Voice to Parliament: the official 'yes' and 'no' cases to swing your vote and fill you in

The "yes" side is pitching to "unite our nation" and "do the right thing" by Indigenous Australians while the "no" side is sending out 10 reasons, summed up as, "if you don't know, vote no."

The finalised lengthy arguments by federal politicians, both for and against a constitutionally enshrined Indigenous advisory body, is being published online on Tuesday "exactly as they have been received" by the Australian Electoral Commission ahead of a massive mail out of 12.5 million copies of the official translated referendum pamphlet.

Voters are required to receive the pamphlet two weeks before referendum day, which is widely expected in mid-October.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has revealed he is not inclined to reveal the date at the upcoming Garma Festival at Arnhem Land in the Northern Territory.

"There needs to be at least 33 days notice of the referendum campaign. But there certainly doesn't need to be that very long campaign. And once the date is announced, then it will be the campaign on in earnest," he told Sky News Australia.

"I don't think that Australians appreciate very long campaigns. That's been the case in the past. So I don't envisage at this time announcing a date at Garma.

"We are having a vote. That is what Indigenous Australians have asked for. And we're having a crack here."

READ MORE

Both sides insist they have very strong cases. The "no" case progresses arguments based on doubt and some which have been dealt with including the proposition of legal risk, as the government released supporting advice from the Solicitor-General making it clear the Voice is legally sound.

The "yes" case comes in at 1971 words and has an eight-point list outlining that the Voice idea came from Indigenous people, it will bring our country together and it will save money.

"When governments listen to people, they get better outcomes and use funding more effectively," the "yes" case states.

The Voice "yes" case adds the endorsement of Indigenous sporting legends Evonne Goolagong Cawley and Johnathan Thurston and offers the proposition to voters as being about recognition, listening and getting better results for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

"Voting 'no' means nothing will change. It means accepting we can't do better," the "yes" case states.

"We can vote 'yes' to be part of a great unifying moment that will bring about a better future.

"We can vote 'yes' to do the right thing by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, give people a say on issues that affect them and make a practical difference that improves lives."

The "no" case warns of division, lack of details and permanency, while raising the question: "what comes next?"

The "no" essay comes in at 1913 words and issues 10 reasons to vote "no".

The list says, in all caps, "no issue is beyond its scope", "it will be costly and bureaucratic" and "there are better ways forward".

It describes the Voice as a "leap into the unknown" and warns that "once it is in the constitution it won't be undone."

"Recognition has the widespread support of Australians. However, this Voice proposal is the problem," the "no" case states. "There are many Australians who oppose a Voice on principle."

"If you don't know, vote no."

The official essays arrive amid further indication of falling Voice support. The latest Newspoll shows support for the proposition dropping to 41 per cent, while 48 per cent of voters indicated a "no" vote and 11 per cent were unsure. Regional support fell to just 31 per cent, a result even more perilous for the Voice than the recent ACM Readers' Survey which found the regional "yes" vote shrinking to 35 per cent.

The two sides have been coordinated by members of Parliament who voted yes or no in the parliament to the constitutional alteration bill.

The opposition's Indigenous Affairs spokeswoman Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and Queensland LNP Senator Paul Scarr were Chair and Deputy Chair of the official No case. Crossbenchers who voted "yes" to the referendum bill were offered briefings, led by Indigenous Australians Minister Linda Burney and Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus. The "yes" side also included Liberal MPs Bridget Archer and Julian Leeser.

READ MORE:

The Prime Minister said the "yes" side puts the case for why we need to do things better and differently.

"The Voice is just the means to the end. The end is closing the gap, making a difference to the lives of Indigenous Australians. And it is a very strong and powerful case that is put forward," he said.

Senator Scarr claimed the "no" case was very strong, simple and persuasive.

"It reflects the arguments which have been made repeatedly by members of the Coalition against changing our constitution - the division, legal risk, lack of details and permanency. Both matters of principle and practical issues are covered. They are very strong arguments."

The AEC plans to translate the pamphlet into more than 35 culturally and linguistically diverse languages, plus 20 traditional Indigenous languages.