Skip to main content

What is the Status of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice Process: The Decision End Point or a Decision-Making Aid? A Conflict Management Perspective

         Divergent public opinion and controversy has arisen in Australia over a referendum the Federal Government intends to hold later this year.

Specifically, that an advisory body known as the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice (“the Voice”) may make representations to Parliament and the Executive on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

However, the available information to facilitate voting about the “the Voice process” at the referendum has been an issue.

    A conflict management framework was applied to address this issue.

The focus was on the “interests” (or needs and concerns)

about the Voice process

that the public have in relation to the referendum question –

 rather than the voting “position” they may hold.

The features of “the Voice process” were compared with public participation processes for resolving public interest conflicts: Processes which already exist and are equally available to all Australians, regardless of ethnicity or race viz. community consultation and Commissions of Inquiry.

Any concern that the Voice “will give Indigenous Australians rights and privileges that other Australians don’t have” would be offset if “the Voice process” was consistent with the existing decision-making framework for public participation processes in Australia.

This would require the Voice

to be acknowledged as a decision-making aid

and not the decision-end point.


READ MORE...

KEY WORDS: Australia; Referendum; Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice; conflict management; UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; Essential Report; needs; concerns; public participation; community consultation; Commissions of Inquiry; decisions.


“Dr. Ted Christie, Barrister and Mediator, Queensland Bar, says it is prudent for the Government agency to recognise the Indigenous community as an expert agency with respect to evaluating aspects of the use of natural resources that relate to their legal rights.

 Christie also acknowledges the Government's recent statement of support for the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [2007], which promotes, amongst other things, the full and effective participation by Indigenous peoples in all matters that concern them and their right to remain distinct and to pursue their own visions of economic and social development."

From the press release for the National Native Title Law Summit 

hosted by LexisNexis, 2009, Ju



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Resolving Cultural Heritage Protection and Development Conflicts on Indigenous Lands

“ P rotecting cultural heritage and development are not mutually exclusive; we can have both, but projects have to be well-designed.” Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek (2024).   The recent decision by the Federal Environment Minister to shut down a tailings dam for a gold mine development, to protect Indigenous cultural heritage, has ignited controversy and conflict.   The controversy is not only over the decision’s impact on the viability of the Regis Resources’ Gold Mine Project at Orange, Central-Western NSW.  It has also highlighted the complexity of the problem when cultural heritage protection (with its focus on Traditional knowledge) and  development (with its focus on Western science) collide over future land use. There is now  community concern that history may repeat in Australia for development projects proposed on Indigenous owned and controlled lands. However, there would be little dispute that the above statement by ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Environmental Evaluation of Development Proposals. Case Study: The Adani Project ~ A Need for Review?

Some form of objective review of the environmental evaluation and approval processes for the ‘Adani Carmichael Coal Mine and Rail Project’ is warranted to address the reasons the final approval was granted  in June 2019.  In a series of articles that follow, the scientific and public interest concerns that ignited the conflict, litigation and delay will be reviewed in a conflict resolution framework .  Must history repeat? 1.   Acceptance of Scientific Findings: Best Available Science ~v~ Relevant and Reliable Science TAGS:  Adani; coal mine; conflict; best available science; relevant and reliable science;  Daubert v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc               The focus of this article is on a source of information conflict that created scientific uncertainty for Adani: Different interpretations of the scientific information base as to what is “the best available science”. READ MORE … The next art...
Post a Comment
Read more