You may have heard a lot about the Indigenous Voice to Parliament in the news recently and the Albanese government’s proposed referendum, but what exactly is it and what does it mean for the future?

The Indigenous Voice to Parliament came about after the Uluru Statement from the Heart, written by First Nations leaders requesting an Indigenous voice, was put to parliament in 2017.

The voice is a body representing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, allowing them to have a voice regarding laws and policies that affect them.

The Uluru Statement from the Heart requested that this be written into Australia’s constitution.

This change to the Australian constitution can only be made via a referendum in which Australian voters will answer the question.

‘Do you support an alteration to the constitution that establishes an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice?’

The Albanese government plans to hold the referendum later this year.

Some have taken issue with the proposed referendum as it provides few details as to what the Indigenous Voice to Parliament would actually look like, and voters will not be asked about a specific proposal but rather, if they would support the principle of adding the voice.

Ultimately, the function of the Voice to Parliament would be decided by parliament, making it a very heated issue, with opposition leader Peter Dutton stating that the Albanese government is making a “catastrophic mistake” by not providing any specific details about the voice and that this lack of detail will cause the referendum to fail.

However, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said that providing an overly detailed model of the voice was avoided to give the referendum a better chance at succeeding.

He argued that with a large list of details, voters who disagree with just one point might decide to vote ‘no’, even though they might agree with many of the other points.

While the exact model of the Indigenous Voice to Parliament remains undecided, it has been proposed that it would be a system of local and regional voices as well as a national voice to make sure all First Nations people have their say on issues that affect them.

In this proposed model, the National Voice would be comprised of 24 members: two from each state/territory, two from the Torres Strait Islands, and six others representing remote communities and Torres Strait Islander people living in mainland Australia.

This is the first time Australians will be voting to change our constitution since the 1999 referendum to make Australia a republic.

A recent survey conducted by the Uluru Dialogue has found that there is an overwhelming national support for an Indigenous Voice by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, with 80 per cent of participants favouring an Indigenous Voice to be enshrined in the Australian Constitution.

A recent survey conducted by the Uluru Dialogue has found that there is an overwhelming national support for an Indigenous Voice by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, with 80 per cent of participants favouring an Indigenous Voice to be enshrined in the Australian Constitution.

Government scraps referendum printing

The Federal Government has decided to scrap the printing of information pamphlets relating to the upcoming Indigenous Voice to Parliament referendum; a decision that has attracted much criticism.

The printing of these pamphlets would have been the largest print job of 2023, going to 9.3 million households across Australia. 

These information pamphlets had been a requirement for previous referendums to provide an overview of the procedure of the referendum, as well as providing detailed arguments for both sides; ‘yes’ and ‘no’.

The government’s decision to scrap this print job has caused much public opposition as people argue the lack of government- provided information will lead the public to source their information online and from social media, which may not provide the same factual information as the pamphlet would.

The decision has also sparked criticism from the print industry, as the information pamphlets would have been a great support to the industry.

Print and Visual Communication Association CEO, Kellie Northwood said that the government’s decision to drop the pamphlet makes no sense. 

“[This] will be an especially poor outcome given that the most digitally-excluded demographic in the country is the Indigenous population,” Ms Northwood said.

“Why on earth would the government leave them to digital information that they don’t have access to?”

The Australian Human Rights Commission is also opposed to the decision as they stated that if it were to be printed, the pamphlet would guarantee voters receive information for and against the Voice to Parliament in one document, allowing for voters to compare the options and make a well- rounded decision.

The Federal Government has since announced that it would give new powers to the Australian Communications and Media Authority in an attempt to prevent online disinformation.

This means that there will soon be an enforceable standard for both online search engines and social media platforms to combat issues relating to the spreading of false information.