Bolt: The Yes23 campaign is addicted to celebrities and treating voters like morons

I don’t mean to be rude to Cathy Freeman but the fact she’s famous for running isn’t an obvious qualification for telling us to change our Constitution to forever divide ourselves by race.

If Cathy Freeman announced she had a tip to make us run faster, I’d be all ears and running shoes.

But, no, Freeman, the admired Olympic champion, said on Wednesday she actually wanted us to vote Yes.

Yes to Labor’s Voice, that is, an advisory parliament in our Constitution just for Aboriginal people.

But here, yet again, is the problem with the Yes23 campaign. Why is it so addicted to celebrities? Why treat voters like morons?

Admired Olympic champion Cathy Freeman wants us to vote Yes. Picture: David Caird

Didn’t Noel Pearson, an architect of the Voice, declare last month that the Yes campaign would ditch its failed tactic of getting celebrity endorsements, and “speak with ordinary Australians” instead?

And the same question again applies: is there some particular reason we should listen to Freeman, rather than any other of the millions of Australians who will have a say on October 14?

That she’s famous for running isn’t an obvious qualification for telling us to change our Constitution to forever divide ourselves by race, and create a Voice of 24 selected – not elected – activists to tell Parliament and public servants what to do, with the power of the High Court behind them.

Sure, I’d have paid attention if Freeman had made a good argument – if she’d finally answered questions, say, about this dodgy Voice that the Prime Minister can’t – about how the Voice members would be chosen, what they would actually do, or the powers they’d have to slow up the government.

If Cathy Freeman announced she had a tip to make us run faster, I’d be all ears and running shoes. Picture: Nick Wilson

But, no. This was the ultimate of celebrity endorsements – don’t mind the details, just look at me. Just go with the vibe, join the party, look good.

I don’t mean to be rude to Freeman, but here’s the essence of her recorded message: “I can’t remember a time when change has felt so urgent. When momentum has been so strong. I know all Australians feel it too.”

(Actually, the momentum is for a No vote.)

On Freeman went: “We have the chance to be part of a moment that brings people together, to work hard for something that we can all believe in.”

(But we don’t “all” believe in this – believe that dividing people by race “brings people together”.)

The closest Freeman came to a real argument was to claim the Voice would “give our kids the very best start in life”, without explaining how. So the questions dogging the Voice remain, including the most basic: isn’t dividing us by race divisive?