Indigenous voice to parliament: Specious leaps of logic suggest flights of fancy

Constitutional expert and voice supporter Greg Craven will be furious to find his own words in the No pamphlet.

There is plenty to wound and exasperate the Yes campaign in the pamphlet written by MPs who oppose the Indigenous voice to parliament, including its categorical assertion that “it won’t help Indigenous Australians”.

The No pamphlet is at pains to highlight there are “no details” about the voice, which makes its claim that it cannot make any difference seem a leap of logic.

The pamphlet’s use of Indigenous voices to criticise the proposal is a strong feature. The MPs who wrote this understand that Australians want to know whether Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people support the voice. Uluru Dialogue says polling shows 83 per cent do. The No pamphlet says many do not.

Constitutional expert and voice supporter Greg Craven will be furious to find his own words in the No pamphlet. He argued for a pared-back constitutional amendment because he believed that would improve the referendum’s chances of success. He always intended to vote Yes.

The pamphlet’s attempt to position the voice as an extension of the bureaucracy is an insult to Indigenous communities who have asked for a voice as an antidote to the bureaucracies that have repeatedly ignored them and let them down. The failings of commonwealth departments responsible for delivering Indigenous affairs policy since 1967 were on the minds of some 1200 Indigenous Australians who helped created the Uluru Statement from the Heart six years ago. Design principles published by the Albanese government’s referendum working group 10 months ago describe a voice made up of Indigenous people selected by their communities.

Characterising the voice as yet more ineffective bureaucracy is attention-grabbing. Versions of this argument have been circulating on social media for months. The No pamphlet points out the NIAA has 1400 staff and states: “This agency’s website and corporate plan says: ‘We … ensure Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have a say in the decisions that affect them.’ ”

The department’s website does say that. Does it do that? It is trying. There has been effort to seek out the views of Indigenous communities since the agency was formed in 2019. It proudly appointed its first Indigenous chief executive, Jody Broun, in February last year. It is widely acknowledged inside that bureaucracy that what is missing is a mechanism or the architecture – a voice – to funnel advice from communities to decision-makers. Ms Broun herself wants the outside advice of an Indigenous voice.