Now it’s up to the people to decide this referendum on the Indigenous voice to parliament
The passage of legislation enabling a referendum on enshrining an Indigenous voice to parliament and executive government in the Constitution is a watershed in Australian history and it marks the turning point when the debate about this constitutional change must shift decisively from politicians to the people.
The referendum campaign carries a heavy responsibility for all Australians. It is now up to every citizen to command this debate from the politicians and to discuss and deliberate it with goodwill, to call out the fearmongering and misinformation by those opposing it, and to urge those supporting it to explain how it will deliver practical change.
The voice, to my mind, is an opportunity that must be seized to turn Australia in a new direction, with reconciliation and responsibility, and to improve the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
The voice has only one goal: to improve the health, education, employment and justice outcomes for Indigenous Australians. It is not about establishing an apartheid state, dividing one Australian against another along racial lines, or granting special privileges to one group of Australians and denying those same privileges to everyone else.
These are all deliberate falsehoods designed to propagate resentment, fear and anger, and channelling this into No votes at the referendum.
The reality is, as the Closing the Gap reports make clear, on key measures of social and economic wellbeing, progress has been painfully slow or nothing much has changed in more than a decade. The voice, by providing input from local communities into policies and programs, can make real progress in alleviating disadvantage.
What is proposed is both a modest constitutional change but one with profound consequences. It would provide for the parliament to establish a body made up of people representing Indigenous Australians that may provide advice to the executive government and the parliament on matters relating to Indigenous Australians.
It will have no power to delay any decisions contemplated or taken by a government or the parliament. Neither can the voice veto or amend any decision.
Indeed, while the voice would be empowered to give advice, there would be no obligation by policymakers to follow it.
But the point is that such advice can only improve the policymaking process.
The authority of government and parliament will not be diminished by the voice. This is an important point.
Because just how the voice is constituted – such as its number of members and how they are chosen – is determined by the parliament. So is how the voice would function and the procedures it would follow.
This allows the parliament to redesign the voice should it not be operating as effectively as it could be. It allows the parliament to determine how it should be designed and operated.
Enshrining the voice in the Constitution simply means that there must be a voice that provides advice on matters relating to Indigenous Australians.
It is about giving Indigenous Australians, who were here on this continent long before European conquest and settlement, a voice in the policymaking process as it relates to them. It has long been recognised in Australian law, through the Mabo judgment, that Indigenous Australians have a special connection and right to traditional lands.
The voice would provide a mechanism to change how governments engage with Indigenous people.
Noel Pearson, a principal architect of the voice, told me that if public servants and ministers had consulted with a voice, then it would have stopped the destruction of the ancient Juukan Gorge rock shelters in Western Australia’s Pilbara and it would have kept the Northern Territory alcohol bans in place.
Parliament and government also may seek advice from the voice on such things, rather than wait to be given it.
The voice is about empowering local communities without ceding power to them. The authority and power of governments and the parliament remain supreme and not compromised. The courts could hear cases only about whether advice was received and considered, not the merits of that advice or whether it was adopted.
After decades of debate about reconciliation being symbolic or practical, the voice delivers both.
It establishes a body that has as its purpose practical change to improve the lot of Indigenous Australians. By enshrining it in the Constitution, it provides recognition of the First Australians in the founding document of a nation. Pearson also emphasised that the voice would provide for Indigenous Australians to take responsibility. It will be accountable and its work transparent.
This is often overlooked. It means that those who sit on the voice will be responsible for the advice they give or do not give.
Pearson says the Closing the Gap reports will be a scorecard of both the voice and government.
The adoption of the Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice) Bill by the Senate on Monday is an important step in reconciling a nation to its past and looking to the future.
In the 2017 Uluru Statement from the Heart, a product of the First Nations Constitutional Convention, Indigenous Australians asked all of us to walk together on a journey to reconciliation.
Those who argue the voice is backed only by “elites” are misguided. This is a tactic to turn voters against constitutional change by fostering resentment.
The support from sporting codes, the business community, churches and faith groups, trade unions and social welfare organisations, law societies and civic bodies is about leadership that is responsive to their members and supporters.
While referendums can be proposed only by politicians, the people will make the final judgment. That is where this debate now rests: with the citizens.
The eyes of the world are upon us. History is calling on us. It is a test for all Australians. We must not fail.
More Coverage
Ten takeaways from the Trump-Zelensky Oval Office spat
Great television but poor diplomacy. Here’s a top ten list after the remarkable televised meeting in the Oval Office, and a prediction for JD Vance’s future.
Putin wins Trump-Zelensky Oval Office spectacle
US Vice President JD Vance starts a public fight that only helps Russia’s dictator.