I voted Probably Yes. I admire the process and those involved in crafting the Uluṟu Statement, and Linda Burney’s grace in voicing her message positively, politely and dispassionately among all the emotion. And, of course, indigenous people are (mainly) asking for it.
However, I am pessimistic that it will achieve anything, in particular in remote communities where the troubles are. As a lawyer, I do foresee the proposed wording will lead to many High Court challenges once the Voice (and the legislation around it) comes into effect.
As Dutton is asking, I think Albanese should show us the draft legislation - if it’s not ready yet (completely understandable), just say that and commit to showing it in time. I’m also concerned about the cost (there will be a lot of bureaucracy attached), and I certainly feel people are entitled to ask about that rather than just “trust Parliament”. The scope of “matters relating to Aboriginal and TSI peoples” is too vague. If that wording is adopted, then Parliament legislates a definition, there will be legal challenges if someone then considers the definition is narrower than the wording.