Linda Burney denies Voice could weigh in on Australia Day, despite experts agreeing it has the power

Australia Day could be in the firing line of a future Indigenous Voice to Parliament, experts and campaigners have claimed, despite a denial from the government that no such change would occur.

Australia Day and other national celebrations could be in the firing line of a future Indigenous Voice to Parliament, experts and campaigners have claimed, despite a denial from the government that no such change would occur.

Indigenous Australians minister Linda Burney on Thursday hosed down a possible change to the date of Australia Day should the Voice referendum pass, saying “the Australian government has a very clear policy on Australia Day”.

But the denial did nothing to allay the fears of critics.

“I expect Australia Day is one of the first things they’ll try and change,” Chris Merritt, vice president of the Rule of Law Institute of Australia, said.

“If you look at what all the leading proponents of the Voice have said … it will be high on the agenda.”

Protesters march down Elizabeth St in Sydney. Picture: John Grainger

Mr Merritt said the Voice would be able to make representations on Australia Day because “as it is proposed, it will be able to weigh in on any aspect of Australian life and if the parliament tries to set rules around it, that will be challenged in the High Court.”

Aboriginal leader Warren Mundine, one of the organisers of the “no” campaign on the upcoming referendum agreed, saying: “If the Voice gets up it will be Australia Day and a lot more than that”, adding: “It is nothing more than a constitutional power grab for a minority of activists and elites.”

However, speaking in Darwin on Thursday, Ms Burney said the Voice “will certainly not be about making changes to things like Australia Day … we have no plans to change it.”

The Indigenous Australians minister’s comments were slammed by deputy opposition leader Sussan Ley who said “given the scope of Anthony Albanese’s proposal remains undefined, the minister cannot rule out the Voice having a de facto veto over our national days of commemoration.”

Indigenous Ministers Linda Burney and Ken Wyatt in Perth. Picture: NCA NewsWire

“The Voice has been sold to the Australian people as only providing for decision making on Indigenous issues, but the idea that this could include a vote on matters affecting every Australian is deeply concerning,” Ms Ley said. “We want Australians to be proud of our country … but it is clear that the prime minister’s proposal would divide Australians rather than bring us together.”

Mr Merritt agreed, saying Ms Burney “cannot possibly say Australia Day is beyond the scope of the voice, unless she proposes to change the wording of the constitutional provision”.

Deputy Oppostion Leader Sussan Ley says changes to Australia Day cannot be ruled out. Picture: Martin Ollman

Speaking in the Northern Territory on Thursday, opposition leader Peter Dutton said that in communities like Alice Springs, it was pointless to wait for a potential Voice when people needed help today.

“The Voice vote is in October of this year and then there is a six month consultation period proposed if the Voice gets up to work out what the design of the Voice actually is (yet) you’ve got kids here tonight who are going to be sexually abused or families where domestic violence has now become a (regular) occurrence and we’re told that nothing could be done about it. I just find it completely and utterly deplorable,” Mr Dutton said.

One of the leading architects of the Voice proposal, Megan Davis, has written it will have the power to “speak on a broad range of matters”, adding: “The success and legitimacy of the Voice will rely on its ability to be judicious and make sensible decisions on what representations it does make.”

A spokesman from the Prime Minister’s office said:, “The Voice will be an independent advisory group made up of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.

“It will make a practical difference on the ground in communities. Nothing in the constitutional provision detracts from the primacy of the democratically elected Parliament.

“It is disingenuous and divisive to suggest otherwise.”