Independent candidate Alex Dyson says The Voice passes the test

A new Prime Minister, giddy from a victory, launches into a nation-changing initiative in the midst of a cost of living crisis, without getting his ducks in a row.

A conniving opposition - sensing an opportunity - decides to abandon their bipartisan position of First Nations recognition and instead launch an emotive campaign based almost entirely on remaining ignorant.

Chris Kenny revealed on Sky News that he was told by Liberal MPs - to his face - that the Coalition's decision was based not on doing the right thing by the country, but specifically aimed at hurting the Albanese Government and "turning their [own] fortunes around". I'm inclined to believe him.

Betraying a generation of our community's most vulnerable people for short-term political gain seems extremely on-brand for the type of people we usually get stuck with in Canberra.

But where does that leave us? The fuse has been lit. We all have to walk into the booths on October 14 and write Yes or No. A decision that will resonate for the rest of Australian history.

And all during a period when one campaign appears to be running on heart and compassion without sufficiently addressing some legitimate concerns while the other campaign appears to have a knack for judging public sentiment but can't provide details of their alternative and seem to harbour a sinister, self-serving agenda.

Well, the one thing that all Australians can unite around is that the hundreds of First Nations Australians who made up the Uluru Dialogues, Saw. This. Coming. After all, who would have more reason not to trust the Australian Government than our Indigenous community?

It's one of the main reasons we are specifically having a referendum in the first place.

Because the thorough, six year, self-determined consultation process came to the valid conclusion at Uluru that recognition via a Voice in the Constitution is the only way to future proof their community from successive governments ignoring the valuable insights they have.

And that's exactly why, instead of asking politicians for a Voice, they're asking us, their fellow Australians, to ensure their people's voices are heard in Canberra, regardless of which people or party are in power at the time.

It's something I'd desperately love to help them achieve as well. After all, we all see there's a problem and all want to do something about it. But I'm not naive enough to believe a constitutional alteration can be made purely on sunshine and lollipops.

You need to be able to back it up with good policy. And somewhat ironically, alongside "Not Trusting Politicians", three more of the No campaign's biggest talking points are exactly the reason I'll be voting Yes on October 14.

Yes, I don't want us to be divided. Unfortunately, our nation is already divided. One group has a life expectancy which sits a full 10 years shorter than the other.

One group make up 3 per cent of the nation's population but 32 per cent of its prison population. And Indigenous Australians finish year 12 at a rate of 49 per cent, compared to 67 per cent for the rest of us.

Something needs to be done about this divide, and voting No will only ensure any action to unite our nation - to close this gap - will be delayed indefinitely.

I don't think I have the right to deny First Nations peoples' attempts to bridge this societal chasm just because I, as a non-indigenous Australian, fall on the beneficial side of these awful statistics.

Yes, I don't want taxpayer money wasted. I haven't seen a single Indigenous Australian asking for more government help. They want better government help.

And studies show that better outcomes are achieved through consultation with the people who are affected. The actual savings for us when these better policies begin to work and money stops going down the drain, incarceration rates drop, and education rates improve, will certainly help our economy in the long run.

Yes, there's no detail. The wording we are voting on putting in our constitution is extremely broad. And thank goodness for that. We don't know exactly how many people will be on the Voice, who they will be, or how it will function, other than it will consist of First Nations Australians, be purely advisory, and have no veto power.

The general nature of the wording is so critical, because if we did lock these details into the constitution, we would be stuck with them, even if the Voice wasn't working.

The government of the day can make laws on how the Voice functions whenever they like. This referendum simply ensures that they have to have a Voice, and if we don't like the way the government of the day implements it, we can vote them out as per usual.

The wording has been vetted by multiple judges meaning it has no implications for other issues such as treaties or land rights, which means any future decisions on those separate issues can be accepted or rejected by the public/governments on their own merit.

With these concerns addressed, The Voice passes all the tests for me. It's an idea born from First Nations communities, one that will transcend both sides of politics, and most importantly it will uphold the spirit behind the main reason I was annoyed enough to run for federal parliament in the first place: Because politicians just don't listen to the people they're supposed to try to help.

The wording in the referendum proposal is clear: the Voice may only make representations on issues that affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Growing up in Warrnambool, Framlingham was a place that was always referenced but I had never visited until now.

So to be able to meet and listen to the views of the only members in our community who will be truly affected by this proposed Voice will be a great learning experience. I must say, I hope our local MP's decide to visit as well. Because if politicians don't know, they should find out.

IN OTHER LOCAL NEWS:

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can access our trusted content: