THOMAS MAYO: The beautifully wild Voice to Parliament, explained
May 2, 2023
auto_awesome
Thomas Mayo, a maritime union worker and official advocate for the Indigenous Voice to Parliament, joins Sarah Wilson to discuss the upcoming referendum. They cover the need for constitutional change, the misconceptions around the Voice to Parliament, and the significance of the Uluru Statement. Mayo clarifies that the Voice advises, does not veto laws, and grants no additional rights. The chapter also explores the challenges faced by Indigenous men and the importance of understanding Indigenous systems and systemic change.
The voice, as proposed in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, aims to advise Parliament on matters directly affecting First Nations people, addressing common issues and achieving better outcomes through consultation and inclusion.
The referendum on the voice asks Australians to decide if they agree with the principle of establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice in the Constitution, without granting veto power or enforcing recommendations, emphasizing the importance of recognizing Indigenous people and providing them with the opportunity to be heard.
Deep dives
Why the Voice is Needed
The voice, as proposed in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, is a representative body that aims to advise Parliament on matters directly affecting First Nations people. It is a modest and symbolic change to the Constitution, but it has been shown to work in other countries. When Indigenous people are consulted on issues that affect them, better outcomes are achieved. The voice would address common issues like housing, justice system reform, and program funding. It is a unifying moment for Indigenous people, inviting all Australians to recognize the existence of First Nations people and include them in decision-making processes.
Understanding the Referendum
The referendum on the voice asks Australians to decide if they agree with the principle of establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice in the Constitution. It does not grant veto power or enforce recommendations, but rather provides an advisory role on issues that directly affect Indigenous people. The details of the voice, such as composition and procedures, will be decided by the Australian Parliament after consulting Indigenous communities. It is important to note that a referendum only addresses the principle, and further discussions and negotiations will shape the implementation of the voice.
Overcoming Misconceptions and Opposition
Opposition to the voice often stems from fear, confusion, and ideological differences. Some misconceptions present the voice as a third chamber of Parliament or a right to veto laws, which is not the case. It is essential to understand that the voice is about recognizing Indigenous people and providing them with the opportunity to be heard on matters that directly impact their communities. The support for the yes vote comes from a wide range of organizations, including banks, law firms, unions, and peak bodies, all recognizing the importance of this unifying and fair step.
The Significance of Voting Yes
Voting yes for the voice is a powerful statement that acknowledges and respects the history, culture, and contributions of Indigenous Australians. It demonstrates an understanding of the need for inclusivity, fairness, and shared decision-making. Choosing to vote yes means contributing to a unifying moment and ensuring a better future for all Australians. It is an opportunity to rectify the historical exclusion and to pave the way for genuine recognition and collaboration. Voting yes will bring pride and a sense of accomplishment in working towards a more just and equitable society.
Thomas Mayo (maritime union worker, author, official advocate for the Indigenous Voice to Parliament) joins me to answer your questions regarding the upcoming referendum to amend the constitution to recognise a Voice. It’s a big, historic and profoundly important moment for every Australian voter. We talk through the basics and drill down into the counterarguments – is there a need for more detail (short answer = no, it’s constitutionally inappropriate to provide more), does it veto laws (no, it advises only), does it give First Nations Peoples more rights (no, it grants no rights). I’ve designed things so you can be best prepared for the vote at the end of the year and for the conversation leading up to it. Also, as an episode to share widely!
Here’s 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.
Check out my Wild conversation with Prof Megan Davis and my interview with The Ethics Centre’s Simon Longstaff who talks about the ethical way to view your vote.
If you need to know a bit more about me… head to my "about" page