We asked the more than 8600 people who took part in our latest Voice referendum survey why they were voting "yes", "no" or were undecided.
Here are some of the responses from "no" voters.
I will vote 'no'
Male 18-39: I am for Indigenous recognition in the constitution but against the way they are recommending they do it.
Male 40-59: I'd like to know why this has to be put in the constitution. If it doesn't work it can't be undone!
Female 60-75: After travelling in the outback, everyone I have spoken to does not want the Voice nor do they like the people representing them. They told me there are so many different mobs that it would be hard to represent them.
Female 40-59: I feel that all Australians should be treated equal regardless of race. Enough money is already being spent on Indigenous affairs. l am concerned that the majority of this money goes to corporate entities and is not spent in an effective way.
Male 40-59: Need clarification of whether this will lead to a treaty and/or other reparations. Unlikely to happen when the PM won't acknowledge that the Uluru Statement From The Heart is more than one page and he hasn't read more than one page.
Female 60-75: I don't approve of the government using taxpayer money to push through this vote. It should be up to the individual. The country has been divided.
Female 18-39: Less political rhetoric and just plain presentation of facts for what the Voice is, how it's run and why can it only be achieved through constitutional change rather than establishing a department.
Male 60-75: I need to know why they get two votes and all other Australians get one, why divide the country depending on race.
Male 40-59: The Voice is a constitutional change that will divide Australia based on race. Indigenous people already have several associations, government departments and committees in place as well as having several Indigenous members of parliament. That in itself constitutes a voice. If the people involved in these committees and Indigenous members of parliament are not meeting the needs of their people, especially in rural and remote areas, they should be removed from those positions and replaced with people who will represent Indigenous people. There is also billions of dollars allocated to Indigenous welfare, schooling, training, housing etc. This money is obviously not being spent appropriately and an audit needs to be conducted to see where the cash is actually going. I am Indigenous.
Male 40-59: The Albanese government is fixated on the Voice and as they say trying to improve outcomes for Aboriginal people, while the rest of us non-Aboriginal people are struggling to survive day to day as well. Rising interest rates, rising power prices, grocery prices, fuel prices, the list goes on and on. What are they doing to help the rest of society - NOTHING!
Female 75+: I have no problem with teaching Aboriginal culture and language but I was born in Australia and the Voice is likely to create inequality and entitlement. It's un-Australian!
Female 40-59: There is no way anyone can make sense of what they are asking for which is why I am saying "No".
Male 60-75: Democracy has always meant one person one vote - not allowing anybody to have a vote then a say as well as a vote. All Australians presently have a 'Voice' through their elected elected representatives - and there are several Indigenous representatives in that lot - not enough detail - this is very badly thought out.
Male 75+: My other concern that good legislation will be held up and unnecessarily distorted by the need to consult with the Voice.
Female 60-75: The Voice advisory group are hand picked, from Aboriginal organisations, councils and attached politicians who don't represent grass root people, are dividing Aboriginal communities and have their own agendas.
Male 40-59: This has been a poorly run campaign, they are relying on a conscience vote, in the absence of detail. This will not pass and then Australians will be cast as racists, which will further divide, when a lot people are interested in seeing something like this happen, but it's impossible to vote on in the absence of detail. The lefties will vote "yes", the right will vote "no" and the sensible centre will either not vote or lean to conservatism in the absence of detail. Worst-run political movement I've seen in my time. It's a shame.
Female 40-59: What does the 26-page full Statement of the Heart really mean? Will we pay rent and not be able to use public rivers and national parks? Not nearly enough information. The so-called Voice will not do anything to help outback Indigenous people, only elite city Indigenous greedy people. We are one not two.
Male 60-75: I feel the Voice is a smoke screen, taking everyone's attention away from the fact that there has been little or no action from both state and federal governments to address problems such as Indigenous health, alcohol and substance abuse, domestic violence and juvenile delinquency. It's been all talk, no action. I would vote "yes" to the Action, but it's a no to the Voice.
Female 40-59: I'm tired of the virtue signalling apologist attitude being forced on Australians to abide by for what happened in the past. Lose the victim mentality and move on. Stop the division and recognise what the modern Australia is now - made up of many diverse nationalities. Stop teaching our children to perpetuate a false guilt by creating sorry posters at school and doing the welcome to country as if it were a religion. I don't need to be welcomed to the country I was born in.
Male 18-39: There is a lot of misinformation from both sides. What cuts through for me is that a Voice does not belong in the constitution ... no group of people deserve their own special taxpayer funded lobbyists. Unfortunately, people will vote for the Voice thinking emotionally rather than whether it is really a good idea and whether the constitution is the appropriate place to put a Voice.
- Some responses have been edited for brevity and clarity.