Indigenous Voice to Parliament : Referendum Approaching

The Indigenous Voice to Parliament (the Voice) have launched a week-long campaign to persuade voters to change the current situation. Since Albanese was elected as the Prime Minister of Australia, he has publicly voiced his commitment to transition Australia from a constitutional monarchy to a republic. He has emphasized that his primary task is to recognize the voice of Indigenous Australians in the parliament through constitutional recognition, which may be pursued in the second or third term as the transition to a republic takes place. To some extent, this is a significant nationwide issue that will determine the direction Australia takes, and the outcome of the national referendum is uncertain.

For immigrants who are new to Australia, many are unfamiliar with the Australian Constitution and political system. Within the Chinese community, there is a lack of understanding about the relationship between Indigenous Australians and Australia. Recently, many people have heard about the upcoming referendum to establish the Voice, and many are asking, “What is it all about?”

Amending the Constitution through a Referendum

Australia is a constitutional monarchy, which means that the Constitution can be amended. The process involves obtaining the agreement of the Parliament and then conducting a nationwide referendum where every citizen can express their support or opposition to the proposed changes. If the majority of the referendum votes are in favor and if the majority of states (at least four out of six) also support the proposed changes, the amendments can be written into the Constitution and signed by the Australian monarch, becoming the new law of the land. This process is known as a constitutional referendum and is the pathway for addressing constitutional matters.

Apart from constitutional matters, there can also be referendums held for non-constitutional issues, which are called “Plebiscites”. Australia has conducted four nationwide referendums on non-constitutional matters, including the conscription referendum in 1916 and the referendum on overseas enlistment in 1917, which were decisions made by the nation during World War I. In 1977, Australia conducted a referendum to choose a national anthem, and although this referendum was not mandatory, it allowed the public to express their preference. In 2017, Australia conducted a referendum on the legalization of same-sex marriage, resulting in an amendment to the marriage law to include same-sex marriage.

The Significance of Nationwide Referendums

In the second half of this year, Australia is likely to hold its first nationwide referendum in 23 years to include Indigenous voices in the Constitution. Prime Minister Albanese has publicly voiced his support for the proposal of the Voice, emphasizing that it is a shared national achievement and a means to bridge the gap and improve lives. Amending the Constitution will protect the future generations’ voices and mark a significant milestone for Australia’s Indigenous peoples. Megan Davis, a key figure behind the Uluru Statement from the Heart, believes that Indigenous parliamentary representation is the most effective way to improve the lives of Indigenous Australians and Torres Strait Islanders.

However, the National Human Rights Consultation in 2009 revealed a lack of awareness among the Australian public regarding the country’s political and legal systems, the Constitution, and the process of nationwide referendums. A referendum is a national vote on a specific issue that may modify the Constitution. It is a mandatory vote, similar to federal elections, where individuals must agree or disagree with proposals, laws, or political questions put forward by the federal government. It requires a double majority and must receive approval from at least four to six states to pass. Since 1901, there have been 19 referendums, but only 8 out of 44 proposed constitutional amendments have been approved, indicating a relatively low success rate. Between 1967 and 1988, for example, there were 6 referendums on issues such as electoral systems, reflecting diverse opinions on how to govern Australia during a new stage in Australian society after World War II. Notably, the most significant successful referendum was in 1967, which included Indigenous Australians in the national census.

Once proposed the Voice, as stipulated by the Constitution, is established, it will require the Parliament at the time to reform the institution if it is found to be dysfunctional, rather than abolish it. This is crucial to ensure that Indigenous voices are always present in the Parliament, transforming the fate of Indigenous peoples from being a political football to a more enduring, sustainable, and long-term impact on their empowerment and progress.

Is the public ready for the referendum?

It’s not easy to amend the constitution. The Liberal Party has not yet made a commitment on whether they support the Voice proposal, and the details of how the institution would operate remain unclear. Prime Minister Albanese has repeatedly denied these claims, mentioning a report drafted by Indigenous leaders Tom Calma and Marcia Langton, which was submitted to the previous Coalition government in 2021 and provided detailed explanations on how the Voice institution would function. However, Turnbull believes Albanese’s statements are “absurd” because the report has not been officially adopted as government policy.

The key to success in a national referendum is to help people understand what the referendum is about, why we need it, and why it is important to vote in favor. At this moment, the Australian public knows very little about the details of the Voice proposal, and it is a reasonable demand for people to want to know why they should vote on it. Recently, Greg Craven, an Honorary Professor of Constitutional Law at Australian Catholic University, criticized undisclosed supporters, pointing out that this firm group demands a lack of details so that they can control the model after the referendum, regardless of public opinion or political orientation. The lack of details has raised numerous concerns about the potential referendum.

Most Australians who have grown up here would agree that Indigenous people should have a certain level of voice in Australian society, and the consensus supporting the Voice has not faced much challenge. However, for first-generation immigrants, who make up about one-third of the Australian population, how much do they know about Indigenous people? Are they familiar with Indigenous constitutional rights? And do they support the establishment of a mechanism like the Voice to allow Indigenous people to express their views to the Federal Parliament? The truth is, nobody knows for sure.

Even for those who support this concept, there are still significant doubts about incorporating it into the constitution. Writing it into the constitution would be a more definitive decision, emphasizing the importance of parliamentary voice and negotiation with Indigenous people. In other words, Australians will be asked whether they support the establishment of an Indigenous voice consultation mechanism in the constitution, and voters will need to answer yes or no to this question. The mechanism does not have veto power but would provide advice to the parliament on policies affecting Indigenous people. However, the available information on the proposed recommendations and how the parliament would respond is quite vague. If people are uncertain, based on past experiences, voters are likely to vote against. If the referendum fails entirely, it will be a significant setback for Australian Indigenous people, setting them back by 20 years.

What exactly is the decision about?

In the previous election, the Labor Party expressed its intention to hold a public vote on the establishment of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. As a result, organizations have formed to advocate for a referendum to establish an Indigenous representative body, with “From the Heart” (https://fromtheheart.com.au/) being the prominent organization. From the Heart has put forward three key propositions for the referendum, including:

1. There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.
2. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to parliament and the executive government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
3. The parliament shall, subject to this constitution, have power to make laws with respect to the composition, functions, powers and procedures of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.

During the referendum, all Australians will be asked whether they support amending the constitution to establish an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, as follows: “Do you support an alteration to the constitution that establishes an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice?”

Referendum that is Not Promising

Since the proposal to include an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice in the Constitution has been put forward, there must be practical needs and purposes behind it. The aim is to grant greater voice and decision-making power to Indigenous local communities in jointly designing and determining matters that affect these communities. In the past, federal and state governments have engaged with local governments and peak organizations to formulate legislation, plans, and services, often excluding the Indigenous peoples of Australia from these processes. Looking back at the successful 1967 referendum where 90% of Australians voted to remove the clause in the Constitution that excluded Indigenous peoples from the national census, will the new generation of Australians choose to recognize the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice in the Constitution after 56 years? The current situation remains uncertain.

Even Pat Turner, CEO of the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation and an Indigenous leader, recently stated that she doesn’t see a path towards constitutional recognition and there isn’t enough detail on how this “Voice” will operate. Lidia Thorpe, spokesperson for Indigenous Affairs from the Australian Greens, also expressed in an interview that the nation is not ready for a public vote on the “Voice” and that it would be risky to do so without first signing a national treaty between the federal government and Indigenous peoples. Since the beginning of the year, there have been attacks on the “Voice” from the radical left, arguing that the Indigenous communities “deserve more” voice. On Australia Day, there was a protest with the theme “Sovereignty before Voice” to protest against leaders claiming that a sovereignty treaty must be established first.

Prime Minister Albanese’s vision is good, hoping to expedite this work during his tenure, but the reality is uncertain. Currently, there are continuous doubts about the “Voice”: how it will actually operate, whether it can effectively represent Indigenous peoples in remote areas, whether its structure is efficient or simply another layer of bureaucratic organization similar to the failed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), and whether it will disrupt the government system that has maintained stability, peace, and democracy in our country for over a century. Launching a nationwide referendum with unclear details in the second year of Albanese’s term, considering the current reactions from various parties, may not be the right timing, and the prospects are worrisome.