One of the architects of the Uluru statement has said while pro-Voice supporters might be the “underdogs” on the first day of the official Voice referendum campaign, the “goodwill” of Australians would push Yes over the line on October 14.
Professor Megan Davis, speaking after the Yes campaign’s launch in the northern Adelaide suburb of Elizabeth on Wednesday, promised an “upbeat” and “positive” campaign that would tell Australians how a Voice would deliver tangible improvements to the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
“It really is a tale of Two Australias,” she told NCA NewsWire.
“A Yes vote is change in an area where all Australians feel change is needed.
“The status quo isn’t working. The Uluru statement and First Nations people provided a positive, optimistic and forward-looking map for the nation.
“And No is just an endorsement of the status quo … it really is quite a stark choice at the ballot box.”
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, launching the campaign before a packed room of supporters at the Playford Civic Centre, called on supporters to “sprint” to the October 14 finish line.
“With your energy and enthusiasm, this referendum can be won,” he said.
“And when Yes wins, all Australians will win.”
The Yes and No camps will marshall thousands of volunteer supporters to knock on doors, hand out flyers and talk to Australians to try to persuade them to vote their way over the next six weeks.
An advertising blitz is also expected to wash over the country.
South Australian Yes activist and AFL executive, Tanya Hosch, said the Yes campaign now had 35,000 volunteers ready to go to work.
Professor Davis said the Yes campaign would emphasise the unacceptability of the “status quo” over the six weeks.
“The fundamental message to Australians who are undecided or thinking of voting No, is they can see, like First Nations peoples (can), that nothing is working in this space and hasn’t for a very long time,” she said.
“The status quo is not working.”
Professor Davis also said Yes supporters would argue First Nations peoples had struggled to secure a say in how they are governed, which would change with a Voice to parliament.
“Part of the reason for the Voice is that First Nations communities are saying they do not get to give input into the laws and policies that apply to their communities,” she said.
“Australians do grapple with that, because it sounds far fetched, but it is true, and we know that from multiple reports and multiple processes.
“There are a lot of people who speak on behalf of communities, but there is not any mechanism for communities to speak for themselves.”
The Voice proposal would reconfigure Australia’s Constitution to embed a permanent Indigenous-led advisory body, which may make representations to the parliament and executive government on matters affecting Indigenous Australians.
Prof Davis said it was a “modest” change in keeping with Australia’s legal and political temperament.
“For small groups like First Nations peoples, it is very hard to impact the ballot box in a way that your interests are taking into account by the government of the day or the parliament,” she said.
“So there are many countries of the world who do things like a Voice to parliament to ensure Indigenous populations do have an adequate say about laws and policies that are made about their lives.
“It’s a very small amendment to the Australian constitution that is going to garner really significant gains. I think that is an important point to make as people go to the ballot box.”
Prof Davis said the emotional power of the Yes argument lay in how it would bring recognition to Indigenous Australians who had suffered through years of racial discrimination.
“Our men and women who grew up in reserves and missions, they are full of great emotion and anticipation because a big part of Australia’s rule of law was the subjugation of so many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people,” she said.
“So for them, this vote means everything to them.
“They grew up not being recognised and very expressly discriminated against through Australian laws.
“For them to be recognised and their experience to be recognised and their culture to be recognised, is a really powerful thing.”
But the referendum outcome looks set to be a close one, with opinion polls suggesting support has flagged in recent weeks.
South Australia is expected to be a key battleground and recent opinion polls have earmarked the state, along with Tasmania, for a tight race.
A survey of 605 South Australians by think tank The Australia Institute suggested the Yes vote now had the upper hand in the state, 43 per cent to 39 per cent.
One in five South Australians (18 per cent) remain undecided.
Meanwhile, separate polling from the Institute of Public Affairs suggested Tasmania was leaning towards a No vote.
The survey of 1156 Tasmanians found 53 per cent were inclined to vote no, with just 42 per cent in support. Five per cent said they were undecided.
For the referendum to succeed, the Yes campaign needs to win four states and the national result to achieve a double majority.
Prof Davis criticised the No camp for what she called “Trumpian-style” tactics.
“I think the one thing we were not expecting (in the campaign) was the deluge of disinformation and misinformation,” she said.
“Engaging of American companies, Trumpian-style campaigning and Trumpian misinformation and disinformation, it is disappointing that those techniques have now arrived on our shores.
“We’ve had an avalanche of misinformation and a lot of racism rain down upon our communities, but we know Australia is not like that.”
The Voice is Australia’s first referendum since 1999 when people were asked to consider if the nation should become a republic. The last successful referendum occurred in 1977.
The Australian Electoral Commission has distributed pamphlets from both camps outlining the arguments for or against a Voice.
The No camp is being led by Country Liberal Party senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and Indigenous advocate Nyunggai Warren Mundine under the Fair Australia banner.