The Australian 1967 Referendum was a referendum called by the Holt Government that occurred on the 27th of May 1967. The 1967 Referendum was significant for the civil rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders because it amended Section 51 and removed Section 127 from the Australian Constitution both of which discriminated against Aboriginals. A staggering 90.77% of Australian voters voted in favour of changing the Constitution believing that it would end racial discrimination towards Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders, however this was not the case.
The amendment of Section 51 was significant for the civil rights of Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders because it allowed the federal government to make federal laws for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. Before the referendum, Section 51 had stated that: “The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: The people of any race, other than the aboriginal people in any State, for whom it is necessary to make special laws”. With the referendum, the words “other than the aboriginal people in any State” were removed from the section. Section 51 basically indicated that federal laws created to protect all Australians didn't apply to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. This meant that each state government could decide on which rights Aboriginals could and could not have which meant that Aboriginals had different rights in each of the 6 states. It also meant that Aboriginals could not access federally funded services such as pensions and maternity allowances. In an interview with Faith Bandler, a leading activist for Aboriginal Rights in the 1960s, she says that “Before the referendum, if you were a person of Aboriginal descent you lived under 6 laws. There was a law in each state and each one differed and you didn’t know what the rules were when you moved from one state to another, you could land in jail as many did.” This shows how hard and confusing it would have been for an Aboriginal who had a family living in a different state or had to move to another state for a job as they would …show more content…
Section 127 stated that: “In reckoning the numbers of the people of the Commonwealth, or of a State or other part of the Commonwealth, aboriginal natives should not be counted.” In a video interview with Gary Williams, an Aboriginal elder who was 21 years old when the 1967 Referendum occurred he states that “Because we weren’t counted as part of the census, we were part of the flora and fauna so that we felt that after the vote came through we were recognised as people”. This shows how degrading and humiliating it must have been for Aboriginals as it suggested that indigenous Australians were regarded as animals instead of human beings by the federal government and therefore did not deserve human rights. Section 127 also made Australia’s Aboriginal population basically invisible to the federal government which resulted in the federal government only providing funding to the non-indigenous population as the federal government did not know the exact number of Aboriginals living in Australia or where the most populated indigenous communities were located. This meant that state governments could only provide limited funding and services to Indigenous communities thus lowering their quality of
The amendment of Section 51 was significant for the civil rights of Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders because it allowed the federal government to make federal laws for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. Before the referendum, Section 51 had stated that: “The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government of the Commonwealth with respect to: The people of any race, other than the aboriginal people in any State, for whom it is necessary to make special laws”. With the referendum, the words “other than the aboriginal people in any State” were removed from the section. Section 51 basically indicated that federal laws created to protect all Australians didn't apply to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. This meant that each state government could decide on which rights Aboriginals could and could not have which meant that Aboriginals had different rights in each of the 6 states. It also meant that Aboriginals could not access federally funded services such as pensions and maternity allowances. In an interview with Faith Bandler, a leading activist for Aboriginal Rights in the 1960s, she says that “Before the referendum, if you were a person of Aboriginal descent you lived under 6 laws. There was a law in each state and each one differed and you didn’t know what the rules were when you moved from one state to another, you could land in jail as many did.” This shows how hard and confusing it would have been for an Aboriginal who had a family living in a different state or had to move to another state for a job as they would …show more content…
Section 127 stated that: “In reckoning the numbers of the people of the Commonwealth, or of a State or other part of the Commonwealth, aboriginal natives should not be counted.” In a video interview with Gary Williams, an Aboriginal elder who was 21 years old when the 1967 Referendum occurred he states that “Because we weren’t counted as part of the census, we were part of the flora and fauna so that we felt that after the vote came through we were recognised as people”. This shows how degrading and humiliating it must have been for Aboriginals as it suggested that indigenous Australians were regarded as animals instead of human beings by the federal government and therefore did not deserve human rights. Section 127 also made Australia’s Aboriginal population basically invisible to the federal government which resulted in the federal government only providing funding to the non-indigenous population as the federal government did not know the exact number of Aboriginals living in Australia or where the most populated indigenous communities were located. This meant that state governments could only provide limited funding and services to Indigenous communities thus lowering their quality of