Indigenous Voice co-chairs reject Noel Pearson call

Marcia Langton and Tom Calma say taking the proposal to a referendum before it is legislated risks scuppering the reform.

Marcia Langton says if Noel Pearson’s ‘sequence occurred and a referendum were lost, we would also lose the opportunity to legislate the voice co-design’. Picture: David Geraghty

The co-chairs of the group co-designing an Indigenous voice to government — Marcia Langton and Tom Calma — have said taking the proposal to a referendum before it was legislated risked scuppering the entire ­reform.

Professor Calma and Professor Langton pushed back against Cape York Indigenous leader Noel Pearson, who used a speech on Wednesday to call for the delay of the Indigenous ­advisory body until there could be a referendum to recognise Indigenous Australians in the Constitution.

Their warning came as Labor flagged its support for a legislated “voice to government” as a stepping stone towards constitutional recognition.

Opposition Indigenous Australians spokeswoman Linda Burney told The Australian that while Labor supported a constitutionally enshrined voice, “you are not going to say no to a legislative proposition”.

Mr Pearson, a member of the panel co-designing a voice, on Wednesday said it should be the recognition of Indigenous Australians in the Constitution that “empowers parliament to legislate the voice to parliament”.

“Let us complete the legislative design of the voice, and produce an exposure draft of the bill so that all parliamentarians and the members of the Australian public can see exactly what the voice entails,” Mr Pearson said in the address at the National ­Museum of Australia.

“Let us set the bill aside and settle on the words of constitutional amendment that recognises Indigenous Australians and upholds the Constitution, and put the amendment to a ­referendum of the people at the next best opportunity.”

Professor Langton, a strong supporter of the Uluru Statement from the Heart that recommends a constitutionally enshrined voice, said she hoped the final report into the design of the voice, due in July, would result in legislation being put to parliament.

Tom Calma. Picture: AAP

“Pearson suggested the exposure draft be released before a referendum so it’s a question of sequencing,” she said.

“My opinion is that if Pearson’s sequence occurred and a referendum were lost, we would also lose the opportunity to legislate the voice co-design. I believe the risk is too great and I am hopeful our final report to the minister in July will result in legislation.”

Professor Calma used the failed 1999 republican referendum as a warning of going to a referendum on the issue before the voice was legislated.

“At the time leading into that (the republican referendum), there was a lot of confidence the vote would win, but it went to a referendum and lost. And 21 years later it still hasn’t re-emerged. Are we willing to take that risk with the voice? Many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are saying no,” he said.

“Will governments still have an appetite to create it under legislation if the people have spoken and said they don’t support it?

“I don’t think they will be gutsy enough to do that.

“It is really a question about risk appetite. There is support for the Uluru statement. The sticking point is over whether the voice is established and tested and then goes to referendum, versus not being established and going to a referendum. And then you have the potential of it not getting through and therefore you lost the opportunity for the voice.”

Scott Morrison on Thursday ruled out taking the voice to a referendum and said there was “no clear consensus” on a model for constitutional recognition of Indigenous Australians.

“On the other issue of constitutional recognition, more broadly, there is still no clear consensus proposal at this stage which would suggest mainstream support in the Indigenous community or elsewhere,” the Prime Minister said. “What we are proceeding with is the co-design process that we set up that is seeking the best possible way to have that voice to government.”

The proposal for a constitutionally enshrined voice was formed in the Uluru Statement from the Heart in 2017 but rejected by then prime minister Malcolm Turnbull as a “third chamber to parliament”.

The Morrison government is pursuing a compromise version of the Uluru statement’s proposal in the form of a “voice to government” that would be legislated but not protected in the Constitution.

Noel Pearson used a speech on Wednesday to call for the delay of the Indigenous ­advisory body until there could be a referendum to recognise Indigenous Australians in the Constitution. Picture: Jane Dempster