Get all the facts

TO ADDRESS the controversy over the so-called full Uluru Statement, voters first need to read the full statement.

See, for instance, Full Uluru Statement: Read the entire document about the Voice | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site.  

Then read a fact check on it, for instance on the RMIT site, https://www.rmit.edu.au/news/factlab-meta/uluru-statement-from-the-heart-is-one-page.

After a comprehensive analysis, it finds the claim, ‘The Uluru Statement from the Heart is a 26-page document, with policies including reparations for First Nations peoples’, to be false.

It states “The Uluru Statement from the Heart is a one-page document, as confirmed by its authors. Papers released under FOI contain the statement, but also include 25 pages of background information, including minutes of meetings held with Indigenous communities, which are not part of the Uluru Statement from the Heart."

But what is the concern regarding the content of the background material presented in the 25 extra pages? 

If any Australians were a First Nations' person, or an Australian fighting for rights if Japan had won WW2 or an Australian whose country had been invaded by and colonised by aliens who forced Australians to live as second-class citizens, wouldn’t they similarly have presented the story and background in discussions prior to any voting on the wording for a referendum on getting a Voice? 

Why would any non-indigenous Australians think they would become second-class citizens if indigenous people got The Voice?  It hasn't happened in other countries where indigenous people have been given a Voice.  

Most Australians would agree First Nations people have been grievously wronged. Surely the sooner these wrongs are righted, as much as it is possible to right them, the better.  

If that involves a treaty or compensation or some sort of discrimination in their favour, or whatever, surely that would be fine with all Australians with the capacity/empathy to walk in another’s shoes.

Also, on Profile of First Nations people - Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (aihw.gov.au), the figures don't suggest a problem for non-indigenous Australians.  

At June 30, 2021, there were 983,700 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, representing 3.8% of the total Australian population:

One-third (33.1%) were under 15 years of age.

The median age was 24.0 years.

Three-quarters (74.5%) lived in New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia combined.

In 1967 it would seem Australians saw the referendum as a moral/ethical issue, and the vote was overwhelmingly Yes on the Aboriginal question.   

According to The 1967 referendum – Parliament of Australia (aph.gov.au), turnout for the referendum was almost 94 per cent, and the result was a strong ‘Yes’ vote, with a significant majority in all six states and an overall majority of almost 91 per cent.

Was that because of the widely held Australians' belief in a fair go, and, possibly/probably, even more, because the Parliament was united over it?

The Holt Coalition Government ran the 1967 referendum and Whitlam's Labor Opposition supported it. If today's major political parties were allied on this referendum, wouldn’t it be likely the ‘Yes’ vote would romp home? 

Are non-indigenous Australians listening to what indigenous people, such as Jacinta Price, the Shadow Minister for Aboriginal Affairs who has an indigenous mother and a non-indigenous father, Warren Mundine, former National President of the ALP who left in 2012 and went on to become chairman of the Coalition Government’s Indigenous Advisory Council under Tony Abbott and then an unsuccessful Liberal Party candidate in the 2019 election, Professor Marcia Langdon and lawyer Noel Pearson have to say? 

Though many Aborigines interviewed seem to be saying 'Yes' to The Voice, it helps to understand the situation to listen to both sides.

It is illuminating to read why some Coalition MPs resigned their positions over the stand taken by their leader, Peter Dutton. Former Shadow Attorney General Julian Lesser made his stand clear on https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/leeser-quits-opposition-frontbench-in-blow-to-dutton-s-voice-referendum-strategy-20230411-p5czn0.html.

Note MP Russell Broadbent named as a Liberal pro-Voice person is now anti-Voice. To read his rationale for changing his stance, see Veteran Liberal MP Russell Broadbent backflips on Yes vote in

Voice to Parliament referendum - ABC News. 

Former indigenous Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, Ken Wyatt, has had much to say, for instance, on https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/constitutional-recognition-and-the-voice-fell-flat-in-the-liberal-years-ken-wyatt-reveals-why-20230921-p5e6ir.html. 

This gives a good historical background to The Voice during Coalition Government under Howard, Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison, and why Wyatt felt betrayed by them all.

Here is a more recent article on Ken Wyatt: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-08-29/ken-wyatt-urges-former-liberal-colleagues-to-support-the-voice/102789738.

In the same article, it mentions Julie Bishop, former Deputy Leader, who is also pro-Voice. Indeed, it shows her walking with the current Minister for Foreign Affairs, Penny Wong, to show her support publicly.

Note the 'No' advocates range from people on the far right to the far left.  

Non-indigenous No advocates include neo-Nazis and a Putin sympathiser. See September 28 article https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-feed/article/neo-nazis-the-freedom-movement-and-sovcits-dont-want-the-voice-but-for-different-reasons/03raex09d.

In 1970 and 1979 trips around outback Australia were eye-openers. In 1970, at an Aboriginal art site in Kununurra, a member of the clergy who worked on a mission with Aboriginal children volunteered his take on Aborigines, taking their children from them. 

"If they don't want to hand them over, we just tell them we'll call the police in. They give them to us quick-smart then. Har, har."

Voting ‘Yes’ is a chance for Australians to show solidarity with First Nations and walk with them.

Meryl Tobin, Grantville