FIRST Nations academics in the Hunter say Australia needs to "grab the historic moment" for a referendum on a Voice to Parliament.
Central to the 2017 Uluru Statement from the Heart, an Indigenous Voice to Parliament would act as a direct, genuine and ongoing form of Aboriginal consultation for the Australian government according deputy head of the University of Newcastle's Wollotuka Institute, Dr Raymond Kelly.
"We have had representation of sorts in the past but I think this one will be totally different," Dr Kelly said. "This will be a place where people can translate from grassroots into the conscience of the country those details that affect communities."
A "critical" element of the Voice, Wollotuka head Dr Kath Butler said, would be having it enshrined in the constitution.
"Australia has no Bill of Rights so I think the constitution is critical in determining how the country functions," she said.
Due to the need for constitutional change, a referendum must be held before the Voice is made a reality. In 1967 there was a referendum to include Aboriginal people in the population count which received more than 90 per cent of the vote in favour.
"It's very easy to change legislation. If we put it into the constitution it's far more difficult to change and I think that would give people a sense of surety."
In a speech delivered to Garma Festival on July 30, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said a question to the Australian public should be "simple". He suggested: Do you support an alteration to the constitution that establishes an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice?
The Prime Minister proposed three additions to the constitution as a "starting point".
"There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice," Mr Albanese said. "The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to Parliament and the Executive Government 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 the composition, functions, powers and procedures of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice."
Dr Kelly told the Newcastle Herald that the Prime Minister's speech, and the referendum he spoke about, are significant "stepping stones for change".
"At the establishment of the constitution we are not in it at all and for generations our families were governed and provided for under a couple of really historically traumatic structures," Dr Kelly said. "We see change and we know change is an incremental thing but it is the will of the people that will bring change."
In his speech, Albanese described the Voice as "an unflinching source of advice and accountability. Not a third chamber, not a rolling veto, not a blank cheque".
Dr Butler said this kind of consultation would allow Aboriginal people in the Hunter, and other communities across Australia, to express regional concerns directly to policy makers.
She compared current models of First Nations consultation to games of Chinese Whispers played in primary school.
"It starts out with the first child and then they pass it on. By the time it gets around the circle the message has completely changed," Dr Butler said. "This is our opportunity to circumvent that process through bureaucracy and just speak directly to Parliament."
Critics of the Mr Albanese's speech suggest the government needs to provide more information around what the Voice would look like and how it would function prior to a referendum.
Dr Butler said she understands the need for clarity but believes the Prime Minister's speech was significant in starting a conversation.
"We shouldn't really be surprised that people are confused because we have seen the example with the referendum on whether we should become a republic," she said. "There were multiple models and people didn't think they could vote on it because they didn't know what it was.
"It's absolutely critical that we use this time to have those conversations, for people to get multiple perspectives and come up with their own idea."
There will be greater detail about what the Voice looks like as people have the conversation, Dr Kelly said.
"It's about being simple around is it something we as a country should be able to embrace. I think most sensible people would say yes," he said.
WHAT DO YOU THINK? We've made it a whole lot easier for you to have your say. Our new comment platform requires only one log-in to access articles and to join the discussion on the Newcastle Herald website. Find out how to register so you can enjoy civil, friendly and engaging discussions. Sign up for a subscription here.
