Abstract
It feels so final. So definite. So dismissive.
On 14 October 2023, Australia said No. While the final votes are still being counted, approximately 60 per cent of the country rejected the offer – and the opportunity – contained in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, to enshrine an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice in the Constitution.
The Voice was a simple request by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. They wished to be seen in the Constitution and heard in the processes of government. Australia said No.
The Voice would not have been a silver bullet. Like all political institutions, its fortunes would ebb and flow. There was no guarantee that government or Parliament would listen to its representations. Often, just as Australia did on Saturday, the Parliament would not listen to the voices of Indigenous Australians. But as a permanent institutional presence, the Voice would have been a starting point for engagement, for conversation, for doing things differently. No means that this will not happen.
No means the problem that the Voice was designed to resolve, the alienation and powerlessness felt by many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, will persist.
No means that the larger constitutional issues will also linger. Basic problems concerning the relationship of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the State will remain unaddressed. Tragically, many Indigenous leaders who have dedicated their lives and careers to reconciliation now appear resigned to the fact that they will not live to see constitutional reform. In the words of Marcia Langton and Noel Pearson, right now, reconciliation efforts look ‘dead’.
No is a lot of things, but it is not the status quo. The referendum made clear that millions of Australians support constitutional recognition. More than 80,000 Australians volunteered to support the Yes campaign – a staggering number. In the weeks leading up to the vote, 200,000 Australians marched across the country for Yes. It was only made possible by the incredible effort and organisation of Indigenous leaders who gave everything to the campaign – who gave everything to make this country better. It was not enough, this time. We go again.
The referendum campaign highlighted areas in need of significant attention. It is undeniable that the campaign was marked by inaccurate and inflammatory statements designed to confuse and frighten voters, and by racist attacks online and elsewhere. It is clear there is an element of Australian society who bear little empathy towards Indigenous Australians and little desire to recognise their unique place and status within the nation. Nevertheless, my sense (my wish, perhaps) is that most Australians simply did not engage with the proposal. The result is consistent with previous Labor referendums held mid-term.
The referendum has also made obvious that Australians have little awareness of key features and concepts underlying our Constitution. There are positives here. It is good to live in a country where we do not need a copy of our founding document to protect ourselves when we step outside our home. At the same time, however, it does makes amendment more difficult.
It seems silly to contemplate but the result has broader consequences. The Australian Constitution has not been amended since 1977. Given how this debate played out, it is hard to see when it might be amended again. It does not have to be this way. The referendum should be seen as an opportunity for government to invest in community education and constitutional literacy programs. The Voice campaign reveals that there is a significant need for greater civics education. Perhaps No might lead to a more informed public. A weak salve.
The day after the referendum I sat on a panel at the National Indigenous Legal Conference. I met 30 young Indigenous law students from around the country. Many had enrolled in law because of their direct personal or familial experiences with the law. Others did so because they wanted to prove, to those who doubted, that they could study law. They wanted to change things for their mob. They were hurting but their spirits were not broken. They hoped for Yes, but expected No. They – and we – go again.
