What is Australia’s Indigenous Voice referendum?

A recent YouGov poll has found that the referendum is unlikely to pass. What is the referendum about, and what have its opponents argued?

To begin with, who are the ‘First Peoples of Australia’?

The expression, as well as the word ‘aboriginal’, refers to the indigenous inhabitants of the continent — people who lived on the Australian mainland and surrounding islands for tens of thousands of years before the first Europeans arrived in the early 17th century.

The Torres Strait Islands, mentioned in the referendum question, is an archipelago of small islands in the Torres Strait, a narrow body of water between the northern tip of the state of Queensland and the large island of Papua New Guinea.

So what does the referendum seek to do, and why?

The referendum asks whether indigenous Australians should be recognised in the country’s Constitution, and whether a body called the indigenous “Voice to Parliament” should be set up to advise lawmakers on matters that impact their lives. The Aboriginals find no mention in Australia’s 122-year-old Constitution.

Aboriginal people make up about 3.2% of Australia’s population and track below national averages on most socio-economic measures. According to a government booklet containing information that would help people make the choice on whether to support or reject the vote, indigenous Australians have:

• A life expectancy 8 years shorter than non-Indigenous Australians;

• Worse rates of disease and infant mortality;

• A suicide rate twice as high as non-Indigenous Australians.

An undated handout photo of Central Land Council delegates who took time out of their council meeting near Uluru to vote “yes” to a Voice referendum to parliament, in Northern Territory, Australia. (AAP Image/Supplied by Central Land Council via REUTERS)

Australia’s Minister for Indigenous Australians, Linda Burney, has said the proposed body would ensure a voice for the original inhabitants of the continent. “It’s about drawing a line on the poor outcomes from the long legacy of failed programmes and broken policies, and listening to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people,” a report in The Guardian quoted her as saying.

How far back before the arrival of the Europeans can we trace Australia’s history?

Ancient rock carvings suggest humans inhabited Australia some 45,000 years ago.

According to the National Library of Australia, the first documented landing of a European was by the Dutch explorer Willem Janszoon, who arrived on the western side of Cape York peninsula in 1606. The Europeans were aware at the time of a land mass in the southern hemisphere that they called Terra Australia Incognita, meaning Unknown South Land, but there is no confirmed evidence of claimed landings earlier.

Captain James Cook’s famous voyages took place in the second half of the 18th century, and the early British settlers on the continent were criminals and convicts who were sent there to serve their prison sentences. Between 1788 and 1868, more than 162,000 convicts in crimes committed in Britain and Ireland were transported to Australia, according to the National Museum of Australia.

And how did the Australian government’s policies impact indigenous people?

Laws and policies made by the colonial settlers over time contributed to the marginalisation of the indigenous communities, who fared increasingly worse than their non-native counterparts on indicators like education and life expectancy.

Under the Infants Welfare Act of 1935, indigenous children on Cape Barren Island were removed from their families based on claims of child neglect. They were then placed in the care of non-native families and institutions and were kept separate from their culture, often facing abuse as well.

These laws were applied to thousands of children for many decades, and those children are now referred to as “The Stolen Generation”. The government’s website states, “Affecting anywhere from 1 in 10 to 1 in 3 children, there is not a single Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander community who has not been forever changed.”

In recent years, legislation to improve the status of indigenous Australians has been introduced. Voting rights were granted in 1962, and in 1992 Australia’s apex court decided that native title exists over particular kinds of lands — unalienated Crown Lands, national parks and reserves — and that Australia was never terra nullius or empty land.

In 1997, a national inquiry was set up on tracking the Stolen Generation, resulting in the “Bringing Them Home” report. Australia’s Parliament and all provincial governments issued statements recognising and publicly apologising to those generations.

Why then does the referendum appear likely to fail?

For the referendum to be passed, more than 50 per cent of voters must vote in favour nationally, plus the majority of voters in the majority of Australian states.

Any constitutional alterations in Australia require a national referendum. Voting is compulsory for all adults.

Opposition parties like the Liberal Party of Australia and the Nationals have opposed the referendum. The ‘No’ campaign has argued that details of the proposed body — such as the members it would include, their powers, etc. — have not been made clear. There is also an argument that saying ‘Yes’ would amount to dividing Australian society on the lines of race.

A section of the indigenous people too have rejected the proposal of having a consultative body, saying it would be toothless, and without real power. They have argued for a formal treaty for a substantial transfer of power between the government and indigenous people.