The Australian government has locked in 14 October as the .
The long-awaited announcement, made by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on Wednesday, means there are now less than 45 days until Australians vote on a constitutional issue that has, over the past several months, become shrouded in misinformation, conspiracy, and propaganda.
With community campaigning and advertising set to ramp up on both sides of the debate, voters now face the increasingly urgent challenge of separating fact from fiction.
“My view of the role of electors is that each of us needs to take our role quite seriously,” says Elisa Arcioni, a leading scholar of constitutional identity at Sydney Law School.
“We need to put some effort into becoming informed about what this proposal is, where it comes from, what it means, and how it would operate.”
“I would hope that, now people have a date for the referendum, their attention might be a bit more sharply focused on the fact that they have to make a decision: Yes or No,” says Arcioni.
“Hopefully people take that decision seriously and then go out and seek information to overcome fears or concerns – or, really, to test their fears or concerns.”
In that spirit, here are some of the most common types of disinformation related to the voting process that have been spotted by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC), the independent federal agency in charge of organising, conducting and supervising the referendum.
The AEC has launched a specific to the referendum to track and counter claims.
Disinformation claim: The referendum will be ‘rigged’ by the AEC
Some users on social media have suggested that the AEC is compromised by corruption, mismanagement and bias.
As a result, they say, the Voice referendum will be “rigged”.
The AEC has directly responded to a number of these claims online, reminding critics that it is “the neutral body administering elections to world leading integrity standards,” and that it doesn’t “advocate how people should vote, just that they do vote.”
As the AEC further explains on its website, the Voice referendum will be run using the same infrastructure as federal elections, which includes more than 100,000 temporary staff counting the votes under the supervision of not only AEC staff but also independent scrutineers.
Other independent experts told SBS News that the AEC has a respectable track record.
"There is no case of the AEC having been found guilty of attempting to stack counting in someone's favour. In terms of neutrality of count process, the AEC is a world leader," said Kevin Bonham, one of Australia's most respected election and polling analysts.
Bonham added that this didn't mean the AEC had never made errors, citing the 2013 Western Australian Senate election as a prominent example.
In that instance, around 1,400 ballot papers went missing, something that Bonham says was an unintentional mistake. When that mistake came to light, the AEC itself demanded that the results be declared void and a re-election was held.
Following that event, there were also "very major procedural overhauls" to ensure the mistake wouldn't be repeated, Bonham said.
"There's been a few other cases where the AEC has had its interpretations not accepted by courts, but none of these are cases of an attempt to bias in favour of any one outcome," Bonham added.
By allowing ticks and not crosses, the AEC is favouring Yes: fact or fiction?
Recently, debate has been triggered by the AEC declaring that a tick would be accepted as a formal vote of Yes, but a cross wouldn't be accepted as a formal vote of No.
A 'formal vote' means one that is counted, while an 'informal vote' is one that isn't.
In response, of the Yes camp attempting to slant the vote in its favour.
"At every turn, it just seems to me that they're taking the opportunity to skew this in favour of the Yes vote when Australians just want a fair election, not a dodgy one," he said.
The ultimate effect that the ticks and crosses policy will have on the referendum is probably too hard to answer definitively at this point, but some clarification may be useful.
Firstly, this isn't a new rule that the AEC – let alone the Yes camp or Labor government – has only now decided to implement.
"Since 1988, the AEC has followed legal advice regarding the application of savings provisions to ‘ticks’ and ‘crosses’ on referendum ballot papers (over 30 years and multiple referendums)," the reads.
'Savings provisions’ refer to the "ability to count a vote where the instructions have not been followed but the voter’s intention is clear", the AEC says, and the same rules apply for federal elections.
Secondly, the vast majority of voters follow the instructions to write a 'yes' or 'no', as the AEC urges them to do.
In 1999, when Australia held a referendum on whether the nation should become a republic, the informal vote rate was 0.86 per cent.
The AEC has also said that, “even of the 0.86 per cent of informal votes, many would have had no relevance to the use of ticks or crosses”.
Clearing up an online rumour: Will there be one or two questions on the ballot paper?
There have also been rumours that there will be two questions on the 2023 referendum ballot paper, and if you vote a particular way to one question it will ‘override’ the answer to the other question.
Various versions of this claim have stirred up confusion as to how voters will be required to fill out ballot papers, and how this information may be interpreted or misinterpreted by those counting the votes.
There will be only one question on the ballot paper, which will read as follows: “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?"
Voters will be required to write 'yes' or 'no' in English.
Disinformation claim: Australia’s constitution has been invalid since 1973
Some have claimed that Australia’s constitution has been invalid since the Australian government amended Queen Elizabeth II’s title in Australia to ‘Queen of Australia’ in 1973.
Both the High Court of Australia and a number of constitutional scholars have considered and rejected this claim.
The parliamentary bill that was used to amend the Queen’s Australian title is constitutionally valid, was signed by Queen Elizabeth II during her 1973 visit to Australia, and did not change or invalidate the Australian constitution.
The only way Australia’s constitution can be changed is by the successful passage of a referendum.
Myth debunked: Voting in the Voice referendum will be voluntary
Unlike the 2017 Marriage Law Postal Survey, in which participation was optional, the as voting in a federal election. All eligible Australian citizens aged 18 years and over are required by law to enrol and vote.
If you don't vote, you'll receive a failure to vote notice from the AEC, be forced to explain why you didn't vote, and may be fined.
The 2017 Marriage Law Postal Survey, by comparison, was neither a referendum nor a plebiscite.
In previous Australian plebiscites, such as that held in 1977 to select Advance Australia Fair as the national anthem, it has been compulsory to vote.
Disinformation claim: You need to enrol separately to vote in the referendum
No separate enrolment is required to vote in the Voice referendum. If you are already registered on the AEC’s electoral roll, and your enrolment details are correct, you don't need to do anything prior to casting your vote, however you choose to do it.
To understand your voting options, check out this part of SBS News' referendum guide:
Stay informed on the 2023 Indigenous Voice to Parliament referendum from across the SBS Network, including First Nations perspectives through NITV.
Visit the to access articles, videos and podcasts in over 60 languages, or stream the latest news and analysis, docos and entertainment for free, at the .
