On referendum day – sometime between 23 September and 16 December – Australian voters will be asked a single question: “A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?”

To help Australians make an informed decision, Professor Kim Rubenstein, from the University of Canberra (UC), and James Blackwell, from the Australian National University (ANU), have begun an eight-part podcast series, ‘It’s not just the Vibe: It’s the CONSTITUTION’.

Professor Rubenstein is a constitutional and citizenship law expert, and a passionate advocate for people knowing more about the Constitution. Mr Blackwell, a Wiradyuri man, is Research Fellow in Indigenous Diplomacy at the ANU’s Coral Bell School of Asia Pacific Affairs, and Ambassador for the Uluru Youth Dialogue.

The podcast, presented in a conversational and engaging format, looks at the history of the Constitution; Australia’s Federal system; the separation of powers into legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government; citizenship; representative democracy; how to change the Constitution; the Crown; and the Voice.

“In 2023, Australians are being asked to change the Constitution,” Professor Rubenstein said. “If we are being asked to change something, shouldn’t we know what is in it already? Sure, we know something about ‘the vibe’ of it from The Castle [a 1997 film], but what else? We’ll take you through how the Constitution came to be, what is in it already, and what the 2023 referendum is about.”

“This referendum is one of the most important votes Australians will likely ever make,” Mr Blackwell said. “It’s so vitally important that Australians not only understand what the Uluru Statement says, and what a Voice to Parliament will mean for Indigenous peoples, but also that they understand the role of the Constitution, not just for us as Indigenous peoples but themselves also.”

If most voters in most states vote ‘yes’, then the Constitution will be altered. The 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 Voice, including its composition, functions, powers and procedures.”

The Yes campaign argues that the Voice, which comes from Indigenous people themselves, would recognise First Peoples in the Constitution, and ensure government listened to advice from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people about matters that affected them, such as Indigenous health, education, employment, and housing. This would result in better outcomes, they believe.

But the No campaign believes that the Voice, the biggest change to the Constitution, would be legally risky, divisive, and have unknown consequences. They say that the Voice would cover all areas of Executive Government, so no issue would be beyond its reach. It might lead to “reparations, compensation, and other radical change”.

Despite the importance of the referendum, Professor Rubenstein is concerned that ACT and NT residents will not have an equal say.

“ACT votes only count for half of the outcome of this referendum, so they only count when assessing the majority of votes in the country,” Professor Rubenstein said. “This means ACT voters are not treated ‘equally’ when it comes to changing the constitution.”

Episodes were recorded at the University of Canberra, at the Museum of Australian Democracy at Old Parliament House, and on Wiradyuri Country in Hilltops Shire, NSW.

The podcast began on 3 August; the first three episodes are available on Apple, Spotify, and Google.