Indigenous Voice to Parliament

The Indigenous Voice to Parliament referendum held on 14 October 2023 returned a NO decision to amend the constitution to recognise Australia’s First Nations peoples and establish a Voice to advise parliament and the executive on matter affecting them. This site is currently being updated, and as the current content continues to be of interest to our community, we will maintain the site for educational purposes until further notice.

UniSC statement on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament Referendum

Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, culture, knowledge and protocols is enshrined in the Reconciliation Charter of The University of the Sunshine Coast, in harmony with our university’s overall vision of enriching our regions, connecting with our communities and creating opportunities for all. We seek to create systemic and structural changes that make a difference through culturally inclusive learning, teaching, work practices and research. Our Charter is informed by wider debates and developments, including the Uluru Statement from the Heart (2017).

With this commitment to make a difference, UniSC actively supports the forthcoming referendum which will consider amending the Constitution to establish an Indigenous Voice to Parliament, providing a pathway to Treaty and Truth-telling. This is a significant moment for all Australians and one which will generate many different points of view.

Our role as a university is broad, to prepare individuals for life-long careers and to undertake research that addresses society’s challenges, but also to share knowledge for the benefit of our whole community. As a higher education institution that values truth-telling, freedom of expression, learning and thoughtful debate, we are committed to facilitating conversation, discussion and information sharing about the Voice among our staff, students and communities.

We strongly encourage our university community to participate in the referendum, and look forward to bringing together staff, students and community members to engage in thoughtful and respectful conversations on this vitally important issue for Australia.

The University of the Sunshine Coast Council and Executive group.

What is the Uluru Statement from the Heart?

The Uluru Statement from the Heart petition (2017) brought together Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders to consider a path to change the Constitution of Australia to improve the representation of Indigenous Australians.

Read the statement

What is the Voice referendum?

In late 2023, Australians will vote in a referendum about whether to change the Australian Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to parliament.

The Voice would be an independent and permanent advisory body. It would give advice to the Australian Parliament and Government on matters that affect the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Subject to parliament’s approval, the referendum ballot paper will ask for a yes or no vote to this question:

“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?”

Constitutional amendment

The proposed law that Australians are being asked to approve at the referendum would insert the following lines into the Constitution:

“Chapter IX Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples

129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice

In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia:

there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice;
the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples;
the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.”

The Yes and No cases pamphlet

The Australian Electoral Commission is required to distribute the Yes and No cases that have been prepared by parliamentarians in a pamphlet to Australian voters.

Read them here

Disinformation Register - the Referendum process

The AEC has compiled a register listing prominent pieces of disinfomation it has discovered about the referendum on the Voice to Parliament.

The AEC is not responsible for fact-checking claims about the Yes or No case for a referendum, and does not seek to censor debate in any way. However, when it comes to the referendum process, the AEC are the experts and they’re active in defending Australia’s democracy.

You can read the register here

Professor Megan Davis keynote address

Professor Megan Davis is Pro-Vice-Chancellor Indigenous at University of New South Wales, professor of law and one of the chief architects of the Uluru Statement from the Heart. Her keynote address to the 2023 Universities Australia conference said, “As leading centres of learning and scholarship, universities are uniquely placed to educate our communities in relation to important social and political issues.”

The Voice: Frequently Asked Questions

Associate Professor Alex Pelizzon and Professor Jay Sanderson, Dean School of Law and Society, have compiled this list of frequently asked questions and answers about the Voice to Parliament Referendum.

What is the Voice to Parliament? The Voice, a group of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representatives, will provide advice to the Government on matters affecting Indigenous Australians. The Voice will be chosen by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

What is the proposed referendum question on the Voice? The referendum question will be: “a Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Voice”. Do you approve this proposed alteration?

What is a referendum? A referendum is a system required by section 128 of the Australian Constitution to change any part of the Australian Constitution. This means that any proposed amendment to the Constitution, be it the introduction, removal or alteration of any word or phrase (or even punctuation!), requires a referendum. The proposed change must be presented to all Australian citizens prior to the referendum, and the referendum then requires a single yes/no answer to the proposed change. Referendums are different from plebiscites: non-binding direct votes to decide a question of public importance.

Is voting in the referendum compulsory? Yes, referendums are compulsory, just like every federal election.

How many referendums have there been? There have only been 44 referendums in Australia since Federation (that is, since 1901). Only 8 of those were ever successful. The last referendum held in Australia was in 1999.

How does a referendum work? Section 128 of the Australian Constitution states that a referendum requires the following: <ol> <li>First, a Bill with the proposed change must be passed by both Federal Houses of Parliament (the House of Representatives and the Senate) in identical form</li> <li>Then, a referendum must be submitted to all electors qualified to vote no less than two months and no more than six months after the passage of the Bill</li> <li>To succeed, the referendum requires both a majority of votes overall in Australia and a majority of votes in a majority of the States (that is, a majority of votes in at least four States)</li> </ol> Referendums are binding, and the Federal Parliament must act in accordance with the choice of the voters.

What is the Voice to Parliament referendum? The Federal Parliament passed the Constitution Alteration Bill on Monday 19 June 2023. The Bill proposes the alteration of the Australian Constitution by including a new section, section 129 (contained in a new, stand-alone Chapter, Chapter 9). The proposed section 129 reads as follows: 129 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice In recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the First Peoples of Australia: <ol> <li>there shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice;</li> <li>the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples;</li> <li>the Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to matters relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.</li> </ol> Australian citizens are invited to answer yes or no to whether they would like this change to the Constitution to occur.

Why is there a proposed Voice to Parliament? The Australian Constitution is currently silent on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. At the State level, four of the states have legislated to expressly recognise Aboriginal people in their Constitutions: s 2 of the Constitution Act 1902 (NSW); preamble to the Constitution of Queensland 2001 (Qld); s 2 of the Constitution Act 1934 (SA); and s 1A of the Constitution Act 1975 (Vic). Demands to include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Federal Constitution started in the 1920s, with Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association (AAPA). AAPA was formed in Sydney in 1924, led Fred Maynard. The association called for: <ul> <li>a national land rights agenda</li> <li>protecting Aboriginal children from being taken from their families</li> <li>a call for genuine Aboriginal self-determination</li> <li>citizenship</li> <li>defending a distinct Aboriginal cultural identity</li> <li>and the insistence Aboriginal people be placed in charge of Aboriginal affairs.</li> </ul> At the second conference held in Kempsey, New South Wales, in 1925, the press coverage of the conference noted that "pleas were entered for direct representation in parliament." Two years later in 1927, the Association produced a manifesto, in which one of the significant points was for an Aboriginal board to be established under the Commonwealth government, and for state control over Aboriginal lives be abolished. It envisioned: The control of Aboriginal affairs, apart from common law rights shall be vested in a board of management comprised of capable educated Aboriginals under a chairman to be appointed by the government. AAPA was forcibly disbanded not long thereafter, and the call was not picked up any further. In 1933, Yorta Yorta man William Cooper petitioned King George V, demanding for a member of parliament, of our own blood or white men known to have studied our needs and to be in sympathy with our race, to represent us in the Federal Parliament. 70 years later, the proposed preamble that went along the republican proposal in 1999 included the phrase ‘honouring Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders, the nation’s first people, for their deep kinship with their lands and for their ancient and continuing cultures which enrich the life of our country.’ In 2007, then Prime Minister John Howard announced that his government was committed to holding a referendum on constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (a successful referendum would have seen a “Statement of Reconciliation” incorporated into the Constitution). In 2010, the Gillard Government appointed an Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians to report on ways of achieving recognition. The panel provided a set of recommendations, but the matter did not advance any further. The panel recommended: <ul> <li>The abolition of ss 25 and 51(xxvi)</li> <li>The inclusion of a proposed new ss 51A (giving the power to the Commonwealth Parliament to make laws with respect to ATSI peoples),</li> <li>The inclusion of a proposed s116A (prohibition of racial discrimination, unless for the purpose of overcoming disadvantage or protecting culture</li> <li>The inclusion of a proposed s127A in recognition of original languages</li> </ul> The matter then stagnated. In 2013 Parliament passed the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples Recognition Act 2013 (Cth), which recognized the first occupation of Australia by the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (s 3(1)), their continuing relationship with traditional lands and waters (s 2(2)) and their continuing cultures, language and heritage (s 2(3)) In 2015, the Turnbull Government appointed a Referendum Council to advise on the next steps towards a referendum to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Australian Constitution. The Council organized 12 First Nations Regional Dialogues, culminating in a First Nations Convention held near Uluru in May 2017. During the discussion, many of the proposed amendments to the Constitution were abandoned, with the Convention instead releasing a document called the Uluru Statement from the Heart, which we will discuss more in depth shortly. Although he set the process in motion, Prime Minister Turnbull categorically rejected the recommendations of the Uluru Statement. In 2017, the First Nations Convention released a document called the Uluru Statement from the Heart, which recommended two things: <ul> <li>a First Nations Voice to Parliament, and</li> <li>a Makarrata Commission to supervise a process of agreement-making and truth-telling (a Makarrata is a Yolngu word meaning ‘the coming together after a struggle’)</li> </ul> Makarrata is the coming together after a struggle. The first meaning of the Yolngu word is that of peace after a dispute. According to Gumatj woman Merrikiyawuy Ganambarr-Stubbs, a Makarrata literally means a spear penetrating, usually the thigh, of a person that has done wrong… so that they cannot hunt anymore, that they cannot walk properly, that they cannot run properly; to maim them, to settle them down, to calm them — that's Makarrata." Another additional meaning is that of a negotiation of peace, or a negotiation and an agreement where both parties agree to one thing so that there is no further dispute and or no bad feeling. In July 2017, the now disbanded Referendum Council delivered its report to the Prime Minister. In addition, the Council recommended a provision against adverse discrimination and the passage of a declaration of recognition by all Australian Parliaments. However, in response, the Turnbull government rejected the recommendation for constitutional inclusion of an indigenous Voice on the basis that this would constitute a third chamber, a claim refuted by the members of the Council. In 2021, the Morrison government’s co-design process in relation to the design of a Voice delivered a report on the design of a non-constitutional Voice. Immediately after winning the election in 2022, the Albanese Government committed to organise a constitutional referendum to enshrine a Voice to Parliament in the Constitution.

Would a Voice to Parliament constitute another chamber of Parliament? No, the Voice to Parliament would not constitute another chamber of Parliament and would have no law-making power.

Would a Voice to Parliament have the power to veto or influence the decisions of Parliament? No, the Voice to Parliament would have no power of veto, nor the power to influence any decision by the Federal Parliament. Parliament remains the only decision-making power according to the Australian Constitution. A Voice to Parliament would only be able to provide advice to Parliament.

Would Parliament have to follow the advice of a Voice to Parliament? No, Parliament maintains what Constitutional lawyers call Parliamentary sovereignty. In other words, Parliament remains the only arm of government that has the power to make laws, and that power would remain unchanged and complete.

Will there be endless High Court challenges as a result of a Voice to Parliament? No, the representations made by a Voice to Parliament would not be binding and would not create substantive rights that can be invoked in a court. Constitutional lawyers, a special Constitutional Expert Group appointed by the Albanese Government and the Federal Solicitor-General have all confirmed that a Voice to Parliament would not lead to endless High Court challenges.

Does a Voice to Parliament give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples special rights? No, the introduction of a Voice to Parliament would not give Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples special rights not ordinarily available to others.

Does a Voice to Parliament take away the rights of non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians? No, the rights of all Australian citizens remain unchanged.

Why have an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament? Firstly, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have lived on these lands since time immemorial. Secondly, even though Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have lived in Australia since time immemorial, the Australian Constitution is completely silent about them. Thirdly, of all peoples now sharing the continent of Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have been historically and routinely singled out for detrimental treatment under the Constitution. This has resulted in many additional hardships and disadvantages. Fourthly, the introduction of a Voice to Parliament would help to close the current gap between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the rest of Australia.

What is the gap between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the rest of Australia? As recently as 2010-12, the average life expectancy of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples was approximately ten years (10.6 years for men and 9.5 years for women) less than that of non-Indigenous Australians. Leading causes of death included heart disease, diabetes, respiratory disease and cancer. All those causes have been identified as the direct result of over two hundred years of colonial policies. Just over half (52.2 per cent) of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people aged between 15 and 64 years were unemployed in 2012-2013, compared with 24.4 per cent of non-Indigenous Australians. 20 per cent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women experienced physical violence in the previous 12 months, compared to 7 per cent of non-Indigenous women. Over the same period, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women (12 per cent) were three times more likely to experience sexual violence than non-Indigenous women (4 per cent). In 2008, half of all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people aged 15 years and over had some form of disability. In non-remote areas, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were one-and-a-half times more likely than non-Indigenous adults to have a disability or a long-term health condition. Around one in twelve Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults are part of the Stolen Generations. In 2008, 8 per cent (26,900) of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples aged 15 years and over stated that they had been removed from their natural family. 35 per cent assessed their health as fair or poor and 39 per cent experienced high or very high levels of psychological distress. The national imprisonment rate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults is 15 times higher than that for non-Indigenous adults. In the December quarter of 2013, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people comprised 28 per cent of Australia’s full-time adult prison population. There were approximately between 250 and 500 Australian Indigenous languages spoken at the time of colonisation. However, a 2005 survey found that only 145 Indigenous languages are still spoken to some degree and less than 20 are considered to be ‘strong’ and able to be spoken by all generations.

Why does a Voice to Parliament need to be enshrined in the Constitution? There have been previous bodies with a similar function to that proposed by the Voice to Parliament referendum, but since they were not enshrined in the Constitution, they could be (and were) removed by the government of the time. The rigorous process of changing the Constitution means that anything that is included in the Constitution is likely to be far more stable. An Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament would mean two things: <ol> <li>That Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples would be recognised in the Australian Constitution. At present, the silence of the Constitution suggests that Australia did not have a history prior to British colonisation.</li> <li>That Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples would be able to provide advice on all policies, programs and services that affect them, leading to better outcomes for both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and for Australia as a nation.</li> </ol>

Would including a Voice to Parliament in the Australian Constitution mean Treaty? No, the Voice to Parliament proposed change does not contain anything more than what it proposes: an advisory body to Federal Parliament on all matters concerning Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Why is there so much confusion and misinformation going around? All Federal Constitutional changes require a referendum in the form prescribed by section 128 of the Australian Constitution. This means that the time required to circulate all relevant information ahead of the vote must occur within six months from the passing of the Bill. Over such a short period of time, conservative and fear-mongering campaigns have an advantage over clear information. The Australian Electoral Commission (‘AEC’) must distribute the Yes and No cases as they have been authorised by the Yes and No Parliamentary committees. The AEC cannot verify or correct any of the content of the cases as they have been submitted. As a result, such information must be circulated as it is, even though potentially incorrect or even misleading.

What do the YES and NO pamphlets prepared by the Parliamentary committee and circulated by the AEC say? The YES pamphlet outlines three main reasons to vote for the Voice: <ul> <li>Recognitionof Indigenous Australians in the constitution and paying respect to 65,000 years of culture and tradition</li> <li>Listeningto Indigenous people's advice on matters that impact them, to improve government decision-making</li> <li>Better resultsin Indigenous health, education, employment, and housing.</li> </ul> The NO pamphlet outlines four main reasons to vote against the Voice, saying it would be: <ul> <li>Risky, because "no issue is beyond its reach" and </li> <li>Unknown, because Australians have not been provided sufficient detail;</li> <li>Divisive, because it would add race to the constitution</li> <li>Permanent, because it could not be revoked except through another referendum.</li> </ul> It also repeats claims that the Voice could spark a wave of litigation in the High Court, an argument rebuked by Solicitor-General Stephen Donaghue in April.

Does the referendum need 51% of votes to be successful? <ul> <li>50% + 1 of votes overall in Australia (including voters in all States and Territories), AND</li> <li>50% + 1 of votes in a majority of States: that is, 50% + 1 of votes in each of at least four States</li> </ul>

Past events

View all 2023 Voice events <h5 style="text-align: left;">Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice: A dialogue for students</h5> UniSC in partnership with ANU Wednesday 2 August 5pm Online and in person at Sunshine Coast and Moreton Bay campuses. Hosted by The Australian National University (ANU) together with partner universities from across Australia, this special livestreamed event will connect students from across Australia for an in-depth dialogue, covering diverse perspectives regarding the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice Referendum. The main in-person event will be held on Ngambri and Ngunnawal land in Llewellyn Hall at ANU in Canberra, in front of an audience of local students and members of the general public, and will be livestreamed to university campuses and online. The panel will be moderated by Professor Mark Kenny and includes: • Senator Jana Stewart, Labor Senator for Victoria • Senator Andrew Bragg, Liberal Senator for NSW • Dean Parkin - Director, From the Heart • Sally Scales - Partnership Manager, Uluru Statement from the Heart • Professor Megan Davis, Pro Vice-Chancellor Indigenous UNSW and Co-Chair Uluru Statement from the Heart • Further speakers to be confirmed. The Dialogue is a unique and important opportunity to hear from our national student body as our nation prepares for one of the most crucial referendums in our history. The livestream will be available <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nchqtgaiWEE" data-anchor="?v=nchqtgaiWEE">here</a> <hr /> <h5 style="text-align: left;">UniSC Law and Society School seminar series</h5> Three UniSC Law and Society School seminars on contemporary issues arising from the Uluru Statement from the Heart will be delivered by Uncle, Adjunct. Professor, Kevin Williams. Uncle Kevin is a Wakka Wakka Elder and Law academic. These seminars will explore how these issues are important to Indigenous, and all Australia. With reference to both historical and contemporary matters. What can we learn from overseas examples of these processes? What is happening in Australia and particularly Queensland? Seminar One "The Voice to Parliament" Wednesday 2 August, 4 pm LT1, Building K, UniSC Sunshine Coast Watch the recording of the seminar: <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/T9ghqiO7_co" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> Seminar Two "Makarrata, Truth telling" Wednesday 30 August, 4 pm LT1, Building K, UniSC Sunshine Coast <hr /> <h5 style="text-align: left;">The Voice, Your Choice: UniSC Conversations</h5> In a few months, Australians will vote in a national referendum to change the Australian Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament. To help you prepare to engage with this historical moment, UniSC students and staff are invited to a special conversation with fellow members of the UniSC community to explore the Voice Referendum question, and learn more about the process and its impacts. Presented by our School of Law and Society and Indigenous Services, this event included a panel featuring: <ul> <li style="text-align: left;">Adjunct Professor Kevin Williams, Resident Elder and Wakka Wakka/Gunggari man</li> <li style="text-align: left;">Associate Professor Alex Pelizzon, lecturer in Law and researcher in legal anthropology, sovereignty, and Indigenous rights</li> <li style="text-align: left;">Jerome Wano, UniSC student and Wakka Wakka Tūwharetoa man. Jerome is in his final year of a Bachelor of Animal Ecology</li> <li style="text-align: left;"> Sara Frazer – Nguigi woman from Quandamooka Nation and kunju from the Thipan people. Outreach and Engagement Officer for Indigenous Services and current UniSC student. </li> </ul> Moreton Bay Wednesday 30 August 2023 9.30am– 11.30am MB.A.G.15 Sunshine Coast Tuesday 5 September 2023 Morning Session 10am–12pm Afternoon Session 1pm–2.30pm Brasserie Lawn <hr /> <h5>Fraser Coast Chomp and Chat event</h5> Wednesday 13 September (11:30am-12:30pm) The Dean of the School of Law and Society, Professor Jay Sanderson, joined UniSC Fraser Coast’s regular “Chomp and Chat” to answer questions about the upcoming referendum. Questions included: What is the Voice to Parliament? What is a referendum? Is voting in the referendum compulsory? How does a referendum work? <hr /> <h5 style="text-align: left;">School of Law and Society Seminar series</h5> These seminars will explore how these issues are important to Indigenous, and all Australia. With reference to both historical and contemporary matters. What can we learn from overseas examples of these processes? What is happening in Australia and particularly Queensland? Seminar Three, "Treaty" Wednesday 4 October, 4 pm LT1, Building K, UniSC Sunshine Coast <a href="https://usc-au.zoom.us/j/84396526055">Join the "Treaty" seminar via Zoom</a> <hr /> <h5 style="text-align: left;">The Voice, Your Choice: UniSC Conversations</h5> In a few months, Australians will vote in a national referendum to change the Australian Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament. To help you prepare to engage with this historical moment, UniSC students and staff are invited to a special conversation with fellow members of the UniSC community to explore the Voice Referendum question, and learn more about the process and its impacts. <h6 style="text-align: left;">The Voice, your choice II: going international; checking in with social media and youthful thoughts</h6> Thursday 5 October 12-1 pm Lecture Theatre 3 by the Brassiere Bring your lunch and join us for another interesting conversation Come and meet Professor Anthony Fraser, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Engagement and Strategy who will chair a panel of academics researching in areas of International Relations and Social Media and will discuss The Voice from those perspectives. Speakers: The Voice – thinking about The Voice and international relations Dr Stefanie Fishel – Lectures and researches in International Relations theory and Political Ecology. Stefanie's research interests include the gendered and racialised experiences of environmental harm to create social justice regimes that are sensitive and responsive to the needs of humans and the more than human. She uses philosophy, critical legal theory, new materialism, and science and technology studies to engage with global environmental theory and law focused on climate change, biodiversity, and the Anthropocene. She extends her theoretical research into norms and institutions with her work on multispecies justice and local responses to deforestation, habitat fragmentation, and species protection. She is committed to fighting for a fairer and more just world for all beings. The Voice – thinking about The Voice and social media’s role in our values, beliefs and understandings Dr Naomi Smith – is a digital sociologist working across a variety of areas. Her research focuses on how web-based technologies are part of our social world and are intertwined with our lived experience. Her current research projects investigate the implications of conspiracy and misinformation on social media. The Voice – thinking about The Voice through an Indigenous youth lens Denika Sticklen – walking in two worlds is a reality of everyday for this talented woman. Let’s hear her story and reflections on the Voice questions. <hr />

From 'The Voice, Your Choice' event at UniSC Sunshine Coast

Voice conversations

Opinion pieces and feature articles on the Voice and the referendum will be posted here throughout the year.

Professor Kevin Williams

The Voice, where to now?
When what has become known as The Voice (the Voice to Parliament) first started to get traction in the media after the Albanese Labor government was elected on 21 May 2022, I couldn’t get out of my head John Farnham’s iconic anthem The Voice, “you’re the voice, try and understand it.”

News

Evidence the oral stories of Australia’s First Nations might be 10,000 years old

Stories from Australia's First Nations tell of a time when the islands and reefs that dot the coastline were connected to the mainland. By analysing ancient sea levels, Professor Patrick Nunn believes we can demonstrate these stories have been passed down for more than 10,000 years.

Get updates about events

Could not render component of type: BlockElement_umbraco_form_picker
This likely happened because the partial view blockgrid/Components/BlockElement_umbraco_form_picker could not be found.

Indigenous Voice to Parliament | UniSC | University of the Sunshine Coast, Queensland, Australia

Search

News

Staff

Indigenous Voice to Parliament

UniSC statement on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament Referendum