With the referendum only months away, campaigning on both sides for an Indigenous Voice to parliament is well underway.

Yes and No campaigns have both been established but are taking very different strategies in the run up to the referendum.

The Yes campaign launched in Adelaide last month and brought together a number of groups under the umbrella of Australians for Indigenous Constitutional Recognition.

The No campaign is being run by multiple groups with different perspectives on why they oppose an Indigenous Voice to parliament, none of which have held formal launches yet.

Each of the groups have common ground in the campaign and specific points of difference about why they don’t want to enshrine an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice in the constitution.

Who are the main No groups?

The key players with formal campaigns are Recognise a Better Way and Fair Australia, but there are also parts of the community who are campaigning from a “progressive no” perspective.

Recognise a Better Way is helmed by former politician and adviser Warren Mundine.

The Recognise position paper says the organisation is opposing the Voice because it wants an Act of Parliament to establish the Voice, not embed it in the constitution.

The group does not support the truth-telling and treaty commitment in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, and they believe the Voice would not adequately address need in Indigenous communities.

The position paper also says it does back Constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians, but in the form of a preamble rather than a new chapter in the Constitution.

“There are three things a government should do in lieu of any new political structure,” the position paper states.

“Recognise prior occupation of Aboriginal people in a preamble to the constitution, establish a Parliamentary all-party standing committee for native title holders, support Aboriginal community-controlled organisations.

“Aboriginal people do not need more voices; they need a way into the wider society.

The first formal event for Recognise a Better Way is in Tamworth on Friday, featuring One Nation Senator Pauline Hanson, former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce, former Labor minister Gary Johns, and broadcaster Alan Jones.

Former deputy prime minister and Nationals leader John Anderson is also a senior member of the group. 

The other high-profile group running a No campaign is Fair Australia, a subsidiary group the conservative political lobbying group Advance Australia that has the support of Country Liberal Party Senator for the Northern Territory, Jacinta Nampinjinpa Price.

Initially, Senator Nampinjinpa Price was initially part of the Recognise committee, but parted ways with the group to work with Fair Australia.

Fair Australia has published 10 reasons that it does not support the Voice proposal, including concerns about changing the constitution, tying constitutional recognition to an advisory body and the expense of a referendum.

“While many supporters of the Voice have good intentions, there are also many radical activists who oppose many parts of our national identity who know the divisive Voice gives them power to make changes ordinary Australians don’t want.

“There is nothing modest about changing the Constitution because when you change the Constitution you’re changing the foundation of the country,” the Fair Australia eBook says.

“The voice isn’t recognition, it’s not reconciliation. It’s the Voice of Division.”

Delegations of Indigenous people from around the country have visited Parliament House in Canberra with Senator Nampinjinpa Price to put forward their views and lobby politicians to join the No campaign.

Both Recognise a Better Way and Fair Australia have some information in their campaign materials and position papers that has been debunked by expert fact checkers, the authors of the Uluru Statement and the government, including that the Voice would be a ‘shadow government’ or create a separate Indigenous state.

What about the ‘progressive no’?

Another position on the No side of the campaign has been labelled the “progressive no”, a term coined by Independent Victorian Senator Lidia Thorpe.

Senator Thorpe is yet to decide her final position on the referendum but did split with the Greens in part due to the party’s decision to back the Voice proposal, and now represents the Black Sovereignty movement in the federal parliament.

“There is a progressive no, and the platform needs to be given to those people,” Ms Thorpe said.

“If you go around this country, and allow people to speak freely, you will hear their demands, and that is tied up in a treaty, not in a voice that has no power.”

The “progressive no” captures many grassroots members of the Indigenous community who don’t align with the traditionally conservative values put forward by the mainstream No campaigns.

Those representing the progressive no have not held any formal events, but campaigners like Michael Mansell and Murriguel Coe have well-documented positions on the Voice and are seeking alternative forms of recognition, like reserved seats in the senate for Indigenous members, similar to the New Zealand Maori model.