Paul Kildea writes in The Conversation (1.8.22) about the Albanese government’s proposed referendum pathway to establish an Indigenous Voice to Parliament.
‘The Albanese government is moving ahead with plans to hold a first-term referendum on a First Nations Voice. The Prime Minister has attended the annual Garma Festival in northeast Arnhem Land, where the Voice was a key focus.
‘The referendum will ask voters to enshrine in the Australian Constitution a First Nations body that would give non-binding advice to the federal parliament on laws and policies affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
‘In recent weeks there has been growing debate on whether Australians need to see the full detail of the proposed advisory body before voting on it. Megan Davis, one of the architects of the process that preceded the Uluru Statement from the Heart, says voters should be asked to approve the body’s basic purpose and function, and other details can be filled in later by parliament.
‘Critics of this approach, including Marcia Langton, argue a specific model should be outlined in draft legislation and tabled in parliament before the referendum.
‘The question of whether proposals should be general or specific is a familiar issue in referendum design. So, how much detail should referendum proposals contain? And is there a risk that proposals that are too detailed, or too vague, can end up being rejected by voters?’
- What can history teach us to ensure a successful referendum for A First Nations Voice to parliament? »
- View from The Hill: Albanese takes welcome first step but government needs to produce Voice detail »
- Anthony Albanese’s Indigenous Voice to Parliament dilemma: Provide more detail or learn from history? »
- Why does the government need a referendum on Indigenous Voice to Parliament? What if it fails? »
- ‘It’s not wise to be rushed’: Linda Burney says government will consult extensively on Indigenous voice »
- The PM’s Garma speech built powerful momentum for an Indigenous voice – his challenge now is to maintain it »
- Creating a constitutional Voice – the words that could change Australia »
- Indigenous Voice to parliament detail to come after referendum, Anthony Albanese says »
- Have a heart: PM urges both sides of politics to support indigenous voice »
- The Prime Minister insists he’s willing to take a risk on a referendum, to ‘uplift our whole nation’ »
- Establishing a Voice to Parliament could be an opportunity for Indigenous Nation Building. Here’s what that means »
- Guardian Essential poll: most Australians support an Indigenous voice – but they don’t know too much about it »
- Bipartisan support for the Voice referendum is dead. Does it even matter? »
- The government wants to change Australia’s referendum laws. How will this affect the Voice to Parliament? »
- ‘Toxic rhetoric’: marriage equality plebiscite offers ugly lessons for Indigenous voice to parliament referendum »
- Racism a concern ahead of voice vote »
- Indigenous Voice details should not be released, says constitutional law expert »
- The Day of Mourning in 1938 set out a peaceful, beautiful message. The voice is a legacy of that unfinished business »
- Indigenous Voice to parliament: The biggest danger to the Voice is not the detail, it’s the politics »
- What the ghosts of campaigns past – and Dirty Dancing – can teach the PM about the voice referendum »
- Voice to parliament: Why the call for Indigenous recognition is different this time »
- State and territory leaders to sign joint statement backing Indigenous voice to parliament »
- The Voice referendum: how did we get here and where are we going? Here’s what we know »
- How much has support for the Voice fallen? It depends on how you ask »
- Will multicultural Australians support the Voice? The success of the referendum may hinge on it »
- Linda Burney warns MPs who walked out on apology not to ‘repeat the mistake’ with the voice »
- The history of referendums in Australia is riddled with failure. Albanese has much at risk – and much to gain »
- The 1967 referendum was the most successful in Australia’s history. But what it can tell us about 2023 is complicated »
- The Voice: Greens’ new First Nations spokesperson Dorinda Cox believes the nation is at a turning point »
- Long before the Voice vote, the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association called for parliamentary representation »
- For a lot of First Nations peoples, debates around the Voice to Parliament are not about a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ »
- When it comes to the voice, Indigenous politics cannot be reduced to ‘left’ and ‘right’ »
- The future of my grandchildren is in the hands of all Australians. Help bring our dream alive
Why a First Nations Voice should come before Treaty
Pat Anderson and Paul Komesaroff write in The Conversation (21.10.22) about the important reasoning for first establishing an Indigenous Voice to Parliament before settling any treaty arrangement.
‘Since the advent of colonisation, the absence of an effective process for conducting dialogues between the broader community and First Nations people has been a festering sore at the heart of Australian society.
‘The notorious doctrine of terra nullius not only led to the denial of the legitimate rights of First Nations people, but also ensured they could never be heard. This malign strategy has produced centuries of unspeakable suffering, sickness and death. Many Australians feel the time has come to start to heal the wound.
‘The Uluru Statement from the Heart advocates for a process of dialogue to set us on a path towards a new way of living together. The statement was agreed to in 2017 by a convention of more than 250 First Nations people after an inclusive and rigorous process of regional dialogues. It proposes a First Nations Voice to Parliament to guide a passage both to a new “coming together” and to the clear articulation of the long-suppressed truth.
‘As Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said when announcing the forthcoming referendum that seeks to incorporate these key proposals into the Australian Constitution, the statement is a generous offer to the entire Australian community. It does not harbour grudges and does not seek vengeance. It asks for a secure mechanism whereby the voices of First Nations people can at last be heard – by each other, by the parliament and by the wider Australian public.’
- Why a First Nations Voice should come before Treaty »
- First Nations Voice to Parliament momentum must not be wasted »
- The Voice: not enough ‘meat on the bone’ »
- The power of yindyamarra: how we can bring respect to Australian democracy »
- A constitutional Voice to Parliament: ensuring parliament is in charge, not the courts »
- ‘Not fit for purpose’: government looks to amend ‘antiquated’ referendum laws ahead of voice vote »
- The rhetoric around the Indigenous voice to parliament shows it’ll be a rough campaign »
- Grattan on Friday: To have the best chance of success, the Voice must be sold to voters as a positive, unifying story »
- The government will not send out Yes and No case pamphlets ahead of the Voice to Parliament referendum. Does this matter? »
- What do we know about the Voice to Parliament design, and what do we still need to know? »
- An Indigenous Voice to Parliament will not give ‘special rights’ or create a veto »
- Indigenous Voice to parliament: From better policy to a greater say »
- Parliament, not the devil, should control the detail on the Voice »
- Losing his Voice: Albanese says no means no skirting around referendum »
- Raising Indigenous voices on a Voice to parliament »
- Voice to parliament: Noel Pearson says reconciliation will be lost ‘forever’ without Voice »
- Voice to Parliament comes into sharp focus as referendum turns increasingly political »
- Why a voice to parliament won’t affect First Nations sovereignty as Lidia Thorpe fears »
- What’s in it for everyone? »
- We are capable of doing both Voice and Treaty »
- The rejection of the Voice and the risk it poses to the referendum »
- Albanese says voice referendum will go ahead even if political dissent presents risk of failure »
- The government is being asked for detail on the Voice. Here’s what we know »
- Enshrining the Voice gives best chance for Closing the Gap, Albanese says »
- In the year of the Voice, Australians must overcome a language barrier if we’re to speak to each other, to hear the same truth »
- Our research has shown Indigenous peoples’ needs cannot be understood and met, without Indigenous voices »
- Young people may decide the outcome of the Voice referendum – here’s why »
- My people in the Alice are a Voice in the wilderness »
- Voice campaigners tell MPs Indigenous consultation could have averted Alice Springs problems »
- From the Heart readies to launch its official ‘Yes’ campaign for Voice to Parliament »
- No, the Voice isn’t a ‘radical’ change to our Constitution »
- Indigenous voice ability to advise ministers to remain »
- With 11 Indigenous politicians in parliament, why does Australia need the Voice?
- What Australia could learn from New Zealand about Indigenous representation