In the final weeks before the Indigenous voice to parliament referendum, the votes of one of Australia’s largest migrant communities are largely up for grabs.
Material on the referendum has been translated into various languages and information sessions are being held across many migrant communities, including Chinese-Australians.
But Ivan Wong, who has worked at the Chinese Australian Services Society since 1998, says very little is cutting through.
“Most in the community still know very little about the referendum, what the context is, what it’s all about,” he says. “A lot of them have not made a decision yet on how to vote.”
There are about 1.4 million people with Chinese ancestry in Australia, making up about 5.5% of the population, according to the Lowy Institute. They include people whose descendants migrated decades ago – and those who migrated more recently.
“Our general feeling is that the Chinese community face a language barrier to engagement,” Wong says.
Wong says his organisation has held two education sessions, with about 70 people attending each, and an online webinar attended by 40 people.
And he says that, when his community is reached, when information is readily available and they are engaged, voters tend to be convinced to vote yes.
“Some of the people that we approach and who know what is happening have a view that we should give the First Nations people an opportunity to have a voice in the parliament.”
Dr Shireen Morris, an organiser behind the Multicultural Australia for the Voice campaign, says her experience engaging with migrant communities has largely been positive.
“There is a deep sense of empathy and goodwill among migrant populations for the plight of Indigenous people in this country,” she says. “In my view, these communities are leaning yes.”
More than 150 cultural and ethnic community organisations signed a joint resolution supporting a yes vote in the Indigenous voice referendum, with many hosting forums on the topic.
“The forums have been very effective in increasing community understanding and allowing people to get their questions answered,” Morris says. “Some forums incorporate in-language translation.
“We need to leave no door un-knocked and no stone unturned. Yes campaigners will be doing everything we possibly can to have conversations, share information and grow support.”
‘Attended by the converted’
While forums have attracted many community members, key leaders such as the president of the Chinese Australian Forum, Simon Chan, believe they aren’t enough.
“I think a lot of these panels are attended by the converted,” he says. “Just from talking to a lot of the Chinese community, quite a lot of them are not that engaged with the topic. There’s a few people that said they were more concerned about the cost of living and inflation, and didn’t have time or space to pay attention to the referendum.”
Chan says the older generation of migrants are particularly disengaged and, with the average age of migrants from China being 37.9, that accounts for a significant portion of the community.
“The younger generation is a lot more engaged with everything but the older generation isn’t, partly because of the language problem, partly because like a lot of them are very involved in running businesses.
“They work day and night. They just don’t have time to even watch TV or read the newspaper or hear the news. I don’t even know if they’d read any translated pamphlets.”
Chinese-Australians who arrived in adulthood or in their late teens may have missed school years that would have provided knowledge of the history of Australia’s Indigenous population, the roots of their disadvantage and the context to the referendum.
And that gap in knowledge makes migrant communities such as the Chinese-Australian community particularly susceptible to misinformation. It’s a problem that has been growing in the Chinese-Australian community and one that Chan believes could affect how his community will vote.
“So much of the information reaching these communities is misinformation … it is very concerning,” Chan says.
“For people that don’t watch the news or are disengaged, they will accept what they are told about the voice and it’s extremely disappointing.”
Dr Anthony Ching, a member of the Chinese Australian Forum, thinks the community would gravitate towards the no campaign due to the gap in knowledge.
“They’re asking themselves why they should support the yes campaign, they’re under the impression Indigenous communities already get a lot of benefits,” he says.
“I hear a bit more of the no side in our community … The community has heard lots of opposing arguments, lots believe the Indigenous community is already well looked after, they already have representatives in parliament.
“They tell me, ‘Why do they need more? We don’t even have one [representative in parliament]’.”
Jocelyn Chey, a former diplomat and an adjunct professor at the Australia-China Relations Institute, says the distribution of materials is not enough to engage migrant communities.
She says there is still a large portion of the Chinese-Australian community who have not made their minds up yet.
What has happened already?
The Albanese government has put forward the referendum question: "A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?"
The PM also suggested three sentences be added to the constitution:
- There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.
- The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples;
- The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.
How would it work?
The voice would be able to make recommendations to the Australian parliament and government on matters relating to the social, spiritual and economic wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
The voice would be able to table formal advice in parliament and a parliamentary committee would consider that advice. But the voice co-design report said all elements would be non-justiciable, meaning there could not be a court challenge and no law could be invalidated based on this consultation.
How would it be structured?
The co-design report recommended the national voice have 24 members, encompassing two from each state, the Northern Territory, ACT and Torres Strait. A further five members would represent remote areas and an additional member would represent Torres Strait Islanders living on the mainland.
Members would serve four-year terms, with half the membership determined every two years.
“I’d say nearly half the community is undecided,” she says. “Most people I’ve spoken to haven’t even factored in that there is a referendum coming up.
“The main issue here is a lack of education – roughly half the community arrived here in the past 20 years and have not been exposed to information about Australia’s history and about the issues of white settlement.”
But Chey says there is still time to reach most of the community.
“People usually make their minds up one or two days before having to make a decision. It’s just how we live these days.”
