Referendum in Australia: No constitutional change – politics

This big no from Australia’s government must have felt like a slap in the neck to First Nations Minister Linda Burney. The ballot papers had not yet been fully counted on Saturday evening after the referendum for indigenous peoples’ say in parliamentary decisions. Nevertheless, it was already clear that the nation had voted against enshrining such a right in the Constitution. You could see the disappointment in Linda Burney when she appeared in front of the media with Labor Prime Minister Anthony Albanese.

The 66-year-old knows what it’s like to make history. She was the first Aboriginal person to be elected to the New South Wales Parliament, and in 2016 she was the first Aboriginal woman to be elected to the National Parliament in Canberra. With great conviction she voted yes to this historic yes to the so-called Voice to Parliament fought, which now lay shattered in front of her.

Linda Burney fought back tears as she spoke. She had to pull herself together. “I know the past few months have been hard,” she finally said, her voice cracking, “but be proud of who you are, be proud of your identity, be proud of the 65,000 year old history and culture that you are a part of .”

Reconciliation is complicated

The result of the referendum on Sunday was 60.6 percent no to 39.4 percent yes. Not a single one of the six Australian states voted for the constitutional change. The defeat for They Voice was devastating, the message of the vote was clear: Even in the 21st century, the nation is not yet ready to come to terms with its bloody colonial history in such a way that the approximately 980,000 First Nations people among the 26 million Australians have their own body in everyday parliamentary life receive.

Reconciliation between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people is complicated. The trauma of the past runs deep. From the end of the 18th century onwards, the European settlers spread too ruthlessly and brutally into the land that did not belong to them. In addition, the world of Australia’s indigenous people is diverse. It includes Aboriginals from the diverse peoples of the mainland and islanders from the Torres Strait between Papua New Guinea and Cape York in northern Australia. They don’t all agree. Nor did they all vote for the right to have a say, as the referendum results showed.

It wasn’t difficult for the conservatives to cast doubts

But The Voice At least it seemed like a suggestion that many people could rally behind. The proposal envisaged a permanent, independent advisory board of First Nations Australians to provide input to government and parliament on Indigenous matters. It was created six years ago in 13 regional assemblies with 1,200 First Nations people, which was organized by a mixed referendum council. The regional assemblies culminated in a First Nations National Assembly and the so-called “Uluru Statement from the Heart” with the said proposal for constitutionally secured participation.

As the conservative one Coalition the Liberal and National parties were still in power, the referendum had no chance. But in May 2022, Labor came to power and Anthony Albanese implemented it straight away. Albanese probably thought that he could easily infect the country with his goodwill. But the conservatives had their own interests. On Saturday evening, Albanese admitted: “No referendum has ever been successful without a cross-party consensus.”

The fight for yes or no sometimes seemed like a party-political showdown. And it wasn’t difficult for conservatives to spread doubts via traditional and social media. Especially since they had a right-wing model native in their ranks: Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price was the front woman of the No movement. Consistently she described The Voice as “divisive”, “elitist” – and even as a threat to the political order, although it was always clear that the proposed indigenous advisory board would have no veto power.

Jacinta Nampijinpa Price celebrated the victory of the naysayers as a triumph over aloof know-it-alls. “We can no longer listen to academics and activists from the cities,” she said, demanding: “We have to move away from resentment.”

Basically, it was a call to let bygones be bygones, not to use indigenous expertise to persuade conservative whites, and to keep social problems down with superficial subsidy policies. But Jacinta Nampijinpa Price showed above all how torn Australia’s society is right now. Because most native people think differently – at least that is the impression left by the referendum. Especially in Price’s homeland, in the Northern Territory, many remote First Nations communities voted yes. And the comments on the no from indigenous circles often sounded sad, sometimes resigned, sometimes indignant and angry.

“Reconciliation is dead,” said Aboriginal activist and professor Marcia Langton, “a majority of Australians have rejected an invitation from Aboriginal Australians with a minimal proposal.” A group of supporters called for a week of silence and spoke of “bitter irony”: “It is unbelievable that people who have only lived on this continent for 235 years refuse to recognize those whose home this country has been for over 60,000 years.” And Senator Andrew Bragg, one of the Liberal Party’s few Voice supporters, said: “Right now the nation is hurting and we have a lot to think about.”

What will come of this is unclear. A project that passionate indigenous representatives have been working on for almost ten years has failed. For many this is a turning point. Well-known supporters such as Marcia Langton and lawyer Noel Pearson have announced that they will withdraw if rejected. Nevertheless, the debate will remain. Especially since the conservative opposition leader Peter Dutton has announced – confusingly for many – that he will hold a second referendum on the recognition of the First Nations Australians if the “Coalition” comes back into government in 2025. Dutton is probably already preparing for the election campaign.

But first, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese must realign his indigenous policy. The Voice His declared goal was to enshrine it in the constitution. This is also what the “Uluru Statement from the Heart” called for. Successor governments should not be able to undo the vote as easily as any normal reform. It is therefore unlikely that Albanese will launch at least one legislative initiative.

But what then? “We will continue to listen,” said Albanese, wanting to find ways to close the social gap between natives and non-natives. And minister Linda Burney said, fighting back tears: “We will carry on, we will progress and we will thrive.”