including among politicians and the Aboriginal community itself.

Why should there be a referendum?

The Indigenous “voice,” or “voice” in Australia, is due to be included in the constitution, a document detailing how Australia is governed.

Anything related to the constitution, including if it is to be changed or added to, needs a vote or referendum.

Australia actually does not often hold referendums, there have only been 44 times, since it was declared a Commonwealth of Nations in 1901. Among them were the referendum on railways and the term of office for members of parliament.

“They changed the constitution because they stuck with it for a long time … and that makes people very careful about voting for change,” said Professor Anne Twomey, lawyer and constitutional law expert.

This year will be the first time in 30 years that Australia will hold a referendum.

Why should there be a ‘voice’?

Eligible Australians will be given a “yes” or “no” choice to decide whether there should be a group of Indigenous Australians advising the government on issues facing them and their respective communities.

Actually, the Federal Government of Australia has been trying to make policies to improve the lives of Indigenous people. However, there are still many Indigenous people who have difficulty getting health, education and welfare services. They are still being questioned.

Not only because of the colonization of the Australian continent in the past, but also because of the ‘White Australia’ policy that was once implemented by only allowing white people, as well as the dark history of the ‘Stolen Generation’ which separated children from Indigenous families.

The current policies are considered not to have brought major changes to the lives of Indigenous Australians, instead last year it was noted that the gap between Indigenous people and other citizens was getting bigger.

There are even some conditions that actually show a decline, including a much shorter life expectancy.

To overcome this, it is proposed to have a ‘voice’ in the form of representatives from Indigenous Australians, namely Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders.

It is hoped that these representatives speak out about what happened to them, determine their own destiny, which is seen as one of the best ways to close the life gap between Indigenous people and other citizens.

“We know from the evidence that people’s lives can be improved when they speak, and this is where voice matters,” said Professor Marcia Langton, author of the report on ‘voice’.

The quest for a voice actually dates back, as in 2017, when Indigenous community leaders gathered in the Northern Territory to work out a plan to improve their lives.

“There has to be some fundamental change in our relationship. Australia has to listen to us for good,” Aunt Pat Anderson, Uluru Statement Author.

What will be voiced?

After lengthy discussions, a consensus was in writing in around 400 words outlining what Indigenous Australians think needs to change.

In essence there are three things put forward, namely ‘voice’ or sound, ‘treaty’ or agreement, and ‘truth’ or truth.

For ‘voice’, they proposed a group of Indigenous people who would advise the government on whether proposed policies and laws would be good or bad for their community.

The debate around ‘voice’

For some people who are campaigning for citizens to vote “No” or not, the voice or ‘voice’ will give too much freedom to get involved with various kinds of problems.

If the referendum is successful, the ‘voice’ will be in the Australian constitution, meaning groups of Indigenous people who can advise the government cannot be dissolved or eliminated, as has been the case in the past.

There are many questions about who and how many people will have a voice or be in this group in the future. How will they be elected, what will their responsibilities be.

A number of residents wanted answers about that before they chose whether this ‘voice’ should exist or not.

Who is representing?

How ‘voice’ will be implemented is largely explained in a report that Professor Tom Kalmar and Professor Marcia Langton wrote in 2021, after speaking with thousands of Indigenous people and organizations from across Australia.

There are two models of their sound.

First, there will be local and regional voice groups that will be designed and run by the community in the way that suits them best.

The aim is to keep them away from organizations that often act on behalf of Indigenous Australians. The goal is for the citizens themselves to be able to speak on their behalf.

Those local and regional groups will be the national voice, 24 different people covering 35 areas, five of which will represent remote communities, as well as three people from the Torres Strait Islands,

Local and regional voter groups decide who will be the national vote, then each group of voices works with each other at all the different levels of government, from Federal to local.

The hope is that with this voice, they will be involved in consultations from the start when making policies that affect Indigenous people.

But, that ‘voice’ or “voice” will not have the power to stop the policies and laws agreed by parliament.

Besides that, in theory, any advice given by Indigenous groups can be ignored, so it is not necessarily included or considered by the government into law.

But given that there will be a lot of consultations going on with Indigenous people, it will at least be a starting point for anything that will be put before parliament.

How many people need to approve?

Experts in Australia say that for something to pass through a referendum it usually has to be supported by 90 per cent of the people. Especially during the campaign, people’s considerations can change.

Currently, at least a quarter of eligible Australians say they will vote “No” or not, as in saying they are undecided.

The rest said “Yes” or yes, so they continued to campaign with the support of less than half the population.

Among Indigenous people there are various views about ‘voice’ or sound. The question asked by them is is this what is really needed?

Lidia Thrope, an Aboriginal politician, said: “Do we want to be an advisory body to the colonial system?”

“We have to fix economic, educational and other problems, this is what needs to be done”, said Warrne Mundine, an indigenous activist.

“We want a black Parliament … we want self-determination,” said Murrieguel Coe Craigie, caretaker of the Aboriginal Tent Embassy in front of the Canberra Parliament building.

There are also those who feel that later this body will only provide advice to parliament, or only as a symbol and not provide real change.

While others want different recognition, for example a seat in the Senate that represents Indigenous people so they have more votes in theory.

But for the backers, they say change has to happen.

This ‘voice’ model is the best form of compromise to get Indigenous people to receive constitutional recognition and opinions on government policies.

“Having a voice for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people doesn’t mean diminishing one’s ability to be heard,” said Professor Towmey.

Also watch the video: Seconds of Fireballs Crossing the Australian Sky