<\/p>\n
The No pamphlet claims the Voice is \u201clegally risky\u201d and will divide Australians in the Constitution. <\/span>Credit: <\/span>Marija Ercegovac<\/cite><\/p>\n Detractors say the Voice would be risky because:<\/p>\n Australia\u2019s Constitution does not mention that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were the original inhabitants of this continent. When he was prime minister in 2007, John Howard put forward a plan to hold a referendum to recognise their unique status. But he lost office and plans stalled despite multiple governments promising change. After Indigenous leaders rejected the form of recognition proposed by Howard \u2013 which they deemed symbolic and weak \u2013 a group of Indigenous leaders came up with the idea of a Voice.<\/p>\n The Voice would be an advisory body that gives ideas and feedback to the parliament and executive government about policies and issues that affect Indigenous Australians. Members of the body would need to be Indigenous and selected by their communities. However, proponents decided to settle on the precise details of its composition after the referendum if it succeeds, prompting some criticism. Possible design features are contained in a report by Indigenous academics Marcia Langton and Tom Calma, though the government has never fully endorsed this report\u2019s suggestions.<\/p>\n The 2017 statement stemmed from a series of meetings organisers say went over six months and involved more than 1200 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representatives. It represents the political aspirations of Australia\u2019s mainstream Indigenous community. The document asks for a Voice, a Makarrata commission that would oversee treaties, and a truth-telling process to educate Australians about the effects of colonisation. Makarrata is a word from the Yolngu language that means coming together after a struggle.<\/p>\n People will be asked to vote Yes or No on a single question: \u201cA 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?\u201d<\/p>\n If a majority of all voters across Australia, as well as a majority of voters in a majority of states (at least four out of six) vote in favour, a new chapter will be inserted into the Constitution saying:<\/p>\n \u201cIn recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:<\/p>\n \u201ci. there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice;<\/p>\n \u201cii. 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;<\/p>\n \u201ciii. 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.\u201d<\/p>\n Voting in the referendum is compulsory for citizens aged 18 or older, with potential fines for those without a valid reason not to.<\/p>\n Since Federation, only eight of the 44 proposals for constitutional change have been approved. The most recent successful referendums were in 1977.<\/p>\nWho backs the No case?<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
Who are the prominent No figures?<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
What is the No campaign\u2019s message?<\/strong><\/h3>\n
\n
What is the referendum about?<\/strong><\/h3>\n
What is a Voice?<\/strong><\/h3>\n
What is the Uluru Statement from the Heart?<\/strong><\/h3>\n
What will we be asked on referendum day?<\/strong><\/h3>\n