Julian Leeser stakes out middle ground on Indigenous voice to parliament proposal

By taking a stand on principle, Julian Leeser has bolstered the Liberal Party tradition of freedom of thought for its members and shone a light on the uncompromising stand being taken by Anthony Albanese on the Indigenous voice to parliament.

Mr Leeser will devote his energies towards compromise in the parliamentary committee process, which still has a chance to gain bipartisan support for the wording of the referendum that ultimately will be put to a vote at the end of the year.

Mr Leeser has pledged to vote yes regardless but will prosecute what he is calling “the press club model” for the voice that he set out before his parliamentary colleagues decided on a united position to vote no.

The hard stand taken in the Liberal partyroom reflects the equally hard line adopted by Labor that puts the right of the voice to deal with the executive government in the Constitution. All sides agree on constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians.

From that point the referendum question put by Labor enshrines a national voice in the Constitution that can consult with all levels of government. Details of how this would operate would be decided by parliament after the referendum was held. The Liberal Party wants a voice to be made representative of local and regional communities and to be legislated rather than included in the Constitution.

Mr Leeser’s press club model for the voice calls for regional bodies connected into a national voice as outlined in the original Calma-Langton report. He said his plan would give constitutional recognition without using symbolic language that could empower activist judges.

He proposes removing clause two of the wording being considered by the parliamentary committee. The second clause of the proposed constitutional amendment says the voice “may make representations to the parliament and the executive government of the commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples”. Mr Leeser argues his proposal is constitutionally safe and recognises that all Australians have a share in this land and its future.

Political opponents have seized on Mr Leeser’s decision to resign as opposition legal affairs and Indigenous Australians spokesman to return to the backbench as a reflection on Peter Dutton. Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said it was not too late for the Opposition Leader to change his mind. This applies equally to the Prime Minister.

Mr Leeser said he was resigning “without rancour or bitterness” and that he remained loyal to Mr Dutton. By declaring he would campaign against the current wording, Mr Dutton had strengthened the hand of Mr Leeser to seek a compromise in the parliamentary committee process during the next six weeks.

The lesson of history is that Australians are unlikely to support constitutional change without bipartisan support. Mr Leeser said the risk of failure needed to be recognised by the government and that an “all or nothing” approach risked delivering nothing. He said it was within the power of the parliamentary and committee process to move to a more secure footing and this was where his focus would be.

Mr Leeser’s views are in accordance with the position we have taken in recent weeks that bipartisan support is vital to give the voice referendum the best chance of success, and that the parliamentary committee process is the vehicle through which it can be secured. Mr Leeser’s resignation is not a political act against his leader. It is a genuine attempt to secure constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians in a way that gives the referendum its best chance of success.