First Nations Voice

First Nations Voice
Name	First Nations Voice
Type	Advisory body

First Nations Voice is a proposed advisory representative body intended to provide Indigenous Australians with a direct consultative mechanism to the Parliament of Australia and the Commonwealth of Australia on matters affecting Aboriginal Australians and Torres Strait Islanders. The proposal emerged from the Uluru Statement from the Heart and subsequent processes involving Referendum Council, national constitutional deliberations, and consultations with state and territory bodies including the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council and the Northern Land Council. Advocates argue it would address issues raised in the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and the Bringing Them Home report, while opponents cite concerns seen during debates over the 2017 Australian Indigenous Referendum and other constitutional reform campaigns.

Background and Origins

The Voice proposal traces roots to the Uluru Statement from the Heart (2017), which followed the Referendum Council's consultations across communities in places such as Alice Springs, Darwin, Brisbane, and Melbourne. Key figures in the movement include leaders from the Australian Indigenous Leadership Centre, elders who signed the Uluru Statement, and advocates like Noel Pearson, Eddie Mabo's legacy proponents, and organisations such as the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. The concept responds to historic instruments and events including the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), the outcomes of the High Court of Australia decisions like Mabo v Queensland (No 2), and national inquiries such as the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody and the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families.

Legal and Constitutional Framework

Proposals for constitutional recognition via an advisory body have engaged actors like the Attorney-General of Australia, the High Court of Australia, and legislators across the Parliament of Australia's Senate and Australian House of Representatives. Models considered range from constitutional amendment provisions akin to those in the Australian Constitution to statutory creations similar to bodies established under the Native Title Act 1993 and corporate entities framed by the Corporations (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) Act 2006. Legal analysis has referenced precedents from the Constitutional Convention (Australia) debates, commentary by judges such as those in the High Court of Australia, and comparative frameworks like advisory mechanisms in the Canadian Senate's interactions with Assembly of First Nations or treaty bodies under the Te Tiriti o Waitangi processes in New Zealand.

Structure and Membership

Design options discussed include regional, state and territory, and Local Aboriginal Land Councils-based representation, drawing on structures used by entities such as the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission and the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples. Candidates for membership have been proposed from community-controlled health services, land councils, Indigenous legal services, and cultural institutions like the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. Debates considered electoral mechanisms similar to those in the Australian Electoral Commission rolls, nominations from bodies like the Victorian Aboriginal Corporation for Languages, and appointment models reflecting practice in bodies such as the New Zealand Māori Council and the Assembly of First Nations in Canada.

Roles and Functions

Announced aims emphasize providing advice to the Parliament of Australia and advising ministers on laws and policies affecting Aboriginal communities and Torres Strait Islander communities, engaging with portfolios including Health, Indigenous affairs, Legal Aid, and programs comparable to the Closing the Gap framework. Functions considered include discrete advisory opinions, participation in legislative consultation processes like those used for the Native Title Act 1993 amendments, and monitoring similar to entities such as the Australian Human Rights Commission or the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption in some states.

Political Debate and Public Opinion

Public debate has involved major political parties including the Australian Labor Party, the Liberal Party of Australia, the National Party of Australia, and minor parties like the Australian Greens, as well as media coverage from outlets including ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation), The Sydney Morning Herald, and The Australian. Polling conducted by organisations like Australian National University and research by think tanks such as the Lowy Institute influenced campaign strategies ahead of proposed referendums, with high-profile advocates including Marcia Langton and critics including politicians from the Liberal Party of Australia and National Party of Australia leadership. Historical parallels were drawn to the 1967 Australian referendum and debates over recognition in the 1998 constitutional convention.

Implementation and Case Studies

Pilot and illustrative case studies have been suggested in contexts such as policy areas overseen by the Department of Health for remote Alice Springs communities, heritage matters linked to sites like Uluru and Kakadu National Park, and land management modeled on the Northern Land Council's arrangements. Comparative case studies include engagement mechanisms used by the Assembly of First Nations with the Parliament of Canada, treaty processes under the Te Tiriti o Waitangi in New Zealand, and the role of the Navajo Nation in consultations with the United States Congress.

Impact and Criticisms

Supporters argue potential benefits similar to outcomes sought in the Closing the Gap initiatives, increased input into legislation shaped by bodies like the Attorney-General's Department, and cultural recognition akin to protections under the Native Title Act 1993. Critics raise concerns about constitutional entrenchment debates seen in past referendums, potential duplication with existing institutions such as the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission and state bodies like the New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council, and legal uncertainties highlighted by commentators referencing the High Court of Australia. Some commentators compare contested implementation risks to those experienced in other jurisdictions, citing disputes involving the Assembly of First Nations and federal legislatures in Canada and treaty litigation in New Zealand.

Category:Indigenous Australian politics