With the "yes" campaign well into its second week, its advocates are running out of time to swing the growing majority of Australian voters intending to vote "no" back into their camp.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Support for the "yes" case has been falling fast since August last year when almost 64 per cent of those polled supported it.
That is now almost completely reversed with the most recent polling by ACM's research unit Chi-Squared finding the "no" vote had risen to 61 per cent of those surveyed.
While slightly higher than the 57 per cent figure from recent polling by other media, this reflects ACM's strong rural and regional footprint.
Almost three-quarters of respondents said the government had not done enough to explain the Voice.
It is now more than three months since the "yes" and "no" trajectories crossed paths. If nothing changes between now and polling day support for "yes" could be in the 20 to 30 per cent range while support for "no" could peak in the 70 per cent range.
If that was to occur it would be a disastrous outcome not only for the Indigenous community but Australia as a whole.
Such a brutal rejection of a proposition put in good faith by the First Peoples of this land after decades of discussion and negotiation among themselves has the potential to stop reconciliation in its tracks. And reconciliation is something this country needs very badly.
Many Indigenous Australians would, rightly or wrongly, feel they had been rejected by the broader polity and there would be little point in starting over.
This would broaden the gulf that already separates Indigenous and non-Indigenous while having the potential to divide the entire community into post-Brexit referendum-like camps.
If these outcomes are to be avoided, "yes" campaigners must do much more than pin their hopes on the emotional buzz that may have resulted from John Farnham's endorsement and recent advertising featuring Cathy Freeman and Nicky Winmar.
While many "yes" supporters are voting with their hearts, the harsh reality is many "no" supporters are voting with their heads.
The Prime Minister, who has handled this process quite badly, handed the LNP, and the broader "no" camp an unstoppable advantage by refusing to spell out what the government has in mind.
It is not enough to point to the information on Reconciliation Australia's website or the proposals mooted during discussions by the working group and say: Tthat's all you need to know."
The scope, representation, constituency and remit of the Voice will be legislated by Mr Albanese's government, not the working group, or Reconciliation Australia.
If at least a summary of what is proposed was made public by the PM or his Indigenous Australians minister, it is very possible a large number of those now firmly in the "no" camp could change their views.
Many of those intending to vote "no" actively support constitutional recognition and reconciliation, and are not opposed to the Voice in-principle.
Their objection is to being asked to give the government carte blanche to craft whatever it wants without running it by the people.
This isn't AUKUS, so why the secrecy?
If the referendum fails, many people and factors will be blamed, including the Coalition for refusing to make this a bipartisan moment, the PM's failures to convince voters and the questionable tactics of some on the "no" side.
But so, too, will be a "yes" campaign that was too slow out of the gates and has seen commanding support for their proposal a year ago fall away to a position where they are now extreme underdogs.
Send us a letter to the editor
- Letters to the editor should be kept to 250 or fewer words. To the Point letters should not exceed 50 words. Reference to The Canberra Times reports should include a date and page number. Provide a phone number and address (only your suburb will be published). Responsibility for election comment is taken by John-Paul Moloney of 121 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra. Published by Federal Capital Press of Australia Pty Ltd.
