-About 20,000 people in Brisbane attended a rally in support of the ‘Voice to Parliament’ proposal, with similar events also held across other Australian cities
-The proposal, which aims to enshrine indigenous people in Australia’s constitution, appears on track for defeat, according to a recent poll
Thousands rallied in Australia on Sunday to support recognising the country’s indigenous people in the constitution, a proposal that is struggling ahead of a referendum next month.
If approved on October 14, the measure would enshrine indigenous people in the constitution and set up an advisory body to give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people input on policies that affect them.
Indigenous Australians, who account for 3.8 per cent of the population, face disadvantages including discrimination, poor health and education outcomes and high incarceration rates.
But the “Voice to Parliament” proposal appeared on track for defeat, a poll showed last week, the fifth monthly survey in a row to find voters against the change.
Yes23, the group behind “Walk for Yes” events, said around 20,000 people attended in Brisbane, Australia’s third-biggest city.
In Melbourne, more than 10,000 supporters marched through the streets, some with banners reading: “You’re the voice, vote yes”. Thousands more gathered in Canberra, Perth, Brisbane, Darwin, Hobart and Alice Springs.
Many attendees wore T-shirts and held placards emblazoned “Vote Yes!”, Australian Broadcasting Corp (ABC) footage showed.
“I think we need a voice in parliament and I think it’s about time,” said Laurel Johnson, a 58-year-old retired indigenous community services worker who joined hundreds of people at the Sydney rally, many seeking shade during a spring heatwave.
Cameron Lum, a 34-year-old supporter of the Voice proposal, said he joined the Sydney rally to support “long overdue change in this country”.
“I think it opens doors to massive policy change led by first nations people,” he said.
To change the constitution, the referendum, backed by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s Labor government, would require a national majority in favour and majorities in at least four of Australia’s six states.
Most indigenous people favour the referendum, but some, like prominent No campaigner Warren Mundine, say it is a distraction from achieving practical and positive outcomes and would not fully resolve the issues affecting them.
“If we can do just three things – accountability, jobs and education – then we’ll resolve most of the problems we’ve got,” Mundine told ABC.
To pass, the referendum needs majority support across Australia, but also a majority in at least four of the six states.
Voting is compulsory, with non-voters who do not have a valid reason liable to a fine of A$20 (US$13).
Voters will be asked: “A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?”.
Since Australian independence in 1901, only eight of 44 proposals for constitutional change have been approved.
Note that the voice to parliament is something being pushed by our centre-right Labor party, the business council of Australia (big business lobby group) and mining magnates.
There is a significant leftwing grassroots opposition to the voice. For example, the black people’s union, which is the only Australia wide pan-Aboriginal grassroots organisation: https://www.blackpeoplesunion.org/articles/conning-us-into-recognition
Most progressives believe that if the referendum passes or fails it won’t matter much. The legislation for a representative voice to parliament doesn’t require a referendum/constitutional change and the legislation itself is only symbolic power for a hand-picked group of indigenous people
I never heard this side before, thank you for sharing, comrade. It’s given me something of a wake up call to my own stupid liberalism.
All good, I think a lot of people are under the impression that if you’re progressive, you must vote yes. There’s been no funding for the progressive “No” campaign compared to the progressive “Yes”.
I’m still fence sitting personally, and will either abstain or vote No. Because there is still significant support from Aboriginal people for the voice. It’s really divisive in their communities. The stat that 80% of Aboriginal people support the voice is a lie with a massive selective bias (300 people surveyed in one of the states with the least Aboriginal people).
IMO it’s self-explanatory that a 97% settler colony is getting to vote on the rights of the Indigenous 3%. We don’t even have a grassroots democratic voice already, so there is no real way of actually gauging support from Aboriginal communities. The closest thing to a democratic Australia wide Aboriginal body is Black People’s Union, which are against the voice. If the government wanted to do this right they would have built the democratic institution first, and then followed the advice of it. Currently they’re just assuming most Aboriginal people want this constitutional change without even having a democratic voice to begin with to advocate for it.
Try to balance idealism with realism my friend, that’s my advice anyway. Strive for the perfect, but don’t refuse the good
https://youtu.be/rzSCEAtDk9c?si=Cb8ZHN4alItmUr7o
Great vid on the undecided leftist position, interviewing Celeste Liddle.
I agree with so much of this but personally I have trouble believing in any value of the referendum failing, so still a Yes for me
Wow I wish I had known about this rally beforehand.
You don’t hear jack shit about this kind of stuff on the news here 👀
Fuck this racist ass country. This is stolen land that was never ceded. Crackers are lucky the First Nations people are only asking for a voice.
Except it’s not first nations people asking for just a voice, it’s the Labor party creating a kneecapped body to suppress grassroots revolutionary organising. The voice comes from First Nations efforts for “Truth, treaty and voice”. Truth and treaty was meant to come first.
True. Typical liberal muddying of things worked on me and I’m ashamed I didn’t see through it.
I don’t know folks, sure it’s a token step but it’s something ffs, a No vote will have no positives I can see (just listen to conservative assholes saying they’re sick of hearing acknowledgement of country, and they’ll be back in power soon enough). Whereas a Yes vote brings us a tiny step closer to actual progress…
deleted by creator
Yes I agree it’s incrementalism, but it’s a grain of sand in the good side of the scales.
I see the strongest detractors of the voice being conservatives, not the groups saying it’s too little. In my opinion, and maybe I’m being more cynical than you, is that if people do not support this small step, there’s no fucking hope of anything more significant being supported any time soon.
So like I said, it’s not much but if it’s defeated I see nothing but harm coming from the loss
deleted by creator
What progress do you expect to happen from the voice? How does it differ to the hundreds of advisory bodies that are completely ignored?
There are real potential negatives to this passing. If the institution is not truly representative, it may act against interests of broader aboriginal people. Imagine if the Voice was just represented by conservatives e.g.: Warren Mundine, Jacinta Price, etc. These people represent a minority of Aboriginal people’s opinions and would support climate destruction for mining companies. The way the Voice is likely to be designed, like many land councils, will be selective and not representative of the 250+ Aboriginal nations which make up Australia. I imagine the first rendition will only represent Labor/centrist views. So far they’ve already cut the left and the right out of the debate and voice implementation
Most likely very little (that’s why I said it’s a tiny step in the direction progress). I think it’s extremely high profile and has public focus, that makes it different to most advisory bodies.
Also true what your saying about it going bad and being stocked with shills.
Again I think it’s an action, which to me seems better than no action. Particularly because I don’t think a No vote results in increased indigenous support, but does result in emboldened bigots and conservative affirmation
Yeah fair enough, as other sentiments on this thread I’m fence sitting and can see the positives you describe
I am leaning towards voting yes on this but this is not going to be a significant change for anything in Australia. The Indigenous/First Nations people I know have decided they will vote no because they find it too insulting. This isn’t addressing the problems Indigenous people face and is going to be used as a political tool to further legitimise the colonial government we have. The people chosen for the Voice to Parliament body are likely not to represent the needs of the Indigenous people. On the other hand, this might be the first time we might get to see Indigenous people voicing their opinions with a national audience. For example, it could be used to talk about Treaty or the disgusting shit we do to the environment.
Most people are not well informed, so they are voting on this based on the advertised idea that this is a big step towards Indigenous representation in parliament. So, with 40% of the population born overseas and having experienced being a minority in this country, you’d think this would be a slam dunk win for the yes vote, yet its struggling. I feel like this says a lot about this country.
