Skip to content

11 min read

The 'No' campaign in Australia's 2023 Indigenous Voice referendum

Summary

On 14 October 2023, Australians voted 60.06% to 39.94% against altering the Constitution to insert an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice, with 9,452,792 “No” votes against 6,286,894 “Yes” votes out of 15,739,686 valid ballots and 17,671,784 enrolled voters (89.95% turnout). [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] The proposal was rejected nationally and by a majority in every state, failing the double majority required for amendment under section 128 of the Australian Constitution; the Australian Capital Territory was the only state or territory to record a “Yes” majority. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] The “No” campaign was organised as a cross-organisational coalition — federally led by the Liberal-National Coalition opposition and backed by the conservative lobby group Advance, by Fair Australia, by Australians for Unity (created 11 May 2023 by Warren Mundine and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price), by One Nation, by the United Australia Party and, from the Indigenous-sovereignty flank, by the Blak Sovereign Movement including Senator Lidia Thorpe. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

Tactics used

  • defensive framing of constitutional recognition as legal risk, racial division and an “unseen” change to the Constitution, anchored on the slogan “If you don’t know, VOTE NO” [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]
  • cross-organisational coalition-building across the Liberal-National Coalition, Advance, Fair Australia, Australians for Unity, One Nation, the United Australia Party and the Blak Sovereign Movement, anchored on a tightly disciplined set of “No” themes [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]
  • social-media advertising targeting younger demographics and “progressive no” voters, including Advance’s “The Voice is Not Enough” campaign on Facebook and Instagram and Fair Australia’s TikTok push [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]
  • a separate “Referendum News” Facebook page presenting anti-Voice content, run by Advance and funded by Jet Couriers founder Brett Ralph, Kennards Self Storage head Sam Kennard, building-material scion Rodney O’Neil, health-company chief Marcus Blackmore and fund manager Simon Fenwick [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]
  • collaboration with fossil-fuel-aligned think tanks including the Centre for Independent Studies, Institute of Public Affairs and LibertyWorks, described by University of Technology Sydney political scientist Jeremy Walker as part of a broader Atlas Network-linked opposition [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

Background

On 21 May 2022 the Australian Labor Party won the federal election under Anthony Albanese, who in his victory speech committed to the Uluru Statement from the Heart in full. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] The proposed amendment — the Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice) 2023 — was introduced by Mark Dreyfus on 30 March 2023, passed the House of Representatives on 31 May 2023 and the Senate on 19 June 2023. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] The Joint Select Committee on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice Referendum endorsed the bill subject to two dissenting reports from Liberal and National members; the Liberal report proposed changes including the deletion of sub-section 128(ii), a new section 77(iv) on judicial review, the addition of “and the legal effect of its representations” to sub-section 128(iii), and the replacement of “executive government” with “ministers of state”, while the Nationals’ report rejected the bill entirely. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] Prime Minister Albanese announced the referendum date on 30 August 2023, and the writ was issued by the governor-general to the Australian Electoral Commission on 11 September 2023. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

Section 128 of the Constitution requires a “double majority” for amendment — a national majority plus a majority in at least four of the six states — making the proposal unusually hard to carry in a federation where Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory had been expected to lean “No”. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] The Australian Electoral Commission estimated the referendum would cost about A450 million, with 364 million supplied in the most recent federal budget and a final cost of $411,269,848. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

What happened

The 'No' campaign in Australia's 2023 Indigenous Voice referendum

The ‘No’ campaign in Australia’s 2023 Indigenous Voice referendum — Orderinchaos (CC BY 4.0). Source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023.jpg

Coalition decisions. On 28 November 2022 Nationals leader David Littleproud announced his party would not support the Voice, with Northern Territory Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price speaking out strongly against it; the decision prompted Andrew Gee to leave the party and sit as an independent. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] On 5 April 2023, after a party room meeting, the federal Liberal Party under Peter Dutton announced it would oppose the Voice “citing constitutional risks”; all members of the shadow ministry were bound by the decision, with a conscience vote allowed only for backbenchers, and the party simultaneously proposed its own alternative and continued to support constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] Former Liberal Indigenous Australians Minister Ken Wyatt quit the party on 6 April 2023 in response; Shadow Attorney-General Julian Leeser resigned from the front bench to support the Voice without quitting the party; and moderate Liberal backbenchers including Bridget Archer and Andrew Bragg, plus conservative Russell Broadbent, declared personal support. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

“No” organisational landscape. The Wikipedia article documents at least seven distinct organisational vectors on the “No” side. (1) Advance (formerly Advance Australia), described as “a conservative lobby group”, set up its own No campaign with the social-media advertising campaign “The Voice is Not Enough” (or just “Not Enough”), aimed at young demographics and targeting the “progressive no” vote with the message that the Voice would be “too weak, or is not the main priority for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people”; several people accused Advance of misrepresenting their views and using their photographs without permission. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] (2) Recognise a Better Way, launched in January 2023 by a group called the Voice No Case Committee with four Indigenous members — Warren Mundine, Jacinta Nampijinpa Price (who left the group in February 2023 to join Advance), Kings Creek Station founder Ian Conway and Kemara Enterprises owner Bob Liddle — alongside former Nationals deputy PM John Anderson and former Keating government minister Gary Johns. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] (3) Australians for Unity, created on 11 May 2023 by Mundine and Price as a merger of Recognise a Better Way with the other No groupings, both of whom are Indigenous Australians. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] (4) Fair Australia, a No campaign led by Price under the auspices of Advance. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] (5) One Nation, which opposed both a Voice to Parliament and a referendum on the subject. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] (6) The United Australia Party, which following the “If you don’t know, VOTE NO” slogan stated “[we] will not support a constitutional change that divides us by race.” [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] (7) The Blak Sovereign Movement, including Senator Lidia Thorpe, who spoke at the National Press Club on 16 August 2023 and joined the official No campaign on 20 June 2023 after voting No to the referendum bill in the Senate the previous day. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

Messaging and framing. The “No” message concentrated on a small number of themes. The Wikipedia article records that an analysis of contributors to the campaigns published in early August found that Advance’s messaging was “using fear as their underlying message” while the Yes campaign’s message was “spread over 33 disparate themes”; “No” ads “predominantly covered only seven, which were all negative.” [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] In late August the top five items on Facebook and X included several that were critical of the Voice and served the “No” campaign, and the analysis showed how “negative stories” could “have the strongest impact on people’s attention”. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] By the end of September both camps concentrated online advertising in Tasmania and South Australia, regarded as “battleground” states. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] In the broader media, News Corp Australia dominated the landscape, owning over two-thirds of leading newspapers along with most online news websites; an interim report by University of Adelaide academic Victoria Fielding analysing News Corp reporting and commentary about the Voice between July and August 2023 found news reporting unbiased and accurate but opinion pieces “almost all in favour of the No vote”, with Andrew Bolt and Peta Credlin the top contributors, and around 70% of News Corp coverage overall favouring “No” arguments. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

Targeting. Fair Australia started using TikTok in May 2023 and by October was using it “far more extensively and proving more successful than the Yes campaign”; the article attributes this to the younger demographic on TikTok being more likely to be “Yes” voters and the “No” campaign wanting to reach them. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] Advance created a “Referendum News” Facebook page showing anti-Voice posts and advertised on Facebook and Instagram. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] Advance was funded by Jet Couriers founder Brett Ralph, Kennards Self Storage head Sam Kennard, building-material scion Rodney O’Neil, health-company chief Marcus Blackmore and fund manager Simon Fenwick, and collaborated with fossil-fuel companies and Atlas Network affiliates including the Centre for Independent Studies, Institute of Public Affairs and LibertyWorks (founded by entrepreneur Andrew Cooper) to promote the No campaign, according to UTS political scientist Jeremy Walker. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

Result

Verdict: won.

The “No” vote carried the referendum on 14 October 2023 with 60.06% (9,452,792 votes) against 39.94% (6,286,894 votes) for “Yes”, out of 15,739,686 valid votes and 15,895,231 total ballots cast; turnout was 89.95% of the 17,671,784 enrolled voters, with 155,545 invalid or blank votes. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] The proposal was rejected nationally and by a majority in every state, failing the double majority required for amendment under section 128; the Australian Capital Territory was the only state or territory with a “Yes” majority. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

The state-and-territory breakdown of “No” support reported in the article was: New South Wales 2,957,880 No votes (58.96%) versus 2,058,764 Yes (41.04%); Victoria 2,180,851 No (54.15%) versus 1,846,623 Yes (45.85%); Queensland 2,167,957 No (68.21%) versus 1,010,416 Yes (31.79%); Western Australia 1,002,740 No (63.27%) versus 582,077 Yes (36.73%); South Australia 748,318 No (64.17%) versus 417,745 Yes (35.83%); Tasmania 218,425 No (58.94%) versus 152,171 Yes (41.06%); Northern Territory 65,429 No (60.30%) versus 43,076 Yes (39.70%); and the Australian Capital Territory 111,192 No (38.71%) versus 176,022 Yes (61.29%) — the only state or territory in which “Yes” won a majority. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023] The article records that “No” “Obtained a majority in no state and an overall minority of 3,165,898 votes” — i.e. carried every state by a margin of more than 3.16 million votes nationally. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

Post-referendum analysis cited in the article identified “a scepticism of granting rights to some Australians that are not held by others and an aversion to constitutional change” as the main reasons the majority of Australians voted “No”. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

Lessons

  • A referendum proposal backed by virtually every major institution — the Prime Minister, every state and territory Labor leader, the Greens, the Law Council of Australia, the Solicitor-General, an expert Constitutional Expert Group, the Uluru Dialogue and the From the Heart campaign — can still be defeated when the opposition runs a tightly disciplined, low-theme, fear-anchored messaging strategy; the “No” campaign concentrated on roughly seven recurring themes against a Yes campaign whose message “was spread over 33 disparate themes”. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]
  • Defensive framing — recasting a proposal for symbolic recognition as a question of constitutional risk, racial division and an “unseen” change — can substitute for a positive case: the Wikipedia article notes that “Advance’s” underlying message was “fear”, and the dominant “No” slogans (“If you don’t know, VOTE NO”, “constitutional change that divides us by race”) appealed to risk-averse undecided voters rather than to committed opponents. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]
  • Microtargeted social-media advertising can deliver demographic reach that a Yes campaign’s broader cross-platform presence does not automatically match: by October, Fair Australia on TikTok was “using it far more extensively and proving more successful than the Yes campaign”, despite the Yes campaign having larger followings on Facebook, X and Instagram. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]
  • A section-128 “double majority” rule means that opponents of a constitutional amendment need not win the popular vote alone; winning a majority in four of six states suffices to defeat it. The “No” side won the popular vote 60.06% to 39.94% and carried every state — an unusually decisive result, but the structural point holds: in a federation with a hostile state majority, even narrow state-level defeats compound into a national loss. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]
  • Concentrated media ownership can shape a referendum’s framing environment in advance of the campaign itself: the Fielding interim report found that around 70% of News Corp Australia’s coverage of the Voice between July and August 2023 favoured “No” arguments, almost entirely through opinion rather than news content. [source: australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023]

Sources

Disclaimer: Included as a teaching example of campaign craft, not as endorsement.

Sources & verification

  • australian-no-campaign-indigenous-voice-referendum-2023 — grounding: primary — license: cc-attribution
  • Rewritten: 2026-07-15 via rw2-q11 batch.

Learn more

Last verified: 2026-07-15