Peter Dutton says corporate Australia lacks ‘significant backbone’ for supporting an Indigenous voice to parliament

Rio Tinto, Wesfarmers and BHP stood firm against the Opposition leader’s criticisms, while Linda Burney hinted at an October vote.

Peter Dutton said that if the voice disagreed with Indigenous elders Rio Tinto had formed good relationships with, the voice would override them. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Martin Ollman

Big business is digging in behind an Indigenous voice to parliament despite a scathing attack from Peter Dutton, who accused some of Australia’s largest companies of lacking a “significant backbone” for supporting the constitutional reform.

The Opposition Leader declared a constitutionally enshrined voice was not in the country’s or companies’ best interests after Rio Tinto, Wesfarmers and BHP each donated $2m to the Yes23 campaign.

The corporations declined to respond directly to Mr Dutton on Sunday but both BHP and Wesfarmers pointed The Australian to previous statements of support for the voice, while Ben Wyatt, Australia’s first Aboriginal treasurer and a Rio Tinto board member, said miners were in a strong position to make an informed choice about the independent advisory body ahead of the referendum.

“It’s striking to note that the corporates that have the most direct day-to-day engagement with Aboriginal Australia have taken a position in support of the Yes vote,” Mr Wyatt said.

“All my life corporate Australia has engaged in policy advocacy, whether it be Native Title, industrial relations, taxation reform or equal opportunity. What makes the current debate about the voice slightly different is that a large part of corporate Australia has recognised that the status quo in Aboriginal affairs is not sustainable.

“The choice is simple — does Australia commit to the world views of Dutton, (Pauline) Hanson, (Lidia) Thorpe that rejects reconciliation and lives with consequences; legal and community tension and increasingly marginalised indigenous population? Or does it embrace a pathway for an inclusive and reconciled future?”

Mr Dutton, the leading No campaigner, said many people in corporate Australia were craving popularity and trying to appease those in the Twittersphere by supporting the voice, including through major donations.

“There are many corporates at the moment, frankly, who lack a significant backbone,” he told Sky News’s Sunday Agenda program.

“There are debates that corporate Australia should be involved in and at the moment I don‘t think they’re paying due consideration to the views of their workforce, to the views of the community.

“There are a lot of CEOs and chairs who have very different conversations with you in private than what they say publicly because they‘re worried about ESG (environmental, social and governance) and remuneration packages being voted down at AGMs. It’s time they started to stand up for what’s in our country’s best interests.

“Clearly, the way that the Prime Minister has proposed the voice and conducted himself in his campaign, the voice is not in our country‘s best interests. And on that basis, I hope that people can support us in other tangible ways of finding better outcomes for Indigenous Australians, which is what we all desire.”

Mr Dutton also hit out at Rio Tinto for the “significant damage” it had done to Indigenous culture after destroying rock shelters of exceptional significance at Juukan Gorge.

He claimed that if the voice disagreed with Indigenous elders Rio Tinto had formed good relationships with, the voice would override them.

“How can that be in Rio Tinto’s or that local community’s best interests? A lot of business leaders in our country today need to reassess where they are on some of these debates,” he said.

Rio Tinto declined to respond, while BHP reiterated its longstanding support for the voice by providing The Australian with previous comments made by its Australian president Geraldine Slattery.

“This (support for the voice) is aligned with our support for broader efforts towards reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians,” she said.

Wesfarmers last week said its board and senior management had endorsed a decision to donate $2m to the Yes campaign but the company wasn’t telling team members how to vote.

“In the lead up to the referendum, we’re giving team members the opportunity to learn more about why we’re having a referendum and what is proposed,” Naomi Flutter, who leads Wesfarmers’ reconciliation work, said last week.

“Our focus is to promote informed and respectful discussions, where we know there will be different views, and won’t be telling our team members how to vote because this is a personal decision for every Australian.”

Indigenous Australians Minister Linda Burney also refused to respond to Mr Dutton on Sunday, saying the referendum was not about herself, Anthony Albanese or the Opposition Leader.

She hinted at the referendum being held in October, saying she hoped there’d be “great excitement” about the poll during the AFL and NRL grand finals in late September and early October.

“Of course, there will be a prepoll and that will start two weeks before the referendum, three weeks in the remote areas,” Ms Burney said.

“The invitation of the Uluru Statement from the Heart … wasn’t to politicians, it wasn’t to individuals, it was to the Australian people and the outcome of this referendum, I am sure you will see the Australian people come together and rise to the occasion. I have every faith in them.”

The government has proposed a voice enshrined in the Constitution that would have no veto power over executive government and parliament but be able to provide advice on matters that affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.