One of the leading Indigenous voice architects says he is “shocked” at the misinformation and vitriol unleashed by the referendum, accusing some politicians of being “bald-faced liars” during the campaign.
Prof Tom Calma, a key architect behind a prospective voice to parliament under the Morrison government along with Prof Marcia Langton, told Guardian Australia he did not expect the levels of misinformation, racism and vitriol spreading among social media, prominent no campaigners and others.
“There is so much misinformation out there,” he said. “People think that we’re over-entitled and we’ve receive too much.
“It’s rubbish. It’s very frustrating. And for me, it’s very frustrating when politicians can be bald-faced liars in this whole process.
“I was shocked because we had all of this goodwill being expressed out in the community … then all of a sudden there’s an emergence of the white supremacist groups getting involved … and others having their attitudes.”
Calma made the comments after he and Prof Marcia Langton, along with Ray Lovett, Ian Anderson and Yin Paradies, published an article for the leading international journal the Lancet.
As early voting in the 14 October referendum is already under way and polls are showing an increasingly likely defeat, Calma said such a result would be just another challenge: “Reconciliation won’t be dead, it’ll just be another challenge, and the whole thing is: will it be worth it?”
Calma said he was not contemplating defeat just yet, and that in his travels and discussions with community around the country he believed the yes campaigners could still succeed.
But the human rights and social justice campaigner also said he worried an Australian public might come to regret a vote against an Indigenous voice to parliament.
“I fear we will be doing exactly what the British community did with Brexit after voting to get out of the EU. They realised, ‘this is not what we thought it was,’ and are lamenting the day that they voted no; 60% or so would now vote yes to stay.”
The article also underscores the deeply negative impact the referendum campaign is already having on First Nations people’s wellbeing with a steep rise in threats, abuse, vilification and hate speech targeting Indigenous people.
The authors write that the referendum process taps into “a deep well of historical racism that originated on the Australian frontier when Indigenous peoples were violently dispossessed from their lands by the British”.
“A No vote will have a profoundly negative effect on those in the Indigenous world who have walked a journey of reconciliation with politicians, business leaders, and Australian communities for nearly two decades,” the article says.
But the authors say this will not dampen Indigenous peoples’ push for rights and justice: “No doubt Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples will continue to strive for justice.” The article says even if the yes vote succeeds, Indigenous peoples will need to work closely with parliament and that the advisory body does not “guarantee outcomes”.
The authors rejected no campaigners’ claims that an Indigenous voice to parliament would be “racially divisive” or grant First Nations people special privileges over other Australians.
“This argument is factually incorrect,” they wrote, arguing that an Indigenous advisory body would be similar to groups already set up in diverse trade, economic and statutory roles who advise and advocate to government.
“There are many business bodies, trade unions, and statutory bodies – representing a range of interests across the Australian community – that regularly provide advice to the Government.”
