Why I will be voting YES to The Voice

In this article I would like to share my thoughts on the Indigenous Voice to the Australian Parliament. I strongly support a constitutionally based Voice for indigenous Australians. My views are based on personal observations of generational trauma leading to finally understand how this has adversely impacted the lives of many indigenous people and the wider Australian society.

For me voting Yes holds no fear. It is a matter of equity and fairness and taking another step towards ensuring that we ‘Close the Gaps’ between Indigenous and non-indigenous Australians for the benefit of all Australians.

Sharing my thoughts on The Voice – the proposed Indigenous Voice to the Australian Parliament, simply, I acknowledge the major adverse impacts of colonisation, ~250 years ago on a sophisticated culture thriving on this continent for at least 45,000 years, which continue to this day.

A ‘breakthrough’ realisation for me was that multi-generational trauma is real – it’s not something “that these folk should simply get over”. It has taken me many years, but I now recognise that I have lived on the edges of this style of trauma impacting my family related to my European and Jewish family ties – living at various times in Vienna, Israel, NZ and now Australia.

Trauma has punctuated the lives of Indigenous Australians since colonisation; forced removal from ancestral Country, slave labour, massacres, policies of assimilation, the Stolen Generation etc - it’s a long, incomplete list which continues into modern times.

The failure of successive governments to close 15 of the 19 “Gap” measures highlights the ongoing, cumulative impact of this generational trauma. ?There is no denying that there are many ‘broken’ indigenous families and communities and it is these broken members of our community who are highly visible. They make the news headlines and are the focus of outrage and judgement from certain quarters. Broken families and communities manifest in many negative ways such as high-crime rates, children with no hope or aspiration, addiction, incarceration, mental health issues and high welfare dependency.

I consider that an indigenous Voice to the Parliament (and executive) will assist in policy and implementation to address these matters being fairer. If Aboriginal people have a genuine say in policies which affect them - then they also become ‘frontline’ accountable to make their suggestions work. This aspect of ‘accountability’ is very important and with Voice representatives likely appointed for just one term will create even greater incentive for them to be focused and effective.

That participation and accountability should lead to more effective funding to support initiatives to close the equity gap that exists between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians. The Productivity Commission, hardly an activist organisation, has the same view; “Consultation with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people cannot be on solutions that are pre-determined – governments need to allow Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to make decisions for themselves and their communities,” Productivity Commissioner Natalie Siegel-Brown.

Yes – I have considered the ‘lines’ that the Constitution is sacrosanct and that changes will “introduce racism into the Constitution”. I don’t agree with this assertion; the Constitution already contains racist clauses such as; section 25 which allows people to be deprived of their vote on the grounds of race, or section 51(xxvi) which gives Parliament the power to make laws with respect to the people of any race, a power which can be used for them or against them – the ‘Race Powers’. Indeed, this fact makes nonsense of the slogan “If you don’t know, vote No” – there is no excuse not to be properly informed, and “If you ‘know’, how could you vote No?”

I often read that the Voice breaches principles of equality by giving indigenous Australians a unique platform not enjoyed by other Australians. Or the phrase, “I don’t have anything to apologise for or feel guilty about”. It’s not about ‘guilt’ – my view is guided by an overriding principle of fairness and equity which a Voice could begin to restore.

In a very lively manner, the No Campaign ‘lights-up’ a series of issues designed to ignite doubt and fear in the community which are without foundation or precedent. Claims of new taxes, repossession of lands, compensation, even a 26-page subversive manifesto – these are all contradicted by the facts, the actual implementation of the Native Title Act, the examples of State based treaties and Voice structures and the actual words and context of the ‘one-page’ Uluru Statement from the Heart. Afterall, how can we have some activist indigenous leaders opposed to the Voice because it is tokenistic and ‘not enough’ and also have No campaigners saying it is ‘too much’ and will ‘break Australia’? Which is it? The Voice has no mandatory power, “it may make representations….”. It is a start whereby Indigenous Australians are at least being constitutionally recognised and heard.

I also struggle with claims around the lack of detail and legal challenges. Every election Australians vote on broad policies and then ‘trust’ the elected Parliament to get the underlying legislation ‘roughly right’. That’s how it works. We don’t vote on detailed draft legislation. I agree that the structure of the Indigenous representation of the Voice will need to be negotiated and finalised. So does all legislation.

The final substantive issue around clogging the courts in legal challenges is a distraction. Again, if there has been an error in process or legal drafting then every law can be challenged in the courts. That’s the joy of an independent judiciary – this should be a comfort that there will be strong focus on proper process and legal drafting and that any errors will be addressed through the courts as they currently are.

These are my thoughts - which are based on recognition of traumatic historical events continuing to reverberate around some Aboriginal people, adversely impacting their own lives and the wider Australian society.?

The Uluru Statement is described as a ‘generous’ invitation. I have been fortunate to glimpse up-close certain aspects of Aboriginal peoples cultures. I understand and agree with this description of 'generous' and I genuinely believe that the Voice is a ‘beautiful invitation’, borne out of goodwill and the culmination of decades of work and wide consultation.

For me, voting Yes holds no fear. It is a matter of equity and fairness and taking another step towards ensuring that we Close the Gaps between Indigenous and non-indigenous Australians.

Mike Rosenstreich

August 2023