Both sides of the referendum campaign are making their final appeals on the last weekend before Australians head to the polls.
A week out from the referendum, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese outlined what Australians could do to help their Indigenous counterparts, who suffer from higher mortality rates and worse education outcomes.
Australians are being asked whether they want to put an Indigenous advisory body called the voice into the constitution.
The ‘yes’ and ’no' vote campaigns are ramping up their messages with voting on the voice under way.
It would be a permanent body but hold no veto right and the parliament will have the power to change the model and how it functions through legislation.
Consulting people about decisions that involved them inevitably led to better outcomes, Mr. Albanese said.
“Give our first Australians the opportunity to achieve the better future that they seek,” Mr. Albanese said.
One of Australia’s pre-eminent legal minds has also batted away concerns that having a non-binding advisory body in the constitution would be legally risky and bog the government down with sustained litigation.
There were no interpretations of the proposed amendment that would force the parliament to accept advice from the body and it would “highly improbably” it would face a court challenge if the body wasn’t consulted before a decision, former High Court chief justice Robert French said.
The former chief also rubbished the notion there was not enough detail in the proposal, saying constitutional clauses usually avoided lengthy specifics to avoid the potential for multiple interpretations.
The model would also be determined and able to be changed by the parliament, Mr. French noted.
People sporting the “don’t know, vote ‘no’” slogan invited “a resentful, uninquiring passivity” towards a straightforward proposal, Mr. French said.
“Australians whether they vote ‘yes’ or ’no' are better than that,” Mr. French said.
It also wouldn’t divide the nation by race as the body “is not a race-based institution”.
Former High Court chief justice Robert French says the voice does not present major legal threats.
“‘Race’ in the history of its use has never had a precise meaning, there are no genes for distinct groups,” Mr. French said.
State and territory leaders gathered in Adelaide to reaffirm their support for the voice, with South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas saying all first ministers were unified in their support.
“A voice to parliament would be a good thing to do for our most disadvantaged community in the country,” Mr. Malinauskas said.
But Opposition Leader Peter Dutton says while all Australians wanted to help Indigenous people, the constitutional proposal remained vague.
“Tradies and others who are just saying, ‘Well, you know, I want to help Indigenous people, but the prime minister’s not putting the detail out there, so I don’t understand it, I’m not voting for it’,” Mr. Dutton said.
Australians will go to the polls on Oct. 14, with a majority of people in at least four states needing to vote ‘yes’ for the referendum to be carried on top of a majority of Australians.
