Sean Gordon said Thursday's speech by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese outlining the Voice to Parliament referendum question stood out for him alongside two other important moments in history.
The Wangkumarra/Barkindji man, who services on the University of Newcastle Council, was in the room with the Prime Minister in Canberra for the speech as a member of the Referendum Working Group.
"Being on that stage and caught up in that moment, it was quite emotional," he said.
"The closest experience I've had to that - there's probably two experiences - one was the apology by Kevin Rudd, the second was when Megan Davis read out the Uluru Statement at the Uluru Convention and the third was this moment."
The Prime Minister announced in Parliament House the wording of the referendum question would be: "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?"
Thursday's announcement also included design principles, including that the Voice will have a gender balance and youth and won't have a veto power.
Mr Gordon has attended every meeting of the working group, and said Thursday's result came after a "very rigorous, robust process".
"Firstly to get to a decision where the referendum working group had consensus... but also lock into a position where the government and the referendum working group agreed on the proposed question, amendment and principles," he said.
"I think the question really captures the aspirations of Indigenous people, it protects the integrity of the parliament and also ensures we don't end up with a process where we're in and out of the High Court."
But Tracey Hanshaw said she was not happy with the wording of the question.
The Awabakal woman said she wanted First Nations people to be "enshrined" in the Constitution.
"If we're going to do it, let's do it right," she said.
"We should be recognised in the Constitution because we were here first. But First Nations peoples on the ground at my level don't want a Voice.
"It should be 'do you want First Nations people's recognized and enshrined in the Constitution? Yes or no?'
"We're being asked how we should be mentioned in the Constitution, that doesn't have to be by way of a Voice."
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Join the discussion in the comment section below.
Find out how to register or become a subscriber here.
