Senator Lidia Thorpe slams both 'yes' and 'no' Voice to Parliament campaigns after she says she was excluded from referendum pamphlet

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson also issued her own statement on the Voice after her essay on the proposal didn't make it into the official "no" case, which will be published in the referendum pamphlets to be distributed to every household in Australia.

The Australian Electoral Commission on Tuesday published the cases for and against a proposed constitutionally enshrined Indigenous advisory body, as submitted by parliamentarians from both sides.

Senator Thorpe, who voted against the constitutional alteration bill last month but said her point of view was excluded by the Coalition-led "no" case committee, stated both cases lacked substance.

The Canberra Times has reached out to the "no" committee for comment.

She accused the "yes" campaign of using "emotive language" and the "no" campaign of "fear mongering".

"I didn't think I could read something on the AEC website with even less substance than the 'yes' case, but then I read the 'no' case."

"The 'no' campaign have clearly taken advantage of the pamphlet not being fact checked and done more to embolden racists than they have to argue against the Voice," she said.

READ MORE:

Uluru Dialogue co-chairs Megan Davis and Pat Anderson, have also criticised the "no" campaign, stating their case was "cooked" and featured "misleading information".

"The 'no' pamphlet has used taxpayers' money to distribute misleading information aimed at holding our people back, all Australians in fact," they said in a statement.

Constitutional law expert Greg Craven, whose comments had been included in the "no" side of the pamphlet to shore up their argument, also told The Canberra Times he was "absolutely furious" about the use of his words, which he said had been twisted.

The electoral commission has said it will not be fact checking or making changes to the essays submitted by both camps.

Senator Thorpe earlier sought to distance herself from the wider conservative-dominated "no" movement but last month made it clear she would be campaigning against the Voice.

On Tuesday, she slammed the "yes" campaign, describing the Voice as a "smokescreen to cover up the continued process of the violent colonisation".

"They provide no historical evidence that an advisory body would have an impact, fail to recognise that there have been many ineffective advisory bodies in the past, and present a model of the advisory body that has not been debated or agreed to by First Nations people," she said in a statement.

"The war on our people continues."

Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Senator Hanson told The Canberra Times that Senator Hanson submitted her essay to the "no" committee but no part of the essay was directly used in the pamphlet.

The spokesperson added that while Senator Hanson had not been allowed any other input, some of her views were reflected in the official "no" case essay.

Senator Hanson did not comment on the "no" case or her ability to contribute to the pamphlet in the statement released on Tuesday.

In her statement, she claimed the "yes" campaign was promoting the "myth" that the Voice would improve life outcomes for Indigenous Australians.

"The Indigenous leaders promoting the Voice are the same ones who have been advising Australian governments on Indigenous issues for decades," Senator Hanson said.

"Indigenous disadvantage remains firmly entrenched in remote communities, and hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted."

Senator Thorpe said she will be releasing a further statement from the the Blak Sovereign Movement and "providing those voting with truth that cuts through the emotive language of the 'yes' campaign and the fear mongering of the conservative 'no' campaign."