Reason entire state were turned against voting Yes to the Voice

One Australian state has been completely turned off voting Yes in the Voice referendum for one painful reason.

Confusion between the proposed Indigenous Voice to Parliament with Western Australia’s Aboriginal cultural heritage laws has turned the majority of the state’s population against voting Yes in the upcoming referendum, a prominent Nationals member has claimed.

Nationals member of parliament for the Central Wheatbelt, Mia Davies, told ABC’s Four Corners that a mass conflation of the two issues were to blame for WA having the equal biggest percentage of No voters in the country next to Queensland — with 61 per cent indicating a No vote in the latest Sydney Morning Herald polling.

“Very early on I could see people linking (the cultural heritage laws with the Voice),” Ms Davies told the program, which aired Monday.

Mass confusion has been blamed for Western Australia turning against the Voice. (Campaigner Noel Pearson pictured). Picture: Chris Kidd

“I tried very hard to make a point to the government that the way they were going about it was creating confusion and chaos, and setting people against the broader debate.”

Her concerns, she said, fell on deaf ears and led to her party being labelled “racist”.

“That was dismissed. We were called racist. We were told we were conflating the two issues. We could see that was happening on the ground in the community and it was making it harder to have those conversations,” she said.

“I was trying to keep the two issues separate.”

Opposition to the Voice has increased steadily throughout the year, with the No vote appearing to gain momentum in all states, most prominently in WA and Queensland.

Mia Davies tried to flag her concerns with the government. Picture: Colin Murty/The Australian

WA Premier Roger Cook scrapped the cultural heritage laws last months. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Philip Gostelow

Thirty nine per cent of WA’s and Queensland’s population have indicated support for the change to the constitution, while 41 per cent is supportive in South Australia, 44 per cent in NSW, 49 per cent in Victoria and 56 per cent in Tasmania.

Nationally, based on SMH polling, people who intended to “definitely” vote No increased to 37 from 33 per cent in the past month alone, while people intending to “probably” vote No was 12 per cent.

Cultural heritage laws binned

WA’s controversial new Aboriginal cultural heritage laws were scrapped last month after widespread backlash — just 39 days after they were brought in.

The decision came after a series of high-profile controversies around the “botched” rollout of the new legislation on July 1.

WA Premier Roger Cook said the new laws were introduced to strengthen protections for cultural sites after the destruction of two ancient rock shelters in the Pilbara’s Juukan Gorge by mining giant Rio Tinto in 2020.

He said: “Put simply, the laws went too far, were too prescriptive, too complicated and placed unnecessary burdens on everyday Western Australian property owners”.

“As Premier, I understand that the legislation has unintentionally caused stress, confusion and division in the community. And for that, I am sorry,” he said in his announcement last month.

“Our response to Juukan Gorge was wrong … We got the balance wrong and what we did hasn’t worked.”

Nationally, support for the Yes vote has plunged. Picture: James Elsby/Getty Images

Mr Cook said his government wanted to “restore confidence in our cultural heritage systems, strike the right balance and provide the community with a simple and effective system”.

“This is a government that listens to everyone in the community,” he said.

“That is why, based on community feedback and following serious consideration, I and the government have made a decision to overturn the Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Act 2021. We will restore the original Act from 1972 with some simple and effective amendments.”

The system of Local Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Services (LACHS) — the key feature of the 2021 Act — which was tasked with determining whether activities would cause “harm” to culturally significant sites, would “not continue”, Mr Cook said.

The rollout of the new legislation, which opponents said had been “slammed through” parliament by Labor, was widely criticised by farmers and landholders in the state for introducing a complex layer of bureaucracy and costly red tape.

Under the three-tiered system, anyone on more than 1100 square metres of land was required to apply for a permit from their LACHS before carrying out certain activities, such as digging fences, planting trees or clearing tracks.

Penalties for damaging a cultural heritage site under the Act ranged from $25,000 to $1 million for individuals and $250,000 to $10 million for corporations, as well as jail time.

– With Frank Chung