CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM A HARD CLIMB
After an interval of almost 24 years, Australians will soon again be asked to vote in a referendum to change the nation’s Constitution.
This time it’s a proposal to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait people in the Constitution, and to establish a representative ‘Voice’ on their behalf.
Referenda in Australia don’t come along that often, for a good reason: changing Australia’s National Constitution is hard work.
Just look at the history: records of the Australian Electoral Commission show that out of 44 constitutional referenda held since Federation in 1901, only eight have been carried.
In the last 50 years, 18 referendum questions have been put to the Australian people, of which only three were passed.
Those three successful and relatively uncontroversial questions from 1977 related to the appointment of casual vacancies to the Senate, the retirement age for federal judges, and the allowance of electors in federal territories to vote in constitutional referenda.
Significantly, those three referenda questions all enjoyed broad bipartisan support.
That frames the challenges for the current campaign for the forthcoming Voice referendum.
Later this year, Australians will be asked to approve a change to the Constitution that would, as defined by legislation passed in June, recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia, and establish a body to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.
Under the proposed constitutional amendment, set out in the legislation, the ‘Voice’ “may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.”
Through the proposed amendment, Federal Parliament would have the power to make laws in respect to matters relating to the Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.
Proposing the referendum question and promoting it is one thing. Garnering the required support is another.
To succeed, referendum questions must obtain national majority support, and also be supported by a majority of the six Australian states.
Bipartisan support is also generally essential – but there is no guarantee that the people will always follow the cue of the major parties.
The last referenda to come before the Australian people was the republic referenda of 1999. That was defeated in all states, by a nationwide vote of around 55-45 per cent, with dissent over the model proposed at the referendum.
This time, the Federal Government is spending considerable time and resources to support the cause of the Voice referendum.
What is arousing most comment is the proposal for the Voice to “make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government.”
Federal Parliament and Executive Government propose and make laws on a range of issues, so technically the Voice could have a wide remit on its input.
That could include not just areas of conventional interest to First Nations people, such as social security measures, health, land ownership and environmental protection, but could also potentially extend to areas such as defence, trade and finance.
In an address to the National Press Club on July 5, Indigenous Australians Minister Linda Burney said she would ask the Voice to consider four priority areas: health, education, jobs, and housing.
As the referendum vote nears, the onus will be on the Federal Government and Voice advocates to explain further the implications of the proposed constitutional amendment.
If history is any guide, the people will respond negatively to any proposed change that is not fully spelt out and carefully explained.
That’s the task for the Government and Yes advocates of the proposed changes in coming months.
Gavin Clancy is a Senior Consultant with Lunik