Indigenous voice to parliament: Peter Dutton says his government would ‘fight’ for constitutional recognition

The Opposition Leader has rejected Anthony Albanese’s threat this year’s Indigenous voice referendum is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for constitutional recognition.

Peter Dutton says a government he leads will pursue constitutional recognition and legislated local and regional voices. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Peter Dutton has committed the Coalition to “fighting for” constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians, as he dismissed Anthony Albanese’s threat of Australia losing a once-in-a-generation chance for recognition as “arrogant and dismissive”.

In response to the Prime Minister’s warning that a No vote in the voice referendum would mean constitutional recognition would not come around again, the Opposition Leader committed a Dutton-led government to constitutional recognition.

He also vowed to legislate local and regional Indigenous voices but not a national voice.

“The unifying moment for our country would be to vote for constitutional recognition,” he said.

“A vote for the voice will divide our country; that’s why a Coa­lition government I lead will fight for constitutional recognition.”

At the Garma Festival in ­Arnhem Land last weekend, Mr Albanese warned voters that, like the republican referendum 20 years ago, a vote against the Indigenous voice to parliament would mean it would not come again.

“We know that this is a once-in-a-generation opportunity,” Mr Albanese said on the ABC’s Insiders program, hosted in Garma.

“Many people in the republic referendum thought it would come around again. And that’s why I say to those people, including people who say, ‘It doesn’t go far enough, so therefore, I’m going to vote No’, don’t think that other issues can be advanced by a No vote.

“A No vote will be a vote for more of the same.”

Mr Dutton said Mr Albanese was being dismissive and arrogant. “The Prime Minister is having a dummy spit when he says vote for the voice or you get nothing. His approach is arrogant and dismissive of the views of millions of Australians,” he said.

“The public just isn’t supportive of the voice but they will support constitutional recognition.

“When a prime minister turns his back on the country, people won’t forget that betrayal.

“The Australian public would overwhelmingly support constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians but people won’t support the voice for many reasons but mainly because the Prime Minister won’t give the ­detail on how it will work.”

While Mr Albanese has not said whether he would seek to legislate an Indigenous voice if the referendum fails because he is concentrating on a successful poll, Mr Dutton said a Coalition government would legislate for local and regional voices to ensure bills could be withdrawn and corrected.

The government and voice supporters say it should be enshrined in the Constitution so future governments can’t get rid of it with the stroke of a pen.

“As we’ve seen in Western Australia, if you get a law wrong, even if there was good intent at the start, you can amend or ­abolish the law,” Mr Dutton said, referring to the West Australian government’s repeal of its controversial cultural heritage laws.

“If it’s in the Constitution there is no turning back. No amendment or abolition, you’re stuck with it.

“The beauty of our proposal is we propose constitutional recognition as well as a local and regional advisory body in legislation, not in the Constitution. In legislation you can make changes. No law can change the Constitution.”

Mr Dutton’s vow to take ­constitutional recognition to the next election without a voice is likely to infuriate the Yes camp, with many campaigners sceptical the Coalition would ­follow through with another ­referendum.

They argue the Coalition had nine years to deliver constitutional recognition – which was first proposed by John Howard – but failed to do so.

Leading Yes supporters this week backed Mr Albanese in warning this referendum would be Australians’ only chance to pass constitutional recognition in a generation.