explainer

The question for the 'Voice to Parliament' Referendum has been revealed.

Later this year, voting-age Australians will be asked a question that could change the way our country is governed.

A referendum will be held to determine if a First Nations 'Voice to Parliament' should be enshrined within the Australian constitution.

Watch: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese explains the Indigenous Voice to parliament referendum. Post continues after video.

The topic has sparked debate among politicians, advocacy groups, academics and social commentators, with pointed questions raised about what the vote will mean for Parliament and for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.

Now we have the official wording of the question that Australians will be asked in the referendum later this year. 

"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 approved alteration?" 

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese made the emotional announcement, saying that the referendum "is an opportunity that doesn’t belong to the politicians, it belongs to every Australian equally – one person, one vote. People from all faiths, backgrounds and traditions. All of us will have an equal say, all of us can own an equal share of what I believe will be an inspiring and unifying Australian moment". 

If the referendum succeeds, wording will be inserted into the constitution that says: 

1. There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice 

2. 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 

And 

3. 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. 

So what exactly is 'the Voice', and what do we know so far about the referendum? Let’s take a look.

Why is there going to be a referendum on a Voice to Parliament?

One of the Federal Labor Government’s election promises was to fulfill the Uluru Statement of the Heart. 

This historic document was crafted in 2017 by more than 250 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander delegates who’d been tasked with plotting a path to constitutional recognition of First Nations people. The statement included a key recommendation: a First Nations Voice to Parliament.

'Enshrining' a Voice to Parliament in the Australian constitution will mean that it cannot be dismantled by the government of the day. 

A constitutional change such as this requires a referendum — a yes/no vote that is compulsory for all Australians who are registered on the electoral roll. 

So, what is a 'Voice to Parliament'?

The Government proposes that the Voice will be an "independent, representative advisory body for First Nations people. It will provide a permanent means to advise the Australian Parliament and Government on the views of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples on matters that affect them."

'Advisory body' is a key term here. The Voice will be 'subservient' to Parliament and won’t have the power to veto legislation.

When will the referendum on the Voice be held? 

A date for the referendum hasn’t been set. But the Government has indicated that the vote will take place before the end of 2023.

Listen: The Quicky look at the arguments for and against the Uluru Statement From The Heart recommendations, and why some believe the referendum could halt debate on the topic for years to come. Post continues below.

If Australians vote YES, who will decide what the Voice actually looks like?

Parliament. MPs will debate legislation that will determine the precise structure and role of the Voice.

The Government has also stated that the members of the Voice will be chosen by First Nations people.

Feature Image: AAP/Getty/Mamamia.

Related Stories

Recommended

Top Comments

snorks 2 years ago
You can't get equality by treating one section of the population different, in perpetuity. 
brisbane mum 2 years ago 6 upvotes
@snorks it is equity that is needed, not equality. If a group of society has historically been disadvantaged in health, education and opportunity, then that group require additional support to get them to the same starting line. . You cannot claim that a wealthy white kid from Double Bay/Toorak/Ascot starts in the same place in life as a poor indigenous kid from Redfern or Inala.  It takes more than hard work to succeed. 
babble 2 years ago 3 upvotes
@brisbane mum not all white kids are from
Double Bay. Not all white kids are rich. Disadvantage exists across society and is not limited to to skin colour.  Using skin colour as the basis measurement is a backward step.  If the referendum was about addressing disadvantage the there would be a sunset clause. I am a believer in equality over equity because I think that equity imposes justice or fairness based on arbitrary measures and stifles innovation. Why try harder if you will end up in the same position as someone who doesn’t try at all?  
draculasgirlfriend 2 years ago
@brisbane mum I agree!!! Certain sections of the population are already treated differently, this helps even things a bit!!!! 
gu3st 2 years ago 1 upvotes
@babble True that inequity can exist in any demographic, but it is over-represented in Australia's indigenous communities. Why pretend otherwise?

jenrobgra 2 years ago
I think there should also, therefore, be a voice of representation for other groups such as LGBTQ and Trsns people, people with disabilities, immigrants and refugees. 
snorks 2 years ago 4 upvotes
@jenrobgra maybe instead we just have a system where you get to vote for a representative who can bring forward the issues of their communities?
Break it up by area perhaps?
laura__palmer 2 years ago 3 upvotes
@jenrobgra well, no, because this about acknowledging the original owners of this land and giving some agency back to them. 
louiseplease 2 years ago
@snorks You mean like what our current system is intended to do...? That is fundamentally the role of members of parliament.
snorks 2 years ago 2 upvotes
@louiseplease yes, that is my way of saying we already have a system for representation in place, we don't need an add on for certain people.