Indigenous Voice to Parliament: perspectives on Closing the Gap

First Nations health and wellbeing is front of mind as Australia draws nearer to the 2023 referendum regarding the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament (the Voice).

For this article, InSight+ looked at what the Minister for Indigenous Australians is saying about the Voice.

We also spoke to prominent Australian health practitioners and academics to get their thoughts on the referendum, what it means, how it relates to First Nations health and wellbeing, and what they think about the vote.

Minister Linda Burney addresses the nation on the Voice

Minister for Indigenous Australians, the Hon Linda Burney, identified health as the first issue she would ask a Voice to Parliament to address in her National Press Club address this month, if the vote to alter the Constitution were successful.

“In 2023, it’s time for Australia to recognise Indigenous Australians,” Minister Burney said.

She went on to address questions regarding why she believes a Voice to Parliament is needed.

“The simple answer is because the gap isn’t closing fast enough,” said Minister Burney.

“For too long, governments have made policies for Indigenous Australians, not with Indigenous Australians. We need the Voice to change that.”

The concept of “Nothing about us without us”, includes the idea that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health initiatives are more successful when Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are involved in and responsible for them.

Minister Burney referred to new data showing that just four out of 19 targets for Closing the Gap are on track.

“We can and we must do better,” said Minister Burney.

“I honestly believe the Voice can help,” said Minister Burney. “[It] will be mechanism for government and Parliament to listen.

“It will be like a resource of local knowledge and solutions that can help us make better policies.”

During NAIDOC (National Aborigines and Islanders Day Observance Committee) Week, Minister Burney presented Dr Kelvin Kong, an otolaryngology, head and neck surgeon at John Hunter Hospital, with the 2023 NAIDOC Person of the Year Award.

Dr Kong has called for improvements in the health of young Indigenous Australians to stop them “falling through the cracks”.

Calling for structural change: the Uluru Statement from the Heart

The call for a 2023 referendum on the Voice to Parliament originated with the 2017 Uluru Statement from the Heart.

Representatives from more than 250 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups gathered to sign the document, inviting Australians to take action to create a better future for First Nations peoples.

The Statement called for two main actions: recognising Indigenous people in the Constitution with a Voice to Parliament, and Makarrata (or treaty).

The Voice (whose design principles are outlined here) would be a permanent body, outside of politics, advising the Australian Parliament and its executive on legislation and policy of significance to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

This year, the government passed a bill triggering a referendum on the Voice to Parliament.

The referendum is expected to occur in October, on a date to be announced.

Proponents of the Voice suggest that a more permanent advisory influence at this level will improve the health and wellbeing of Indigenous Australians, enabling Australia to Close the Gap in the health of Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples.

Dr Ngaree Blow on the Voice and Aboriginal community control

Dr Ngaree Blow is a Quandamooka, Goreng-Goreng and Yorta-Yorta woman completing her advanced training as a public health physician.

She works as the Director of the Wurru Wurru Health Unit at the University of Melbourne and was a lead medical officer for the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak response in 2020–21 with the Victorian Department of Health.

Dr Blow hopes that the referendum outcome is a “Yes” vote, but says that the success of a Voice in improving Indigenous health and wellbeing depends on many factors.

“If there is a yes to the vote – which I do hope there is because I think a ‘No’ is more detrimental to our communities – we then have to think about how much this Voice has say over what happens,” said Dr Blow.

Dr Blow said that, in her experience as a lead medical officer during the COVID-19 pandemic response, the success of Aboriginal community controlled programs suggested that a Voice to Parliament could help more than just Indigenous communities in its holistic approach to health and wellbeing.

“Aboriginal community controlled institutions were knocking on the door of government well before government were thinking about them,” said Dr Blow.

“During that response, I advocated for our team to also [focus on] refugee and migrant communities, because they were having the same issues that we were: having fewer security blankets around employment and being able to access [COVID-19] education when you couldn’t leave your home.

“Even though this Voice to Parliament is meant for First Nations, having that voice enshrined in the Constitution could have huge impacts and benefits … that could benefit all people,” she said.

To improve holistic health for Indigenous people, the Voice would need to come alongside treaty and truth-telling about Australian history and colonisation, Dr Blow said.

“All three things have to happen in order for there to be self-determination.”

AIDA announces its support for the Voice

Dr Blow refers to the Australian Indigenous Doctors’ Association (AIDA) this month announcing its support for the Voice to Parliament (here).

AIDA stated that the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples should no longer be discriminated against and politicised.

“The position that AIDA holds is based on our vision to rectify the continued health disparity that disproportionally affects Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and this unique opportunity to influence policy, which may not present itself again in our lifetimes,” it said.

Despite support for the Voice, questions remain

Dr Kelly Menzel, the Associate Dean Education at Gnibi College, Southern Cross University, has written about her reaction to the Voice, and also spoke with InSight+.

She is a Ngadjuri woman from South Australia with ancestral connections to the Bundjalung Nation in northern New South Wales and south-east Queensland.

Dr Menzel said she wondered whether a “Yes” vote could be treated as a panacea for the work of reconciliation, saying that the work is the job of all Australians, not merely First Nations people.

“I absolutely believe and agree that Aboriginal people’s voices should be privileged,” said Dr Menzel.

“I took a transcript of Linda Burney’s speech at the Press Club to know more. I understand the concepts, and I’m still not 100% clear.

“I understood and agree with the rhetoric that Aboriginal people should be taking care of Aboriginal business. We are the first peoples of this continent and, as such, should be recognised.

“But I still have these unanswered questions. And if I do as an Aboriginal person, non-Indigenous people must have so many questions,” Dr Menzel said.

How will the referendum work?

On referendum day, Australians over the age of 18 years will be asked to vote. The question asked will 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?”

For a referendum to pass, the vote must achieve a double majority (a national majority; ie, more than half of voters from all states and territories) as well as a majority of votes from at least four of the six states (votes from the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory will count only toward the national majority).

The Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) will issue a pamphlet before the referendum including 2000-word summaries of both the “Yes” and the “No” campaigns.

The AEC has said that, although it is not responsible for fact-checking the summaries, it is considering partnering with third-party organisations that would.

It has also created a “disinformation register” about the referendum process on its website.

This is one of several articles on the Voice that InSight+ intends to publish before the referendum.

If you would like to submit an editorial for consideration, send a Word version to mjainsight-editor@ampco.com.au.