The referendum date is set for October 14. Like a federal election, voting in the upcoming referendum is compulsory. So, with six weeks until the vote, what is it asking exactly?
Why do we need a referendum?
The Constitution came into effect on January 1, 1901. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has described the Constitution as “our nation’s birth certificate”.
In Australia, a referendum is the only way to change the Constitution.
There have been 44 proposed changes in the document’s history, and only eight have been successful.
Changing the Constitution requires a double majority Yes vote.
A double majority means for the Voice referendum
to be successful, half of the national electoral roll must vote Yes, and four of the six states must also have majorities.
The territories do not require a majority vote. Instead, territory votes contribute to the federal tally.
So what is the referendum about?
Here is the proposed constitutional amendment:
In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:
i. there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice;
ii. the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples;
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.
This referendum asks just one question: Should there be an Indigenous Voice to advise the government about policy that impacts Indigenous Australians?
A Yes vote would allow an advisory body of Indigenous Australians to consult on matters affecting Indigenous Australians at a federal level.
The Voice would sit as a body external to parliament. Its advice would be non-binding. There are no plans for a vote or veto power that could disrupt the function of the parliament.
It is hoped it would improve policy outcomes for Indigenous Australians in areas that have been persistently challenging for the government to address, such as health, education, employment and housing.
The Voice opens the door for greater participatory democracy, helping grassroots voices to be heard in Canberra. It recognises Indigenous Australians as best placed to make decisions about their lives.
Once a Voice was constitutionally enshrined, only another referendum could remove it.
The permanence of the Voice is seen as a positive for many Yes advocates because it would remain active even through changes of government, shielding it from political point scoring.
If Australians vote in favour of the question, then parliament will decide the finer details of what that Voice will entail through regular law-making processes.
Some people who oppose the Voice fear this ambiguity, uneasy with leaving parliament with the authority to determine how the Voice will function.
Others fear that the change may be only symbolic, with the systems that have led to poorer outcomes for Indigenous Australians remaining largely unchanged.
Why are we voting on this now?
The Uluru Statement from the Heart was released in 2017 when a group of 250 Indigenous leaders met at the base of Uluru to discuss the future of their people in this country.
It is a statement and invitation to non-Indigenous Australians that calls for substantive reform to help realise Indigenous rights. It is an invitation to all Australians.
The Uluru Statement outlines the methods that should be used to achieve reform rather than the fine details of what the change to the Constitution should be.
The statement calls for establishing an Indigenous Voice to Parliament and a Makarrata Commission.
To proceed with the objectives of the Uluru Statement from the Heart, we need to amend the Constitution to allow the Voice to be formed.
Have we been here before?
In 1967, the Australian Government held a referendum to amend two sections of the Constitution that impacted Indigenous Australians.
Section 127 did not recognise all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as part of the Australian population.
Section 57 stated that the Commonwealth had the power to make laws for ‘people of any race, other than the Aboriginal race’, this was known as the ‘race power’. States and territories made policies for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The Federal Government created racial policies for all other races.
The 1967 referendum overturned sections 57 and 127 of the Constitution.
As a result, all Indigenous Australians count as citizens in the census, and the Federal Government can make policies especially for Indigenous Australians, some of which have been discriminatory.
Nationally, support for the 1967 referendum was strong, with an overall majority of almost 91 per cent voting in favour of changing the Constitution.
What happens if the No vote wins this time?
ABC national Indigenous correspondent Carly Williams spoke with Mr Albanese at the Garma festival in north-east Arnhem Land last month. At the time, the Prime Minister rejected an alternate form of recognition for Indigenous Australians if the Voice referendum failed.
He said changing the Constitution to enshrine an Indigenous Voice in Parliament was “a once-in-a-generation opportunity”.