From a legal standpoint, there is a difference between a state and a territory, and for some that justifies giving territory voters less say.
A Voice to Parliament would advise the “executive government” – that is, ministers and the public service – on issues that affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
Mis- and disinformation about the Voice to Parliament proposal are rife. Here, experts address 10 of the most common myths.
Legislation is an unsatisfactory way to institute a Voice to Parliament because, among other reasons, it would make the body insecure and vulnerable to the whims of different governments.
We now know the wording of the Voice referendum and proposed constitutional amendment. But what may have been forgotten is how we got here in the first place – and why it matters.
The bill that has passed through the Senate provides for a robust referendum, although there is still room for improvement.
This constitutional reform process may be ‘unorthodox’, but it’s entirely appropriate.
There has been much debate about the “details” of the Voice to Parliament, but the referendum is on the principle.
The Albanese government wants to change the way referendums work ahead of the Voice to Parliament vote. There are still flaws, but it is a step in the right direction.
Australian Governments must embrace Indigenous Nation Building if the Uluru Statement is to lead to effective structural reform and self-determined government for First Nations peoples.