Everything you need to know about the Voice to Parliament

Eventually, it will come down to a 'yes or no' question. The voter, a pencil, and a ballot slip.

The success of the referendum, which passed the Senate on June 19, would enshrine the proposed Voice in the Australian Constitution, formally recognising the nation's Indigenous history.

So, what is the Voice to Parliament? What will it mean? And how will it affect the people of Bendigo?

Here's what we know so far.

Reader survey: Yes or no? How will you vote on the Voice

In a nutshell, the Voice to Parliament will be an independent, advisory body providing guidance to parliament on the issues directly facing Indigenous Australians.

The Voice was a key campaign promise from Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who used his first elected speech to reinforce his commitment to the referendum.

It was recommended in 2017 as part of Uluru Statement from the Heart by 250 Indigenous delegates, tasked by the then-Morrison government to advise on how First Nations people could be acknowledged in the Australian Constitution.

Greater Bendigo City Council, at its June 26 meeting, will consider a report recommending it supports a Voice, highlighting the referendum's alignment with council's own Yilingga Marna recognition agreement with Dja Dja Wurrung Clans Aboriginal Corporation (DJAARA).

Should the report be supported, council has committed to "sharing clear, unbiased information of the Voice to Parliament", in an effort to support residents with their decision making.

If accepted, the Voice would be the first time Indigenous Australians were recognised in the constitution as the first people of this land.

Advocates say the proposed change would allow First Nations people to actively participate in the decision-making on policies that impact their lives.

More news: Supermarket staff victim of armed robbery calls crime a 'disgrace'

For Bendigo, Djaara CEO Rodney Carter, speaking during Reconciliation Week 2023, said he liked to keep it simple when it comes to the Voice.

"My people just want to have a greater say," Mr Carter said.

He said the Voice would present a medium for First Nations people to contribute without changing the architecture of governance in Australia, remedying the feeling many First Nations people feel "they can't get a word in".

"People who talk conspiracy theories, or say it's not good enough, they're stuck in a negative space," Mr Carter said.

"They don't see the advantage of what it will actually bring.

"It's an addition, not a subtraction."

But not everybody agrees.

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton and the majority of his Coalition MPs have officially joined the "no" camp.

Mr Dutton said while his party supported constitutional recognition of First Nations people, the proposed Voice would "re-racialise" the nation.

"It should be very clear to Australians by now that the prime minister is dividing the country and the Liberal Party seeks to unite the country," he said in April.

Mr Dutton's stance has seen the party shed a notable frontbencher earlier this year, with Liberal MP Julian Leeser, who held the shadow attorney general and Indigenous Australians portfolios, joining the backbench to actively campaign for the ''yes'' vote.

But its not only the Coalition voting "no", with the referendum creating a rarely seen alliance between conservatives and progressives.

Independent senator Lidia Thorpe said the Blak sovereign movement takes the position, "no to the referendum, and no to the Voice".

"This is about asserting our sovereign status in this country and the fact that we don't accept any colonial mechanism that continues to control us, and that is what the Voice is ultimately a part of," Senator Thorpe said on June 20.

"(The Voice) is part of a colonial system that will continue to oppress us. It has no power, it will be controlled by parliament.

"We don't accept that. That is not good enough."

Opponents of the Voice say, where a Voice is advisory only, a treaty would give First Nations people more power in law making and governance over traditional lands.

More news: Two Bendigo parents face court over Facebook post breaches

From the start, advocates have made it clear a Voice will not have the power to pass laws or veto policy.

Instead, it will act as a pipeline for the issues facing Indigenous Australians to then be discussed in parliament.

Mr Albanese has proposed three clauses to be added to the constitution, these are:

"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."

Widri man and Referendum Working Group member Tony McAvoy KC has also outlined the principles of the Voice:

We won't know exactly the structure of the proposed advisory body until it's decided by parliament, with members to be voted by First Nations people.

Now that the bill has passed the Senate, we can expect the vote to be held within the next two to six months.

Voting day will look a lot like a general election. Let's hope there is democracy sausages.

It will be compulsory for all eligible Australians to vote. If passed, it will be only the ninth "yes" vote of 45 referendums held since the constitution was adopted in 1901.

MORE NEWS:

Digital subscribers now have the convenience of faster news, right at your fingertips with the Bendigo Advertiser app. Click here to download.