Introduction to the Referendum
On 14th October, Australians will vote in the nation’s first referendum in over two decades. We will be asked if we support a move “to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice”.
The mission of Australian Christians Party is to promote true welfare for all people of Australia by bringing legislation into conformity with the will of God as revealed in the Holy Bible, with a redemptive emphasis on the ministry of reconciliation (2 Corinthians 5:18). We believe solutions are to be found in fostering unity – not division.
The Voice Model and Design
Firstly, the referendum refers only to the tip of the iceberg of changes to legislation that will be required at all levels of government.
The Calma-Langton Report (which outlines design of the Voice) points out that The Voice to Parliament is just one of many proposed Voices. It is to be supplemented by 35 Local-Regional Voices that must also have the right to speak to Local, State, and Federal parliaments. The Voice to Parliament is to be selected by the Local-Regional Voices and cannot function without them. Potentially, state governments will then have to introduce into their legislation, similar rules and protocols to work with these Local-Regional Voices.
There are many serious concerns about how representatives of the Voice will be selected and function within the structures of parliament. Representatives would not be elected, but appointed by various Indigenous bodies, limiting the range of views expressed.
The Calma-Langton Report fails to provide details on how Voice representatives will be selected and held accountable for their decision making. Analysis of The Calma – Langton Report and The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) raises serious doubts about the efficacy of the Voice Model. Some proponents who are signatories to Closing the Gap arrangements, are the same who champion the Voice.
Secondly, Makarrata (Treaty) is the culmination of the Uluru agenda: “the coming together after a struggle… It captures our aspirations for a fair and truthful relationship with the people of Australia and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination ”.
Makarrata is a Yolngu word describing a process of conflict resolution. Merrikiyawuy Ganambarr-Stubbs, a Gumatj woman describes Makarrata as “literally means a spear penetrating, usually the thigh, of a person that has done wrong… so that they cannot hunt anymore, that they cannot walk properly, that they cannot run properly; to maim them, to settle them down, to calm them — that’s Makarrata”.
The Uluru statement is spiritual in nature, along with its concepts of Makarrata and the notion of sovereignty.
Thirdly, the use of the words “power/s” as stated in (iii) of the referendum proposal, is ambiguous and does not clearly define who or what this “power/s” exactly refers and to what extent it will apply.
Question iii – the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.
Referendum process
The Australian Electoral Commission, the body that oversees the electoral process for the referendum voting, has recently published its official Yes/No referendum pamphlet. There will be early voting and locations will be on the AEC website.
The Yes campaign provides three primary reasons to vote in favour:
| Top Reasons for YES: | Considerations: |
| Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in our Constitution. |
Recognition is supported by all Australians. Given the current number of organisations and corporations – isn’t a constitutional amendment likely introducing another costly bureaucracy?
|
| Listening to their advice about matters that affect their lives, so governments make better decisions. |
Will a constitutional amendment ensure a permanent lasting change of heart, priorities and solutions? Government should aspire to make decisions that are in the best interest of all its citizens – the wellbeing of the vulnerable and voiceless should always be a priority. |
| Making practical progress in Indigenous health, education, employment and housing. |
How will ‘practical progress’ be measured? Closing The Gap initiatives have been in place for decades – often with the same leaders who now support the Voice – to address these very issues. The proposed Voice model is an advisory body only with no program delivery. Currently taxpayers spend $100 million+ a day on direct support for Indigenous Australians. That is $39.5 billion in direct government expenditure per year as per the Indigenous Expenditure Report (2017). |
Recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in our Constitution.
Recognition is supported by all Australians.
Given the current number of organisations and corporations – isn’t a
constitutional amendment likely introducing another costly bureaucracy?
Listening to their advice about matters that affect their lives, so governments make better decisions.
Will a constitutional amendment ensure a permanent lasting change of
heart, priorities and solutions?
Government should aspire to make decisions that are in the best interest
of all its citizens – the wellbeing of the vulnerable and voiceless should
always be a priority.
Making practical progress inIndigenous health, education, employment and housing.
How will ‘practical progress’ be measured? Closing The Gap initiatives have been in place for decades – often with the same leaders who now support the Voice – to address these very issues. The proposed Voice model is an advisory body only with no program delivery.
Currently taxpayers spend $100 million+ a day on direct support for Indigenous Australians. That is $39.5 billion in direct government expenditure per year as per the Indigenous Expenditure Report (2017).
The No campaign provides four primary reasons to vote against:
| Reasons for NO: | Considerations: |
| This Voice is legally risky. | Whilst The Calma – Langton Report (Indigenous Voice Co-design Process) does outline some design, it lacks necessary detail. |
| There are no details. | Whilst The Calma – Langton Report (Indigenous Voice Co-design Process) does outline some design, it lacks necessary detail. |
| It divides us. |
Our current Australian constitution is based on the equality of all citizens and democratically elected representation. Aboriginal communities are not homogenous, and most desire for all Australians to be treated equally and have equal opportunity. Many Aboriginal elders across Australia are not convinced that a constitutional amendment will bring desired unity and change. |
| This Voice will be permanent. |
Constitutional changes and amendments require another referendum in order to be altered. Is the current Voice proposal ready for such permanence? The government intervened to make necessary legislative changes in response to the dysfunction within the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), and eventually abolished it. Once permanent, any future issues of functionality, corruption, or lack of accountability arising from the Voice and/or representatives will not be as simple to address. |
This Voice is legally risky.
All future judgments of law ultimately draw from a nation’s constitution.
Future legislation will be framed based on this constitutional amendment.
There are no details.
Whilst The Calma – Langton Report (Indigenous Voice Co-design Process) does outline some design, it lacks necessary detail.
It divides us.
Our current Australian constitution is based on the equality of all citizens and democratically elected representation.
Aboriginal communities are not homogenous, and most desire for all Australians to be treated equally and have equal opportunity. Many Aboriginal elders across Australia are not convinced that a constitutional amendment will bring desired unity and change.
This Voice will be permanent.
Constitutional changes and amendments require another referendum in order to be altered. Is the current Voice proposal ready for such permanence?
The government intervened to make necessary legislative changes in response to the dysfunction within the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), and eventually abolished it.
Once permanent, any future issues of functionality, corruption, or lack of accountability arising from the Voice and/or representatives will not be as simple to address.
Final thoughts
We understand there will be a range of opinions amongst Christians, and it is imperative that we appreciate the different perspectives that exist among us. Regardless of the outcome of the forthcoming referendum, Australian Christians Party steadfastly dedicates itself to nurturing the welfare and prosperity of all Australians, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
We fervently advocate for the recognition, active participation, and representation of Indigenous communities. It is indeed a momentous achievement that eleven individuals in the Federal Parliament are of Indigenous descent, serving as powerful voices for their communities at a political level.
After analysis of insights and feedback from various Aboriginal pastors, community leaders, legal experts, and community workers, we have arrived at the consensus that the Voice, may not be an effective avenue to bring about the transformative changes that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities rightfully deserve. Will the Voice structure bring meaningful long-term change or simply shuffle seats and change the platform from which the Voice negotiates Treaty and reparations?
So, what path should we tread instead?
The ongoing national conversation and deliberations have spotlighted pivotal issues surrounding financial allocations, accountability, and the effectiveness of existing programs.
As we forge ahead, it is our duty to maintain a focused approach in highlighting Aboriginal concerns, mirroring the intensity and dedication we demonstrated in the Yes/No campaign.
It is vital to hold our current representatives to account and foster a culture where community leaders are encouraged to take up political advocacy. Addressing pressing concerns such as child safety, youth mental health, education, and healthcare necessitates thoughtful deliberation and a bipartisan commitment.
It is unequivocal that the existing bureaucratic systems have let down the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities over numerous decades. The call of the hour is wise stewardship, cooperation and collaboration. We must strive to develop viable policy alternatives that foster unity and are beneficial to all.
On a hopeful note, there have been heartwarming instances of forgiveness, healing, and reconciliation where families have taken steps to heal past wounds and traumas. Our aspiration is to nurture a generation of children and youth who step into the future with confidence, hope, and freedom – a vision that should resonate with everyone.
AC urges all Christians to pray for the upcoming referendum and to think through the issues raised and how we might all best serve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, families and children.
References
1 https://voice.gov.au/resources/indigenous-voice-co-design-process-final-report
2 https://ipa.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/IPA-Research-Undemocratic-unfair-complex-and-divisive-an-analysis-of-the-Calma-Langton-report.pdf
3 The significance of the Voice in Closing the Gap – NACCHO
4 https://ulurustatement.org/the-statement/view-the-statement/
5 https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-10/makarrata-explainer-yolngu-word-more-than-synonym-for-treaty/8790452
