Conducting focus groups of non-Indigenous Australians on their attitudes to the voice can be tough going, even for someone whose job it is to listen quietly to casual racism, but I guess someone has got to do it.
I’ve been conducting waves of these groups as well as advising and reviewing many surveys on the voice, published and private, since October last year – and some patterns are emerging. Support is holding up despite increased political tussles. There is still of course a long way to go.
One of the more concerning findings emerging across all these sentiment studies that could threaten to undermine the momentum for constitutional change relates to perceptions about the extent of First Nations support for a yes vote.
All the available research shows that a strong majority of First Nations people support the change. The actual number bounces around depending on sample size and timing, but tends to land somewhere between 80% (in an Ipsos poll of 300 First Nations people in January of this year) to 83% (in a YouGov poll of 738 First Nations people conducted this month, the largest and most representative sample I know of to date).
There’s no doubt that the tools we have to measure sentiment in First Nations communities are blunt. But even if we consider any larger than usual margins of error, available research shows that support is high, higher than in the non-indigenous community.
However, the YouGov research also shows that only 40% of non-Indigenous Australians believe a majority of First Nations people support the voice.
There is a yawning gap between what First Nations Australians say and what non-Indigenous Australians believe. Just like every other gap that exists between these two groups.
The qualitative research I have done reaffirms this gap. In focus groups, people are unsure about whether the voice is something First Nations people have asked for and will support. Without this support, they are uncertain whether the voice will work. And given that the most effective message, across all groups of Australians, on why they should vote yes for the voice is “the voice will give Aboriginal people a say over the decisions that affect them”, then uncertainty about community support can be very damaging. If the majority of First Nations people are given a voice they don’t want, maybe they won’t really use it. And then we are back to square one: government imposing their decisions on communities without listening from the get-go to what they want and need.
There are two important details for people who are open to voting yes but still undecided: firstly, that the voice emerged out of a process driven by First Nations people leading to the Uluru statement from the heart rather than Canberra-based discussions between political leaders and a chosen few First Nations representatives; and secondly, that the majority of First Nations people want the voice in its current manifestation. Presenting the Ipsos poll of 80% support to focus groups of undecided voters in the weeks after Australia Day, the response was, “oh well, now I feel better, you should really tell more people about that …” (In lieu of conducting focus groups with the majority of people in the majority of states between now and November, I am writing this op-ed.)
I’ve seen this phenomenon (the gap between perception of support and reality) play out over decades with climate change. Climate deniers or “dismissives” make up 10% or less of the population. Those who are alarmed or concerned make up over 50% of the population. And yet if you ask Australians in focus groups or surveys how many deniers are out there, they suggest more like 20% or 30%. This overestimation of opposition to climate action undermines social consensus and slows progress, giving the majority the idea that these denialist delusions are legitimate because more people believe them to be true.
It’s the “megaphone effect”, except with one of those voice distortion devices attached.
I reject any argument that First Nations voices that oppose the voice or are just concerned or unsure about it are letting the side down by speaking up. In fact, the focus groups show, there is no expectation of a consensus First Nations position. To quash dissenting First Nations voices on the voice would in fact be counter-productive to the yes cause. “Isn’t the whole point of a voice that Aboriginal people will actually be listened to?”, said one focus group participant in response to a question about the impact of dissenting First Nations senators on the left and the right.
The onus is not on First Nations leaders and communities to “step into line”, but on the media and our political leaders not to misrepresent community attitudes – in Indigenous or non-Indigenous communities – for their own cynical ends.
It’s an argument for greater respect, focus and airtime for the diverse voices from First Nations communities across the land. Not handing the voice-distorting megaphone to a few anointed leaders on either side.
Which, as I understand it, is what the voice is all about.
Dr Rebecca Huntley is director of research at 89 Degrees East
