(Image: Zennie/Private Media)

Organisations supporting the Yes vote for an Indigenous Voice to Parliament are growing in number, but there remain some notable absences from the sign-up sheet.

Although few organisations are publicly campaigning for a No vote, many are opting for a “politically neutral” path. That can mean no comment at all or taking a leaf out of the government’s playbook and leaning into a “public awareness” campaign.

So why are companies so eager to say Yes? “It’s good for business,” Sally Rugg told Crikey.

The LGBTQIA+ activist at the helm of the Yes vote for the same-sex marriage plebiscite says there are parallels to be drawn when it comes to the behaviour of big brands and corporations. 

Rugg says that First Nations justice does not yet have the same “commercialised and commodified” status of LGBTQIA+ pride and equality in Australia, which has seen the Mardi Gras parade “inch closer to a business expo from a protest each year”. But whether or not it descends to the same “brand halo” status will be determined by companies’ ability to commit to First Nations justice in their day-to-day operations.

Creative director Karen Ferry points to the number of organisations that already have Reconciliation Action Plans in place: “Supporting Yes for the Voice falls out of that.”

Like Rugg, Ferry says that despite the public-facing commitments of companies that obligate them to endorse a Yes case, the marketing metric trumps all. 

“Ultimately, companies look at who’s going to be their consumer in the next 15 years,” she said, adding that although brands attempting to “future-proof themselves” is the “dirtiest reason” for issue-based marketing, it does help get the cause across the line.

For sport, Ferry says the Yes mass adds huge weight to the “social permissibility” of a Yes vote. In short, that means the more people who say, “I’m for this”, the more likely someone else is to say, “Me too!”

“Our sporting codes are huge — AFL, cricket, NRL, that’s pretty much the country covered,” Ferry said. 

“It’s geographic, but it reaches all classes of people. It reaches where I think the Yes campaign would have traditionally struggled to reach. It’s the heartland in which the No campaign would have typically tried to go after.”

While sport, big business, law and a slew of grassroots organisations have come out to stamp their name on a Yes ticket, the advertising industry and many of the consumer-facing brands they represent have kept relatively quiet. Ferry anticipates this will ramp up as the date of the referendum approaches.

So what’s holding brands back?

Yatu Widders Hunt, general manager at Indigenous communications consulting firm Cox Inall Ridgeway, puts it down to three things: nervousness about appearing partisan, concern about internally alienating staff, and a general sense in-house that it’s not their place to comment. 

In her dealings with big brands to assist with the development of First Nations engagement strategies and now a public stance on the Voice, Widders Hunt says her approach is to remind big business (many of which have existing commitments to First Nations peoples) that they’re obligated to practise what they preach, that it’s possible to show leadership at a business and CEO level while also being respectful of the fact that not everyone in an organisation will fall in line, and finally that the Uluru Statement from the Heart was a gift to the Australian people, not the Parliament.

“Businesses, organisations, and community groups are a big part of that,” she said.

While Widders Hunt hasn’t seen any organisations actively campaign No, she said those riding a neutral line risk being perceived by consumers as No advocates: “A lot of businesses say we want to stay neutral, but it’s very hard to stay neutral. It’s a Yes or No question. It’s an invitation. You either respond to the invite or you don’t.”

Here is Crikey’s industry-by-industry checklist of big players and where they stand.

Sport 

More than 20 sporting organisations now support the Voice with all seven major codes — AFL, NRL, Rugby Australia, Football Australia, Netball Australia, Tennis Australia and Cricket Australia — uniting with 14 other groups for a resounding Yes.

Community sector 

Australia’s diaspora communities have thrown their hats in the ring with 120 multicultural organisations — Indian, Chinese, Sri Lankan, Italian, Irish, Iranian, Greek, Vietnamese, Filipino, Sikh, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist and Pacific Islander grassroots groups — all signing a joint resolution to “steadfastly support” a Yes case.

The Radical Centre Reform Lab at Macquarie University Law School helped pull together the signatories, as it did last week with a joint resolution from major Australian religious groups. Declaring the Voice to be “necessary, right, and reasonable”, the Anglican Church of Australia, the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, the Australian National Imams Council, the Australian Sangha Association, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, the Hindu Council of Australia, the National Council of Churches in Australia, the National Sikh Council of Australia, and the Uniting Church in Australia Assembly all signed up.

Business

Of the “big four” accounting firms, all support the Uluru Statement from the Heart, and three have given a resounding Yes. 

Deloitte said it backs the “spirit and intent” of the statement, supports formal constitutional recognition of First Nations peoples in the constitution, and is in favour of enshrining a Voice.

Former PwC Australia CEO Tom Seymour declared the firm’s national arm to be a “vocal supporter” of a Yes vote. This was in February, around the same time it released a report detailing the ins and outs of Voice “architecture” and logistics.

EY Australia CEO David Larocca was clear that his company “fully supports” the Voice and plans to roll out an in-house educational campaign in the lead-up to the referendum.

KPMG has not explicitly supported the Yes case but it too has committed to engage staff in awareness-raising seminars. Advocates of the No camp have declared these to be biased towards a Yes vote, with Warren Mundine saying: “They’ve all gone woke and they’ve been sucking on the Kool-Aid … They are running biased education programs.”

Other big businesses to publicly back the Yes campaign include NAB, Commonwealth Bank, ANZ, BHP, Rio Tinto, Wesfarmers, Woolworths and Coles.

Law

Many — but not all — of the biggest law firms have backed the Yes vote. These include Allens, Arnold Bloch Leibler, Ashurst, Baker McKenzie, Corrs Chambers Westgarth, DLA Piper, Gilbert + Tobin, Herbert Smith Freehills, Holding Redlich, King & Wood Mallesons, Lander & Rogers, MinterEllison and Norton Rose Fulbright, all of whom pledged their support for the Uluru Statement from the Heart in 2019.

At the time, 18 big firms banded together to sound their support, releasing a joint public statement that read: “We hear and support your call for the establishment of a First Nations Voice enshrined in the constitution and for a referendum as a national priority.”

Of those signatories, Clayton Utz, Dentons, Fisher Dore, Jackson McDonald and Russell Kennedy have refrained from endorsing the Voice. Clayton Utz said a 2020 company policy on public issues meant it was no longer in a position to pick sides.

There is also a handful of big firms not on the 2019 list that have put their hand up for a Yes case. These include Hall & Wilcox, Hive Legal, Macpherson Kelley, Maurice Blackburn, Piper Alderman and Slater & Gordon.

The Law Council of Australia has said it “unwaveringly supports” a constitutionally enshrined Voice, as has the Australian Lawyers Alliance. 

While the NSW Bar has given a legal nod to the Yes case, the Victorian Bar is yet to follow suit. There’s a battle brewing internally over whether or not to provide public support. More than 300 Victorian barristers have put their names to a petition advocating for the bar to declare it’s on team Yes.

Education

The peak body representing the university sector, Universities Australia, will not take a stance on the establishment of an Indigenous Voice to Parliament, preferring to stick to its lane as chief national educator. 

Individual universities have taken a different approach, with ANU, University of Melbourne, UNSW, University of Wollongong, Griffith University, Swinburne University, Charles Darwin University and Curtin University all pledging public support for a Yes vote.

The University of Sydney is yet to determine its “official position”. Its law faculty called on the government to enshrine a First Nations Voice in 2021.

Social sector

In February, the Fred Hollows Foundation, Oxfam Australia, ACOSS and ANTAR banded together to launch the Allies for Uluru Coalition — a representative group of 144 civil society organisations actively in favour of a Yes vote. Notable names include Greenpeace Australia Pacific, UnitingCare Australia, the Salvation Army Australia, Human Rights Council of Australia (HRCA) and Beyond Blue (to name a few).