Nasty tone of Indigenous voice to parliament debate may benefit ‘no’ campaign as divisions bubble to surface of yes proponents
Noel Pearson’s verbal attack on fellow Indigenous voice to parliament proponent Mick Gooda has sparked concerns the Cape York leader is trying to veto any compromise on constitutional change and that a nasty debate will benefit serve the “No” campaign.
Indigenous leader Noel Pearson’s verbal attack on fellow Indigenous voice to parliament proponent Mick Gooda has prompted concerns he is trying to veto any compromise on constitutional change and that a nasty debate will benefit servethe “No” campaign.
Mr Pearson on Friday described former Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander social justice commissioner Mick Gooda, who worked on a blueprint for the voice with Indigenous leaders Marcia Langton and Tom Calma, as a bedwetter.
It came after Mr Gooda said it might be necessary to water down the words of the constitutional amendment for the voice in order to secure support.
“Mick Gooda’s wrong,” Mr Pearson told the ABC.
“He’s never been involved in the process that led to the Uluru Statement from the Heart. He had no involvement.”
Mr Pearson believed that Mr Gooda – whom he called “little Mickey Gooda” – had made his remarks prematurely after an outlier poll purported to show support for the voice was falling.
“His early bed-wetting, just when we’re yet to start the campaign proper, is not right. He does not represent Indigenous people in the position he’s taken,” Mr Pearson said.
Mr Gooda said he anticipated Mr Pearson’s attack. “Of course, I knew it was coming,” he said.
Two figures in the campaign for the voice told The Weekend Australian they feared the chances of success could be damaged if the “Yes” side was associated with personal attacks and “petty” name calling.
Mr Pearson’s comments came as several Liberal MPs said a compromise on the executive government clause would lead them to reconsider their opposition to the voice.
This was despite Mr Pearson on Friday claiming that compromise on the voice would not secure further Coalition support.
Indigenous voice to parliament supporter Chris Kenny also writes in The Weekend Australian that is time for Labor to compromise with Liberals on the referendum wording to ensure its success at the ballot box.
Mr Pearson last month apologised in the Australian Jewish News after he made remarks about former opposition Indigenous affairs spokesman Julian Leeser, who had asked the government to clarify which definition of Aboriginality it would use to determine eligibility to serve on the voice. It was one of 15 questions Liberal leader Peter Dutton sent to Anthony Albanese in February.
“I’m wondering whether Julian expects us to wear a tattoo identifying ourselves as Indigenous?” Mr Pearson said on Sky News. “Or that our clothes should be adorned with some kind of badge identifying us as Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander?”
Mr Pearson later told the Jewish newspaper: “If any of my friends in the Jewish community were distressed by my choice of words then I’m completely apologetic for that.”
Mr Leeser intends to vote “Yes” at the referendum but has frustrated many on the “Yes” side who say he is helping the “No” campaign with his continued push for the wording to be changed. He believes the voice’s authority to advise executive government as well as parliament should be spelled out in legislation, not in the Constitution.
Speaking about the tone of the voice debate on Friday, Mr Leeser said: “We need to find common ground in our country – and not only on this issue. We all have to walk a mile in each other’s shoes. All of us have to be bigger people and the see the best in each other.
“If you are a leader or advocate of the ‘Yes’ case, then you have a responsibility to listen to the legitimate questions of those who doubt. And if you are a leader or advocate for the ‘No’ case, then you have a responsibility to listen to the aspirations of Indigenous Australians who see value in a voice.”
The debate is likely to intensify next week when the bill containing the referendum question and proposed amendment is introduced into parliament. However, there have been insults in the public domain for months, including when constitutional expert Greg Craven claimed there was an “all or nothing” faction in the “Yes” campaign that would rather see the voice fail if it did not reflect their vision. One member of the government’s referendum working group responded by calling him “Crybaby Craven”.
On Friday, Mr Leeser said he respected Mr Gooda enormously. “Like Mick I am concerned about where the polling currently is, and like him I want to see the ‘Yes’ vote win,” he said. “I want the voice to win at the referendum because failure would be catastrophic for our country and for reconciliation.
“As well, I support the voice because the current system is broken. As a nation we are failing on Indigenous health, education, housing, safety and economic advancement.”
Eminent lawyer Mark Leibler, who was co-chair of the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians. said he felt the stress of the voice debate. “I can understand why emotions run fairly strong in relation to this. I feel that sort of stress, I have to say, myself,” he said.
More Coverage
Terror disbandment underscores Bali bombings anniversary
‘Amid that terrible darkness, the terrorists could not break the spirit of humanity’, the PM said as he commemorated the Bali bombings.
Price blasts PM on failures, one year on from voice vote
Indigenous senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price says the Albanese government has no interest in listening to marginalised Indigenous people and continues to fail on Aboriginal policy.