People from New England speak up about The Voice to Parliament

If the majority of Australians in a majority of states vote yes when a Referendum is held, likely later this year, an amendment will be made to the Constitution.

That amendment will ensure a representative body of Indigenous Australians would be present from the beginning of policies and legislation that could impact their communities.

The exact details of how the body will function would be worked out through parliamentary legislation and consultation after the referendum and the constitutional change has been made.

The Leader spoke to local Indigenous Australians in New England about what they think of The Voice to Parliament.

READ ALSO:

Kamilaroi elder Len Waters said it is important to keep discussions and commentary alive about The Voice so people can make up their own minds about it.

"But the time is right. Let's go because these things don't come around often," Mr Waters said.

"We've only had senior officers and ministers discussing Aboriginal issues in parliament with very little input by Aboriginal people within parliament."

Mr Waters said The Voice should be led by Indigenous Australians, and that it would give communities in remote and rural areas a chance to be heard.

"Our voices need to be heard no matter how far away from Canberra we are," Mr Waters said.

Mr Waters referred to the 1967 Referendum which gave Aboriginal people the right to be counted on the census, saying it was support from many non-Indigenous Australians that got it over the line.

Asked whether he thought there was enough detail about The Voice, Mr Waters said he had enough information to know how he wants to vote and that the final workings would be sorted once the amendment to the Constitution had been made.

Anaiwan and Kamilaroi elder Steve Widders said he is in support of The Voice so long as it comes from the grass-roots level.

"If we are going to effect change then it needs to come from the people," Mr Widders said.

"And it shouldn't be about party politics. It should be by the people for the people."

Mr Widders said having a voice enshrined in the Constitution would mean successive governments could not abolish representative bodies like they did the Australian Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) in 2005 and the National Aboriginal Congress (NAC) in 1985.

"It's not right for non-Aboriginal people to be making decisions on behalf of Aboriginal people," Mr Widders said.

"The Close the Gap targets will tell you they're failing all the time because there's too much policy and they're not getting direct input from Aboriginal people.

"We come from a people whose oral history ensured our survival. They always had a voice. They always spoke about things that affected their communities."

Anaiwan man Callum Clayton-Dixon said he is firmly against the proposed Voice model and instead supports designated seats in the Senate for Indigenous Australians.

"It's being promoted in two different ways to two different groups," Mr Clayton-Dixon said.

"To conservatives, it's being promoted as something that's got no real power, that it can be controlled, that it's only advisory.

"And then there's the other yarn that's been told to the Aboriginal community; that it's going to be the best thing since sliced bread."

Mr Clayton-Dixon said the weakness in the proposal is that successive governments will be able to "tear down and reconstitute" The Voice because the details of how it will look will be determined via legislation.

"During a Labor government it might look one way and during a coalition government it might look very different," Mr Clayton-Dixon said.

"The whole idea of parliament having absolute power and say over this body and how it's constituted; its roles, responsibilities, powers, membership and structure, are all inherently anti-Aboriginal self-determination."

Gomeroi woman Rachel Phillips said she and many others have not yet decided on what message to put out into the community, as they look to their leaders during upcoming meetings for guidance.

Ms Phillips was at the no campaign launched in Tamworth on March 31, and said she felt offended by some of the language that was used to describe people of Aboriginal descent.

"They referred to us as blacks and half-bloods and 'not real Aboriginals', it was quite disgusting," Ms Phillips. She said Aboriginal people need to be included in the conversations that affect them and the outcomes of those decisions.

"Not only for now but for our children," Ms Phillips said. "Our children are the ones who are going to live with the outcome of this.

"We know our community best. We know our people best. And we just want to be included."

UNE Associate Professor Guy Charlton recently returned to Australia after being invited to speak at an international indigenous law conference at the University of Wisconsin in the USA.

He said there was a lot of interest at the 37th Coming Together of Peoples Conference held from March 31 to April 1, about what was happening here in Australia.

"Certainly, The Voice caught everyone's attention," A/Prof. Charlton said.

A/Prof Charlton said The Voice to Parliament was discussed during conversations about what legal mechanisms can be used to address the disproportionate impact of climate change on Indigenous peoples.

He said having Indigenous people at the table from the beginning of policy and legislative changes would enable them to have a say on how issues, such as climate change or other more pressing societal concerns, impact them.

A/Prof. Charlton also said that having generalised language in the Constitution is more desirable because it enables changes to be made in order to improve how The Voice might look later on.

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: