“Rejected from representation: What the Voice Referendum Means for the Indigenous Rights Struggle in British Settler-Colonial States”

On the 14th of October 2023, the Australian population rejected the Voice, an opportunity for an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (A&TSI) representative body to be enshrined in the Australian constitution. This would have provided political representation for Indigenous Australians for the first time in the country’s history and supported the struggle for Indigenous sovereignty. Sovereignty refers to Indigenous authority to govern their people. Australia is a British Settler-Colonial State, referring to “countries where white settlers historically displaced and eliminated Indigenous communities to ensure their own survival and reproduction” (Chong, 2018). Whilst other British Settler-Colonial States (USA, Canada and New Zealand) have all granted Indigenous constitutional presence, Australia appears as an outlier. Does this mean Indigenous people in Australia have less sovereignty than those in other Settler-Colonial states?

The Voice referendum contended over an advisory body which would elect Indigenous representatives from each Australian state and territory. This body would be enshrined into the constitution, meaning that A&TSIs would be able to contribute to political decisions that affected them indefinitely. This permanence marks a stark progression from the existing temporary and unstable First Nations advisory bodies. Without it, such insecurity remains.

The voting outcome mirrors the historical oppression of ATSI sovereignty. Since the conception of Australia, marked by the claiming of Australia for Great Britain by Captain James Cook in 1770, Indigenous autonomy has been oppressed. This happened overwhelmingly through dispossession from native homelands since, but also through efforts to exterminate and assimilate them by extension. Most infamously, Indigenous children were forcibly removed from their families, known as The Stolen Generation. Long-term disproportionate incarceration rates of A&TSIs, with Indigenous people filling a quarter of Australian prisons, despite consisting of less than 3% of the country’s population, is exemplary of this historical legacy.

Moreover, disproportionality faced by First Nations in everyday life has increased with the referendum. A&TSIs have poorer health, wealth and education outcomes than their white counterparts. For example, the suicide rate among Indigenous Australians is almost double that of non-Indigenous Australians, despite their minority status. These outcomes have worsened in late 2023 with a rise in mental health issues faced in the lead-up to and in the aftermath of the campaigns, corresponding to an increase of racial abuse, particularly across social media platforms. Not only did the rejection of the Voice continue to deny sovereignty, did it worsen commonplace oppression?

A pessimistic picture of Indigenous Australian rights emerges in comparison to permanent political representation granted in British Settler-Colonial States elsewhere. By contrast, New Zealand, Canada and the United States have given Indigenous people constitutional recognition in differing forms. In the case of New Zealand, Māori peoples have had guaranteed representation in parliament since the country’s origins, with the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 dedicating several seats for Māori in parliament. In the United States, treaties signed between the federal government and Native American tribes since the 1770s characterise negotiation on a “nation-nation” basis providing tribes with authoritative footing to assert their political autonomy. Their political power has been enhanced by the Self Determination and Education Act of 1975 since it enhances support for self-governance. Looking northwards, Indigenous policy in Canada focuses on reconciliation with its Indigenous population through truth sharing and making reparations. Significantly, the establishment Truth and Reconciliation Commission in 2008 sought to make reparations with former students, families and communities, who suffered under the residential school system that emerged in the 1880s.

However, issues of disproportionately appear across nations. In all these countries, Indigenous peoples face stark inequality in comparison to their white counterparts. Moreover, these constitutional advantages are not transactional, since like that in Australia, there has been bitter struggle for the political representation established. In particular, the treaties used to assert Native American sovereignty have been repeatedly violated by the federal government, making promised political agency difficult to realise. Even in these spaces with authoritative political representation, it is insecure, presenting the struggle as more multifaceted than it may appear.

With the rejection of the Voice and constitutional recognition, Australia appears as an outlier in progressing Indigenous rights. However, this is a face-value assumption. Disproportionate outcomes for Indigenous peoples across national contexts present a diverse struggle for Indigenous sovereignty, one in which even granted political representation has not alleviated. The bestowing of constitutional representation forms merely part of a wider push against systemic oppression. Although the struggle is in motion, it has a long way to go before it overcomes the powerful legacies of colonialism.

Bibliography

Chong, Hannah. “Reconciliation in Settler-Colonial States: A Study of the Political Apology.” Essay. Yale University International Studies, 2018. http://yris.yira.org/essays/2597.

El Gharib, Sarah. “Canada Just Passed 2 New Laws to Affirm Rights of Indigenous Peoples.” Global Citizen, accessed January 9, 2024, https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/canada-lawsnational-indigenous-peoples-day/?gclid=Cj0KCQiAwP6sBhDAARIsAPfK_waYemAkIcYCegxdJMIVUm7r4youfOzoOiyIsAVwyPePWK0Ee9I8FAaApt1EALw_wcB.

Khalil, Shaimaa. “Aboriginal Australians ‘still suffering effects of colonial past.” BBC News, accessed January 9, 2024. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-53436225.

Maddison, Sarah. “Indigenous reconciliation in the US shows how sovereignty and constitutional recognition work together,” The University of Melbourne, accessed January 10, 2024, https://findanexpert.unimelb.edu.au/news/4373-indigenous-reconciliation-in-the-us-showshow-sovereignty-and-constitutional-recognition-worktogether#:~:text=Treaties%20were%20negotiated%20with%20some,or%20Torres%20Strait% 20Islander%20peoples

Mao, Frances. “The Voice: Why Australia and New Zealand took different paths on Indigenous journey.” BBC News, accessed January 10, 2024, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worldaustralia-67076216.

National Museum of Australia, “National Apology.” accessed January 10, 2024. https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/national-apology.

Ritchie, Hannah. “Voice referendum: Lies fuel racism ahead of Australia's Indigenous vote.” BBC News accessed January 10, 2024, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-66470376.

Ritchie, Hannah. “Voice referendum: Indigenous rights vote is a reckoning for Australia.” BBC News, accessed January 10, 2024, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-66944609.