The campaign advocating for the incorporation of an Indigenous Voice to Parliament is facing challenges, despite an aggressive social media campaign leading up to the October 14 referendum. From August 7 to September 5, Yes23 spent $512,831 on 4,786 different advertisements on Facebook and Instagram. However, a recent poll conducted by RedBridge Research in early September revealed that only 39% of respondents supported the ‘Yes’ vote, with 61% indicating they would vote ‘No’.
Tony Barry from RedBridge described the ‘Yes’ campaign as being in a “freefall,” noting that the opposition’s focused messaging, referring to the initiative as the ‘Canberra Voice’, seems to be effectively swaying undecided voters. The poll also showed a new peak in opposition to the Indigenous Voice, with 53% against the establishment of an independent and permanent advisory body for First Nations issues. This is the first time either side has achieved a majority in the polls, surpassing the 47% and 48% ‘No’ votes recorded in June and July.
One of the leading arguments against the Constitutional amendment is that it would be “divisive,” which resonated with 25% of respondents. In terms of financial expenditure, Advance Australia, a primary opponent of the campaign, invested $64,165 in 135 ads, while Australians for Unity spent $22,849. These initiatives have contributed to the declining support for the amendment, casting doubt on whether it can achieve the double majority needed for Constitutional change.
Despite the challenges faced by the campaign, proponents of the Indigenous Voice to Parliament argue that it is crucial for ensuring meaningful representation and addressing the unique concerns of First Nations peoples. They emphasize the need to address historical injustices, strengthen cultural preservation, and promote self-determination.
Advocates believe that an Indigenous Voice could provide a platform for First Nations peoples to contribute their perspectives and expertise on matters that directly impact their communities. By having a dedicated advisory body, they argue that policies and decisions would be better informed and more inclusive, leading to improved outcomes for Indigenous Australians.
However, opponents of the initiative argue that it may create a separate and divisive avenue for decision-making, potentially undermining the unity of the Australian Parliament. They also express concerns about the potential for the Indigenous Voice to have undue influence on policies and legislation, leading to an imbalance in power.
As the referendum approaches, both sides continue to actively campaign and engage with the public. Supporters of the Indigenous Voice are working to highlight the benefits it could bring, while opponents aim to address what they perceive as risks and challenges associated with the proposed constitutional change.
Ultimately, the outcome of the referendum will depend on the voting population’s interpretation of the potential impact and significance of the Indigenous Voice to Parliament. Regardless of the result, the debate surrounding Indigenous representation in Australia’s political system and the pursuit of reconciliation and justice for First Nations peoples is likely to continue.
Source link
