Liberal MPs say they voted for a legislated national body in lieu of the Voice to Parliament

Liberal MPs say they left this week’s party room vote on the Voice believing they had agreed to back a legislated national body — because a briefing note told them that was the party’s position.

Many Liberal MPs left a party room meeting on the Voice believing they had agreed to back a legislated national body, because a briefing note circulated by the leadership told them that was the party’s position.

According to the briefing note handed out to MPs on Wednesday at the meeting which rejected the Voice, the Liberals would back a legislated national body in order to offer “a credible alternative”.

However, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton told a press conference after the meeting it was a “resounding” no to a national body, which he described as Canberra’s Voice.

Labelled “Liberal-Party-in-confidence”, the briefing document states that if the Liberal Party “is credibly to reject the government’s current model, it must provide an alternative”, and to that end proposed a “suite of measures … built on three key pillars”.

The three measures were constitutional recognition, a local and regional body, and a legislated national body.

“The third pillar of the proposed Alternative Model is a commitment to a national bodyas (sic) and offering to develop such legislation on a bipartisan basis in advance of the referendum,” the document states.

“Importantly, this legislation would be subject to clear caveats clearly defined responsibilities for the national body and proper connection between the local and regional bodies and the national body.”

Opposition Leader Peter Dutton (right) and Deputy Leader Sussan Ley announce that federal Liberal MPs will campaign for a ‘no’ vote. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

A number of MPs said the circulation of the document by the leadership led them to believe this was now the Liberal Party’s position.

“Obviously if you leave the room with that piece of paper and the leader has endorsed it then that’s what the position is — everyone thought that’s what the policy was,” one MP said.

Another said that while Mr Dutton hadn’t explicitly said at the meeting that the party’s position was to support a legislated national Voice, it was there in black and white.

“In these matters you go on the papers,” the MP said.

A third MP said that leaving the meeting he had been “absolutely clear” this was the party’s position.

“We did agree that — 100 per cent that is what we agreed to,” the MP said. “It’s in writing.”

The MP said he had supported the position expounded in the paper.

“It achieves exactly the same thing but without creating the constitutional minefield,” he said.

But another said that while the document circulated to the meeting might have backed a legislated national Voice, the overwhelming sentiment of the meeting had been to reject any form of national body in favour of local voices.

“Shadow cabinet agreed to what was announced,” he said.

In his press conference on Wednesday, Mr Dutton said “The Liberal Party resolved today to say yes to constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians, yes to a local and regional body so that we can get practical outcomes for Indigenous people on the ground, but there was a resounding no to the Prime Minister’s Canberra Voice.”

A spokesman for Mr Dutton said Wednesday’s statements “clearly outlined the Liberal party room’s position”.

Got a news tip? Email [e-mail]