Save articles for later
Add articles to your saved list and come back to them any time.
Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has promised to hold a referendum on constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians if the Voice is defeated at the ballot box next month, and he wins power at the next election.
Setting out some of his alternatives to a Voice that is written into the Constitution, the opposition leader said he supported “regional voices” and the recognition of First Australians.
Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has promised another vote if the Voice referendum fails.Credit: Alex Ellinghausen
But he highlighted the latest move by the Yes campaign – its use of John Farnham’s You’re the Voice anthem – to criticise the government for not providing more detail about how its proposal would work.
“In a sense, it’s the appropriate theme song for the Yes campaign, because remember that the key line in the lyrics there is, you know, ‘you’re the voice, try to understand it’,” he said.
“I honestly don’t think most Australians understand it. And they want to be informed.”
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has described the Voice as an “advisory committee” chosen by Indigenous people but has not said how many members it would have, or specified how they would be elected.
While Albanese set out his case for the Voice at a campaign event last week, Dutton has not outlined his alternative in detail but took questions on Sky News on Sunday morning that canvassed how the Coalition might try to close the gap on Indigenous disadvantage.
Asked what he would do if the October referendum was defeated and the Coalition won the next election, Dutton said he was willing to negotiate the creation of local and regional consultation groups in response to a report to the government by Indigenous leaders Tom Calma and Marcia Langton last year.
Dutton said the Coalition would go to the next election with a policy to hold a referendum to recognise Indigenous people in the Constitution, but without a Voice specified in the Constitution.
“Yes, I believe very strongly that that is the right thing to do,” he said.
“But enshrining a voice in the Constitution is divisive, it will divide the country down the middle. It will not provide the practical outcomes.
“It will change the way of government very significantly, because of the broad words.”
“And I think it would grind the process of government decision-making to a near halt.”
Albanese warned last week about a halt to progress on closing the gap if the Voice was defeated at the referendum.
“Voting No leads nowhere. It means nothing changes,” he said in his campaign speech.
“Voting No closes the door on this opportunity to move forward.”
Albanese said the Voice would be independent of daily politics, would be set up to offer advice and would not prevent the parliament from making decisions on laws and funding.
He used his speech to quote a key section of the proposed change to the constitution, the last of three provisions on how it would work, which says the parliament would have the power to make laws regarding the “composition, functions, powers and procedures” of the Voice.
Dutton’s remarks on Sunday are the first comments since the referendum launch last week that suggest Australians would go to another referendum on Indigenous recognition if the Voice is defeated on October 14.
Uluru Dialogue co-chair Professor Megan Davis said Australians want constitutional change that isn’t just symbolic.
“There’s no use going to referendum if it’s not going to change the daily lives of First Nations peoples,” she said.
“There’s zero evidence anywhere in the world that a statement of recognition changes anything.”
Professor Megan Davis does not want a “symbolic” referendum. Credit: Luis Enrique Ascui
South Australian traditional owner Kirstie Parker said Dutton’s comments showed the opposition leader wasn’t listening to Indigenous communities.
“Some people have said the referendum is an expensive exercise,” she said. “And here we have the opposition leader proposing to spend the same amount of money on something that would not change lives. That’s the poorest investment of Australian taxpayers’ dollars.”
Asked how many people will make up the Voice, which Albanese has called an advisory committee, Davis said that detail would be worked out by parliament, should the referendum succeed.
“Our primary focus is getting the principle embedded into the constitution. [That principle] is that we should have a voice and we should be at the table.”
The Uluru Dialogue co-chair added that it was not up to her to say whether the people who make up the Voice should be paid.
The elected representatives of Victoria’s First Peoples’ Assembly, for example, are paid a stipend. However, the exact figures are not publicly available.
“The Australian parliament has rules about how you pay people within the framework and machinery of governance,” Davis said.
As for how soon after a successful referendum she and others would like to see the Voice implemented, Davis said she was hoping for at least one day of rest after voters attend the ballot box.
“There’ll be a period of design where communities are asked to contribute to what the Voice looks like. Once that process is finished, it will enter the parliament. I don’t want to speak for the prime minister or the government, but that is the conventional way these things occur.”
Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter here.
Most Viewed in Politics
From our partners
Source: Read Full Article