How the world reacted to the rejection of the Voice
ByRob Harris
October 15, 2023
London: The Australian public’s decision to vote against enshrining an Indigenous voice to parliament in the Constitution has made headlines around the world, with descriptions of a fraught and often “ill-tempered” referendum campaign.
The result of all states rejecting the proposal, and roughly six in 10 voters, has sharpened global attention on the plight of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and their relationship with generations of federal governments.
How the world reported on the Voice referendum.CREDIT:ARESNA VILLANUEVA
Human rights experts at the United Nations in Geneva had urged Australians to vote Yes before the poll, saying it would “pave the way to overcome the colonial legacy of systemic discrimination and inequalities” that had undermined the ability of Indigenous peoples to realise their rights to development and self-determination.
In the UK, The Financial Times reported that supporters of the Voice had promised that entrenching the Indigenous peoples into the Constitution would unite Australia and usher in a new era. It said No leaders had described the idea as divisive, as creating special “classes” of citizens where some were more equal than others.
“The failure of the high-profile referendum, which had been supported by some of Australia’s largest companies and institutions, represents a setback in the country’s attempts to deal with its past and present treatment of its native people, who make up 3 per cent of the population,” it said.
RELATED ARTICLE
Voice to parliament
‘We have given our all’: Albanese pledges unity after defeat on Voice
The BBC reported Australia had overwhelmingly rejected a plan to give greater rights to Indigenous people in an “often acrid campaign”, which was “based on misinformation about the effects of the plan”.
The Times said it was a “a huge blow” for those who viewed the Voice as a unique opportunity to close the yawning gap that remained between Australia’s Indigenous people and the rest of the population.
“Despite numerous initiatives by successive governments, and many billions of dollars of investment, young Aboriginal men are more likely to go to jail than university, and Indigenous people are expected to die eight to nine years earlier than non-Indigenous people,” it said.
In France, Le Monde said Indigenous Australians had expressed anger and anguish that the white majority had rejected calls for “a reckoning with the country’s bloody colonial past”.
“More than 230 years since the first British penal ships anchored in Sydney, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese proposed the reforms as a step towards racial reconciliation. But instead, it has sparked a deeply rancorous and racially tinged debate that exposed a gulf between First Nations people and the white majority,” it said.
Deutsche Welle, German’s public, state-owned international broadcaster, described the result as a “major setback to the country’s efforts for reconciliation with its First Peoples”. In Italy La Repubblica, the left-wing daily paper based in Rome, said the vote which was aimed to give new rights to First Nations peoples had been sunk by a campaign which scared voters with “disgusting lies”.
The Irish Times said the reasons for the decline in support since the initial strong opinion polls were broad.
“Albanese, and his ministers were prominent faces of the Yes movement, and while Labor did not lead the campaign, the government’s focus on the referendum was seen alongside its handling of other national issues,” it reported.
Britain’s BBC gave prominent coverage of the Voice referendum result.CREDIT:
“It weathered accusations that it championed the voice push while failing to deliver tangible improvements for citizens facing cost of living pressures and a housing crisis hurt the yes side.”
Al Jazeera, the Qatari-owned 24-hour English-language news channel, said the result may also have implications for misinformation in Australia, referencing a campaign spread through social media that the Voice would become a third chamber of parliament and bring Aboriginal people more federal funding.
It said Albanese had criticised sections of the media that he said steered the referendum debate away from the core issues.
In the United States, The Wall Street Journal said the rejection of the constitutional amendment, which would have given Indigenous people more say in government, reflected “deep divisions over how best to address the legacy of colonialism and improve the lives of the nation’s first inhabitants”.
It highlighted that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were now “poorer, less educated and less healthy than other groups”.
RELATED ARTICLE
Analysis
Voice to parliament
A failure in slow motion: Albanese showed great courage but poor judgment
“The result shows the difficulties in reaching a consensus to address historical wrongs in countries that are grappling with their colonial histories.”
The New York Times, which in the past week has likened the tactics of the No campaign to “Trump-style misinformation”, has warned the reverberations from election conspiracy theories, until recently the domain of political fringes, could be acute.
It said the result had crushed Indigenous hopes of reconciliation, but the campaigns had “raised fears and hopes that were both overblown”.
“Many of them saw it as a sign of Australia taking a step to do right by them after centuries of abuse and neglect,” it said.
“In reality, the proposal, known as the Voice, was much more modest, making some of these expectations rather lofty. At the same time, it had given rise to unrealistic fears – like of homeowners being forced to return their land to Indigenous people – that galvanised opposition to the Voice.”
ByRob Harris
October 15, 2023
London: The Australian public’s decision to vote against enshrining an Indigenous voice to parliament in the Constitution has made headlines around the world, with descriptions of a fraught and often “ill-tempered” referendum campaign.
The result of all states rejecting the proposal, and roughly six in 10 voters, has sharpened global attention on the plight of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and their relationship with generations of federal governments.
How the world reported on the Voice referendum.CREDIT:ARESNA VILLANUEVA
Human rights experts at the United Nations in Geneva had urged Australians to vote Yes before the poll, saying it would “pave the way to overcome the colonial legacy of systemic discrimination and inequalities” that had undermined the ability of Indigenous peoples to realise their rights to development and self-determination.
In the UK, The Financial Times reported that supporters of the Voice had promised that entrenching the Indigenous peoples into the Constitution would unite Australia and usher in a new era. It said No leaders had described the idea as divisive, as creating special “classes” of citizens where some were more equal than others.
“The failure of the high-profile referendum, which had been supported by some of Australia’s largest companies and institutions, represents a setback in the country’s attempts to deal with its past and present treatment of its native people, who make up 3 per cent of the population,” it said.
RELATED ARTICLE
Voice to parliament
‘We have given our all’: Albanese pledges unity after defeat on Voice
The BBC reported Australia had overwhelmingly rejected a plan to give greater rights to Indigenous people in an “often acrid campaign”, which was “based on misinformation about the effects of the plan”.
The Times said it was a “a huge blow” for those who viewed the Voice as a unique opportunity to close the yawning gap that remained between Australia’s Indigenous people and the rest of the population.
“Despite numerous initiatives by successive governments, and many billions of dollars of investment, young Aboriginal men are more likely to go to jail than university, and Indigenous people are expected to die eight to nine years earlier than non-Indigenous people,” it said.
In France, Le Monde said Indigenous Australians had expressed anger and anguish that the white majority had rejected calls for “a reckoning with the country’s bloody colonial past”.
“More than 230 years since the first British penal ships anchored in Sydney, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese proposed the reforms as a step towards racial reconciliation. But instead, it has sparked a deeply rancorous and racially tinged debate that exposed a gulf between First Nations people and the white majority,” it said.
Deutsche Welle, German’s public, state-owned international broadcaster, described the result as a “major setback to the country’s efforts for reconciliation with its First Peoples”. In Italy La Repubblica, the left-wing daily paper based in Rome, said the vote which was aimed to give new rights to First Nations peoples had been sunk by a campaign which scared voters with “disgusting lies”.
The Irish Times said the reasons for the decline in support since the initial strong opinion polls were broad.
“Albanese, and his ministers were prominent faces of the Yes movement, and while Labor did not lead the campaign, the government’s focus on the referendum was seen alongside its handling of other national issues,” it reported.
Britain’s BBC gave prominent coverage of the Voice referendum result.CREDIT:
“It weathered accusations that it championed the voice push while failing to deliver tangible improvements for citizens facing cost of living pressures and a housing crisis hurt the yes side.”
Al Jazeera, the Qatari-owned 24-hour English-language news channel, said the result may also have implications for misinformation in Australia, referencing a campaign spread through social media that the Voice would become a third chamber of parliament and bring Aboriginal people more federal funding.
It said Albanese had criticised sections of the media that he said steered the referendum debate away from the core issues.
In the United States, The Wall Street Journal said the rejection of the constitutional amendment, which would have given Indigenous people more say in government, reflected “deep divisions over how best to address the legacy of colonialism and improve the lives of the nation’s first inhabitants”.
It highlighted that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were now “poorer, less educated and less healthy than other groups”.
RELATED ARTICLE
Analysis
Voice to parliament
A failure in slow motion: Albanese showed great courage but poor judgment
“The result shows the difficulties in reaching a consensus to address historical wrongs in countries that are grappling with their colonial histories.”
The New York Times, which in the past week has likened the tactics of the No campaign to “Trump-style misinformation”, has warned the reverberations from election conspiracy theories, until recently the domain of political fringes, could be acute.
It said the result had crushed Indigenous hopes of reconciliation, but the campaigns had “raised fears and hopes that were both overblown”.
“Many of them saw it as a sign of Australia taking a step to do right by them after centuries of abuse and neglect,” it said.
“In reality, the proposal, known as the Voice, was much more modest, making some of these expectations rather lofty. At the same time, it had given rise to unrealistic fears – like of homeowners being forced to return their land to Indigenous people – that galvanised opposition to the Voice.”
More than 60 per cent of Australians had voted "No" in the landmark referendum on Saturday.
SYDNEY - Australian Indigenous leaders called on Sunday for a week of silence and reflection after a referendum to recognise First Peoples in the constitution was decisively rejected.
More than 60 per cent of Australians voted "No" in the landmark referendum on Saturday that asked whether to alter the constitution to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island people with an Indigenous advisory body, the "Voice to Parliament", that would have advised Parliament on matters concerning the community.
Australia's first referendum in almost a quarter of a century needed a national majority and majorities in at least four states to pass. All six states rejected the proposal.
"This is a bitter irony," the Indigenous leaders said in a statement. "That people who have only been on this continent for 235 years would refuse to recognise those whose home this land has been for 60,000 and more years is beyond reason."
They said they would lower the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island flag to half-mast for the week and urged others to do the same.
The outcome is a major setback for reconciliation efforts with the country's Indigenous community and damages Australia's image in the world regarding how it treats First Nations people.
Unlike other nations with similar histories, such as Canada and New Zealand, Australia has not formally recognised or reached a treaty with its First Peoples.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island people make up 3.8 per cent of Australia's 26 million population and have inhabited the country for about 60,000 years. But they are not mentioned in the constitution and the country's most disadvantaged people by most socioeconomic measures.
"It's very clear that reconciliation is dead," Ms Marcia Langton, an architect of the Voice, said on NITV. "I think it will be at least two generations before Australians are capable of putting their colonial hatreds behind them and acknowledging that we exist."
Reconciliation Australia, an Indigenous body, said the community was left to grapple with the "ugly acts of racism and disinformation" that they said were a feature of the debate.
Australian Indigenous leader and former national rugby union player Lloyd Walker said the path to reconciliation seemed difficult now but the community needed to keep fighting.
"We can say it got out-voted but there was still 40% of the people that wanted it. Years and years ago we wouldn't have that percentage for sure," Walker said.
'Reflect hard'
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese staked significant political capital on the Voice referendum, but his critics say it was his biggest misstep since coming to power in May last year.
Opposition leader Peter Dutton said it was a referendum "that Australia did not need to have" and that it only ended up dividing the nation.
One of the biggest reasons for the loss was a lack of bipartisan support, with leaders of the major conservative parties campaigning for the "No" vote.
No referendum has passed in Australia without bipartisan backing.
"Much will be asked of the role of racism and prejudice against Indigenous people in this result," leaders said in the statement. "The only thing we ask is that each and every Australian who voted in this election reflect hard on this question."
REUTERS
Indigenous Australians call for a week of silence after historic referendum fails
BY LAUREN SFORZA - 10/15/23
Australian Indigenous leaders are calling for a week of silence after a referendum to recognize Indigenous people in the constitution failed.
Every state and mainland territory except the Australian Capital Territory rejected the measure to enshrine an Indigenous Voice to Parliament, an advisory body, in the constitution. More than 60 percent of voters opposed the measure, but it was largely more popular among Indigenous Australians.
The Indigenous people of Australia are the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. They make up about 3.8 percent of the population, but Australia has not formally recognized or reached a treaty with them.
Supporters of the referendum were flying Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island flags at half-staff across Australia on Sunday to symbolize their disappointment. Reuters reported that the Indigenous leaders are calling for a week of silence in the wake of the failed proposal.
“This is a bitter irony,” the Indigenous leaders said in a statement, according to Reuters. “That people who have only been on this continent for 235 years would refuse to recognize those whose home this land has been for 60,000 and more years is beyond reason.”
Opposition leader Peter Dutton led a “no” campaign on the referendum, arguing that it would divide Australians.
“This is the referendum that Australia did not need to have. The proposal and the process should have been designed to unite Australians, not to divide us,” Dutton said.
Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles said the government would explore other ways of improving the lives of Indigenous people in comments made after the referendum failed.
“In terms of exactly what the precise steps forward are from here is a matter that we need to take some time to work through, and I think people can understand that,” Marles told Australian Broadcasting Corp, according to The Associated Press.
The Associated Press contributed.
Australian Indigenous leaders are calling for a week of silence after a referendum to recognize Indigenous people in the constitution failed.
Every state and mainland territory except the Australian Capital Territory rejected the measure to enshrine an Indigenous Voice to Parliament, an advisory body, in the constitution. More than 60 percent of voters opposed the measure, but it was largely more popular among Indigenous Australians.
The Indigenous people of Australia are the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. They make up about 3.8 percent of the population, but Australia has not formally recognized or reached a treaty with them.
Supporters of the referendum were flying Aboriginal and Torres Strait Island flags at half-staff across Australia on Sunday to symbolize their disappointment. Reuters reported that the Indigenous leaders are calling for a week of silence in the wake of the failed proposal.
“This is a bitter irony,” the Indigenous leaders said in a statement, according to Reuters. “That people who have only been on this continent for 235 years would refuse to recognize those whose home this land has been for 60,000 and more years is beyond reason.”
Opposition leader Peter Dutton led a “no” campaign on the referendum, arguing that it would divide Australians.
“This is the referendum that Australia did not need to have. The proposal and the process should have been designed to unite Australians, not to divide us,” Dutton said.
Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles said the government would explore other ways of improving the lives of Indigenous people in comments made after the referendum failed.
“In terms of exactly what the precise steps forward are from here is a matter that we need to take some time to work through, and I think people can understand that,” Marles told Australian Broadcasting Corp, according to The Associated Press.
The Associated Press contributed.
Australia rejects constitutional reform to recognise Indigenous people
The proposal did not garner enough votes among the country’s six states, nor an overall majority with its population.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has promised he will continue his reconciliation efforts after voters resoundingly rejected the referendum's proposal [Mark Brake/AAP Image/Reuters]Published On 14 Oct 2023
Australians have resoundingly rejected a proposed reform to the country’s constitution that would recognise Indigenous people, a referendum’s results have shown.
With most of the vote counted on Saturday, it became clear that the “Yes” votes have failed to reach the required threshold with the goal of creating an Indigenous advisory body called the “Indigenous Voice to Parliament”.
Those opposed to the reforms led those in favour 60 percent to 40 percent, with all but one of the six states that needed to also be in favour actually voting to reject the proposal.
The highest number of yes votes were registered in Victoria with 46 percent, with Queensland seeing the lowest at 32 percent.
However, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese defended his decision to push for a referendum, and said “We must seek a new way forward with the same optimism.”
“Tonight is not the end of the road and is certainly not the end of our efforts to bring people together,” he said.
The Indigenous citizens in Australia make up about 3.8 percent of the country’s population of 26 million, and have inhabited the land for some 65,000 years. But they are not mentioned in the constitution, and are believed to be some of the most economically disadvantaged people in the country.
Supporters of the proposal to make changes to the country’s 122-year constitution believe adding an Indigenous voice to the document would help reconcile the country, but opponents have called it divisive and ineffective.
Misinformation implications
From the 44 referendums that have been held in Australia since its founding in 1901, only eight have successfully passed. This is the first referendum in Australia since voters rejected a proposal to become a republic almost a quarter of a century ago.
The vote on Saturday may also have implications for misinformation in Australia, as a large campaign had spread through social media prior to the vote that sparked fears that the Indigenous Voice to Parliament – a purely advisory body – would become a third chamber of parliament and bring Aboriginal people more federal funding.
Albanese also touched on this and criticised sections of the media that he said had steered the referendum debate away from the core issues.
“We have had, including in outlets represented in this room, discussions about a range of things that were nothing to do with what was on the ballot paper tonight,” the prime minister told reporters on Saturday.
SOURCE: AL JAZEERA AND NEWS AGENCIES
Op-Ed: Australia votes No to Aboriginal Voice in a messy referendum
By Paul Wallis
DIGITAL JOURNAL
October 14, 2023
The referendum will decide whether to recognise Indigenous Australians in the constitution for the first time - Copyright AFP DAVID GRAY
I was in favor of the Voice to Parliament as a form of constitutional recognition for Aboriginal people. It didn’t come as any sort of surprise when the No vote won.
The expected mass disinformation was everywhere. A week or so before the referendum, the real nuts were out. One of my neighbors said she saw a meth freak screaming at people on a train station, threatening to kill them if they voted yes.
…And so on. The right-wing media and News Corp kept up a very negative drone of polling news. Whataboutism was also everywhere. Any and every sidetrack was grafted on to the subject of the referendum. “If there’s a small traffic jam in Sydney, are you for or against the referendum”, etc
The referendum will decide whether to recognise Indigenous Australians in the constitution for the first time - Copyright AFP DAVID GRAY
I was in favor of the Voice to Parliament as a form of constitutional recognition for Aboriginal people. It didn’t come as any sort of surprise when the No vote won.
The expected mass disinformation was everywhere. A week or so before the referendum, the real nuts were out. One of my neighbors said she saw a meth freak screaming at people on a train station, threatening to kill them if they voted yes.
…And so on. The right-wing media and News Corp kept up a very negative drone of polling news. Whataboutism was also everywhere. Any and every sidetrack was grafted on to the subject of the referendum. “If there’s a small traffic jam in Sydney, are you for or against the referendum”, etc
.
Crowds hold up banners during a “Walk for Yes” rally in Melbourne ahead of the referendum that could grant Indigenous Australians a constitutionally enshrined right to be consulted on policies that affect them – Copyright AFP William WEST
Meanwhile, the other big call was “It’ll divide the country”. A Yes or No vote will divide the country? Think about that for half a second. Context is not their strong point on any subject.
The usual heroics by media non-entities on the No case were everywhere, too. “Pseudo-passionate scripted babble by the unemployable” about covers it. A more forgettable group of C or D-list people would be hard to find. This was all about symbolic victory in two dimensions.
The proponents of the Yes vote had a problem, too. The Aboriginal Voice to Parliament was to be an advisory body “without binding powers”. Try explaining that to a suburban middle-class country
Meanwhile, the other big call was “It’ll divide the country”. A Yes or No vote will divide the country? Think about that for half a second. Context is not their strong point on any subject.
The usual heroics by media non-entities on the No case were everywhere, too. “Pseudo-passionate scripted babble by the unemployable” about covers it. A more forgettable group of C or D-list people would be hard to find. This was all about symbolic victory in two dimensions.
The proponents of the Yes vote had a problem, too. The Aboriginal Voice to Parliament was to be an advisory body “without binding powers”. Try explaining that to a suburban middle-class country
The rally in Sydney was not part of the official anti-Voice campaign, but was instead linked to Australian anti-vaccination and pro-Putin activist Simeon Boikov
– Copyright AFP DAVID GRAY
The Voice was already pretty garbled. It didn’t sound impressive. It sounded like a cosmetic exercise in some ways. I saw the Voice as at best a first step to better constitutional status. If they wanted it, I was happy to vote for it.
The public reaction to all this babble was very unimpressive. I was surprised that older people, who should know a lot better, even bothered to listen to any political commentary. The anti-Voice spin was mediocre at best. The pro-Voice message, as usual with progressive causes, didn’t get its message across clearly enough.
Anyway, it’s over.
This is NOT “a tragedy”. In comparison with Aboriginal post-colonial history. It’s a short-term small misstep at most.
The Voice was already pretty garbled. It didn’t sound impressive. It sounded like a cosmetic exercise in some ways. I saw the Voice as at best a first step to better constitutional status. If they wanted it, I was happy to vote for it.
The public reaction to all this babble was very unimpressive. I was surprised that older people, who should know a lot better, even bothered to listen to any political commentary. The anti-Voice spin was mediocre at best. The pro-Voice message, as usual with progressive causes, didn’t get its message across clearly enough.
Anyway, it’s over.
This is NOT “a tragedy”. In comparison with Aboriginal post-colonial history. It’s a short-term small misstep at most.
Australia: Setback for Indigenous Rights
Government Should Look to First Nations Communities for Next Steps
Daniela Gavshon
HRW Australia Director@dgavshon
Click to expand Image
Aunty Shirley Lomas (L) looks on at a media conference in Redfern, Sydney, Australia ahead of the October 14, 2023 referendum to decide on an Indigenous voice to parliament.
Government Should Look to First Nations Communities for Next Steps
Daniela Gavshon
HRW Australia Director@dgavshon
Click to expand Image
Aunty Shirley Lomas (L) looks on at a media conference in Redfern, Sydney, Australia ahead of the October 14, 2023 referendum to decide on an Indigenous voice to parliament.
© 2023 Jenny Evans/Getty Images
Australia’s referendum to enshrine a First Nations voice in the country’s constitution was unsuccessful. But the spotlight remains on the Australian government to ensure First Nations people’s rights to self-determination, and full and effective participation are properly realized.
Establishing an Indigenous Voice to parliament was put to a vote on October 14, 2023, as constitutional amendments in Australia must be decided by a referendum.
Many Indigenous Australians campaigned for a “yes” vote, hoping it would deliver better outcomes for their communities, which continue to face disproportionately high rates of incarceration and other systemic socioeconomic disadvantages due to the legacies of colonialism.
The Voice is a proposed advisory body, made of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, who would advise the Australian parliament and the government on issues that affect them.
First Nations people had called for the Voice through the Uluru Statement from the Heart, following extensive consultation. Human Rights Watch supported the Voice as an important way to ensure self-determination for First Nations people in Australia.
While the results are disappointing for many First Nations people in Australia, the “no vote” does not diminish their rights as Indigenous people, which the Australian government has a continued responsibility to uphold.
In deciding next steps, the Australian government should prioritize the views of Indigenous communities.
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which was endorsed by Australia in 2009, recognizes that Indigenous people have the right to participate in decision-making in matters that would affect their rights, and that governments should consult with Indigenous people before making laws that affect them.
It is a blight on Australia’s history that successive governments of various political persuasions have failed to uphold the rights of First Nations people.
No comments:
Post a Comment