Shockingly Australia votes NO on giving voice to Aborigines

[Anthea]

Nation’s Indigenous people

Australians are voting on whether their nation’s constitution should be amended to enshrine a mechanism for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to advise parliament on policies that affect their lives

‘The Voice’ referendum, as it has become known, would establish a board of Indigenous peoples who would provide advice to the federal government on issues affecting their communities.

Despite comprising only 3.8 percent of Australia’s population, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples continue to experience drastic inequalities and the long-lasting impact of colonial policies.

Labor Prime Minister Anthony Albanese campaigned for the referendum, which asks Australians to vote ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the constitutional amendment of which he is in favour.

Recent polling has demonstrated a slide in support for the amendment, with a majority expected to vote against any change.

Public debate has been marred by misinformation, racism and what some people state is a lack of detail on how “the Voice” would operate.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander politicians and community leaders have also been divided in their support, and Liberal opposition party leader Peter Dutton is staunchly opposed to the proposal.

Significantly, just eight out of 44 referendums in Australia’s history have been successful, with past results suggesting that bi-partisan support from both major parties is necessary to win a majority vote.

Matthew Weegberg is an Indigenous father and husband who identifies with the Mutti Mutti, Yorta Yorta and Boon Wurrung peoples. He cast an early “yes” vote, saying he was optimistic a Voice to Parliament could bring about positive change.

“I’m optimistic that that Voice will achieve positive outcomes for Indigenous communities throughout Australia,” he said. “I’m a glass half-full kind of guy hoping that something good comes out of it.”

He said he was voting yes to support his children’s future.

“I’m hoping they can function in this society free of any racism or prejudice against them,” he told Al Jazeera.

James Henry is an Indigenous father and partner who identifies with the eastern Yuwaalaraay and Gamilaraay peoples, and also has a non-Indigenous heritage.

He voted against the proposal for a Voice to Parliament, telling Al Jazeera he “wasn’t convinced that the Voice was going to be the right path for Indigenous advancement”.

“While I do approve of community consultation and working with communities, I didn’t see [the Voice to Parliament] as the best way to address Indigenous disadvantage,” Henry said.

He said the money and effort used to promote the referendum could have been spent on addressing the inequalities that exist in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

“Despite the millions of dollars put into the campaign, it’s likely to not succeed,” he added.

Christine Smith was handing out leaflets at a polling booth encouraging people to vote against the proposed Voice to Parliament on Saturday. She told Al Jazeera that the constitutional amendment would create division.

“We don’t want a division. We want everybody to be treated equal,” she said.

Smith was also concerned that an advisory body such as the Voice to Parliament would utilise money that could instead be spent directly on “grassroots” service to assist Indigenous peoples.

“How many schools or health clinics could they set up, instead of having another body that they just got to give millions of dollars to,” she said.

Partners Leanna Buchanan and Dan Stubbs were enthusiastic supporters of the Voice to Parliament.

Stubbs told Al Jazeera that “it’s the most simplest way we can show some gesture towards including Aboriginal communities”.

“We as white people lose nothing. And hopefully, we show some openness and community. A minor thing for us to embrace Aboriginal communities in Australia, it’s the least we can do,” he said.

Buchanan agreed, saying it was important that “Aboriginal perspectives” are included in the government, but acknowledged that the Voice alone “is clearly not the answer to all aspects of inequality”.

“But just making sure that when government makes decisions, they’re being advised by Aboriginal community. And from Aboriginal perspectives. That has to offer some hope,” she said.

“I’m actually really emotional. If this is a no-vote, I will feel so sad,” she added.

Michael Paterson is an Indigenous man who identifies with the Dja Dja Wurrung people. He told Al Jazeera that he was voting “yes”.

“I’m just hoping that we can finally get a say in what our people do and hopefully get some of our land back,” he said. Paterson also said that if the vote was unsuccessful, “it would set us back about 10 years”.

Nioka Mellick-Cooper told Al Jazeera that she also voted yes and had listened to a diverse range of Indigenous voices before making her decision.

“I’m not an Indigenous person. And I don’t think it’s my place to vote ‘no’,” she said. “I’ve been listening to Indigenous voices and reading as much as I possibly can because I want to get a good grasp on everything.”

She said that while “there are Aboriginal people that are voting no, a lot of people that I’ve loved and respected in the Aboriginal community are voting yes. So I’m going to support them.”

Annette Maxwell and Yvonne Gu were campaigning against the Voice to Parliament.

Maxwell told Al Jazeera that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people already had a “Voice” in government by way of the 11 elected members of parliament that already hold office.

She said the main problem was that the government was “not doing a good job” on Indigenous affairs, which had resulted in the inequalities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

“It’s not because they don’t have a voice,” she said. “It’s because [the government] are not doing a good job. We need to solve that problem.”

Gu – a member of the Liberal Party and supporter of conservative Indigenous Senator Jacinta Price – told Al Jazeera that the “Voice referendum is actually part of a much bigger agenda, which is excluding so-called conservative people from the society”.

Thousands rally across Australia in support of Indigenous reform

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/10/ ... ous-people

[Anthea]

Australians vote NO

Australia has overwhelmingly rejected a plan to give greater political rights to Indigenous people in a referendum

All six states voted No to a proposal to amend the constitution to recognise First Nations people and create a body for them to advise the government.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said defeat was hard: "When you aim high, sometimes you fall short. We understand and respect that we have."

Opposition leader Peter Dutton said the result was "good for our country".

The referendum, dubbed "The Voice", was Australia's first in almost a quarter of a century. With the majority of ballots counted, the "No" vote led "Yes" 60% to 40%.

Its rejection followed a fraught and often acrid campaign.

Supporters said that entrenching the Indigenous peoples into the constitution would unite Australia and usher in a new era.

No leaders said that the idea was divisive, would create special "classes" of citizens where some were more equal than others, and the new advisory body would slow government decision-making.

They were criticised over their appeal to undecided voters with a "Don't know? Vote no" message, and accused of running a campaign based on misinformation about the effects of the plan.

The result leaves Mr Albanese searching for a way forward with his vision for the country, and a resurgent opposition keen to capitalise on its victory.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called for unity following the divisive debate

Addressing the nation, the prime minister said he respected the vote and "the democratic process that has delivered it".

"This moment of disagreement does not define us, and it will not divide us, we are not Yes voters or No voters, we are all Australians. And it is as Australians together, that we must take our country beyond this debate, without forgetting why we had it in the first place.

"Too often in the life of our nation, the disadvantage confronting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people has been relegated to the margins, this referendum and my government has put it right at the centre."

Mr Dutton said after the result that Australia "did not need to have" such a vote. "What we've seen tonight is Australians in their millions reject the prime minister's divisive referendum."

Leading No advocate and Bundjalung man Warren Mundine said: "This is a referendum that we should have never had had because it was built on the lie that Aboriginal people do not have a voice."

For some in the Yes camp, the devastation was visible.

"Our Indigenous leadership put themselves out there for this... we have seen a disgusting No campaign that has been dishonest, that has lied to the Australian people," Yes advocate Thomas Mayo told the ABC.

"I'm not blaming the Australian people at all, but who I do blame are those who lied to them," the Kaurareg Aboriginal and Kalkalgal, Erubamle Torres Strait Islander man added.

'A roadmap for reconciliation'

The Voice to Parliament was proposed in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, a 2017 document crafted by Indigenous leaders that set out a roadmap for reconciliation with wider Australia.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people - who make up 3.8% of the nation's 26 million population - have inhabited Australia for about 60,000 years but are not mentioned in the constitution. They are, by most socio-economic measures, the most disadvantaged people in the country.

The referendum marked the 45th time Australia has attempted to change its founding document - but only eight proposals have cleared. It was also the second time the issue of Indigenous recognition was put to a national vote - the last attempt was in 1999.

The Yes campaign said that the Voice could help tackle the entrenched inequality their people still face. The No campaign saw it differently.

"Instead of being 'one', we will be divided - in spirit, and in law," Mr Dutton said at the start of the campaign.

Many of the nation's best constitutional minds have disputed those claims, arguing that the Voice would not have conferred special rights on anyone.

But the campaign's slogan "divisive Voice" which covered No banners and posters, ultimately resonated with voters.

A separate No movement, spearheaded by Aboriginal Senator Lidia Thorpe and the Indigenous-run Blak Sovereign movement, opposed the Voice for different reasons.

They called instead for a legally binding treaty between First Nations peoples and the Australian government to be prioritised.

"This is not our constitution, it was developed in 1901 by a bunch of old white fellas, and now we're asking people to put us in there - no thanks," Ms Thorpe said, reacting to Saturday's result.

As scenes of tears and silence at Yes events flooded the media, all sides of the debate called for a period of national unity and reflection while the dust settles.

But for Australian's first inhabitants, who showed strong support for the Voice in early polls, advocates fear the referendum could be seen as another rejection.

"There are so many people who aspired for our country to be seen differently tonight, and that is going to be deeply felt," assistant minister for Indigenous Australians Senator Malarndirri McCarthy said.

"We have had many disappointments over decades and centuries really, we are resilient people, and we will take stock," the Yanyuwa woman added.

Dean Parkin, the director of the Yes23 campaign group, attempted to allay claims from opponents that the objective had been to take rights from non-Indigenous Australians.

"I want to speak very directly to those Australians who voted no with hardness in your hearts, please understand that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have never wanted to take anything from you," he said.

"We have never and will never mean you no harm.

"All we have wanted is to join with you, our Indigenous story, our Indigenous culture, not to take away or diminish what it is that you have, but to add to it, to strengthen it, to enrich it."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-67110193