The poor civics literacy that acutely affected the voice referendum is never more on display these days than in the persistent and pernicious narrative of some that the no vote in the 2023 referendum has blanket application across all Indigenous law and policy reform, across the federation, forever more.

I find this revisionism of how voting sentiment works deeply concerning for Australian democracy but especially for First Nations communities. If voting sentiment for one specific proposition has blanket application to all future non-related or tangential things, what’s the point of voting? It makes a mockery of policy development, trivialises professional political parties and their election platforms if a no in 2023 applies to every jurisdiction and every level of government.

A recent example is the suggestion that New South Wales premier Chris Minns’ commitment to a treaty process, with the appointment of three treaty commissioners, undermines the self-determination of the Australian people who voted no at a federal referendum.

The Australian people did not vote no to the appointment of NSW treaty commissioners or to a treaty. This is very clear in the question put to the Australian people at the referendum. The question was:

“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?”

Minns took treaty as a policy to a state election and won that election. That seems to me a straightforward application of election policy and democratic........

© The Guardian