Australia’s prime minister has revealed key information about a referendum that might result in the country’s first constitutional change in over 50 years.
If passed, a referendum later this year would create an official organization called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, which would allow Indigenous people to offer their opinions on laws.
It would be a “very simple” yet “momentous” adjustment, according to PM Anthony Albanese.
Only eight of 44 constitutional referendums have been successful, making them fairly uncommon.
The Voice is the subject of heated discussion across the political spectrum, with both supporters and opponents.
The Uluru Statement from the Heart, a significant document from 2017, recommended The Voice.
Though not unanimously agreed upon, the declaration, which was drafted by more than 250 Indigenous leaders, is regarded as the best call to action for First Nations Australians.
Mr. Albanese revealed the suggested phrasing for the question that Australians will be required to vote on on Thursday.
An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice would be established as part of a proposed proposal to amend constitution to recognize First Peoples of Australia. Do you agree with the change being proposed?
Australians “share this great island continent that is world’s oldest continuous culture,” Mr. Albanese said in an emotional speech, adding the Voice will “enshrine recognition” of that fact.
He continued, “This should be recognized and celebrated on our birth certificate as a nation.”
The plan, which is still up for discussion in the legislature, stipulates that the Voice will “make representations” to lawmakers and decision-makers “on matters relating to Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander peoples.”
Parliament, however, would have the authority to determine the Voice’s makeup, responsibilities, authority, and practices.
The Uluru Statement claims that Indigenous Australians experience “powerlessness” when attempting to address structural issues in order to improve their lives.
A few of these issues are having a lower life expectancy than non-Indigenous Australians, having disproportionately worse health and educational outcomes, and having greater incarceration rates.
Many contend that inability to properly consult Indigenous people on solutions is frequently to blame for this.
According to Prof. Megan Davis, a signatory to the Uluru Statement, “Non-Indigenous people making decisions about communities they have never visited and also to the people they do not know.”
Some claim that the representation of Indigenous people in parliament is adequate.
Supporters of the Voice, however, argue that MPs do not always represent the concerns of Indigenous people.
However, the government has ruled out this possibility. Other critics claim it may function as a third chamber of parliament and potentially veto legislation.
Additionally, not all Indigenous people get support. Some contend that the top goal should be to negotiate and sign a treaty with Indigenous people. One of the only former British colonies without one is Australia.
Many Aboriginal Australians emphasize that they never gave up their land or their sovereignty. Being acknowledged in the constitution is feared to be equivalent to that.
Others contend that it is merely a symbolic act and that money would be better used to find quick fixes.
That’s still up in the air. Legislation establishing the Voice will next be written and discussed if Australia votes in favor.
According to one idea, the advisory board may consist of 24 people, with members chosen from each state, territory, the Torres Strait Islands, and isolated Aboriginal settlements.
The Voice, in Mr. Albanese’s opinion, is “an unwavering source of advice and accountability.”
Advocates for the Sami people compare it to the First Nations legislatures in Norway, Sweden, and Finland.
They are primarily consultative bodies without a formal legislative role, hence they are not parliaments in the usual sense.
For instance, in Finland, the government and Sami Parliament discuss about specific issues like land management and administrative or legislative changes that have an impact on Sami culture.
Government officials can nonetheless move forward without negotiations under Finnish legislation.
Advocates argue that the Voice should be guaranteed by the constitution rather than by law. Without a referendum, such a change is impossible.
They contend that by doing this, the Voice would acquire permanence and become immune to partisan politics.
A majority of Australians must vote in favor for it to pass. Additionally, a majority vote is required in at least four of Australia’s six states.
Even US basketball legend Shaquille O’Neal, who will be featured in promotional materials, has endorsed the idea.
However, the outcome is far from certain because the last successful referendum took place in 1977.
The conservative Liberal Party has opposed the Voice in the past, but it now claims that its MPs will vote to determine its stance. The Nationals, a minor coalition partner, are against the reform.
The Greens political party will back the Voice. Lidia Thorpe, the party’s former Indigenous Affairs spokesperson, recently resigned over it; she is in favor of a treaty first.
The Uluru Statement calls for a Makarrata commission, a body to oversee a process of treaty-making and truth-telling regarding Indigenous Australians’ history, if a Voice is established.
The implementation of a Voice is also thought to increase the momentum toward an Australian republic. If Mr. Albanese is elected to a second term in 2025, he has already said a referendum on the subject is likely.
