Referendum not about the details, say Indigenous voice supporters

Indigenous leaders campaigning for the voice say the referendum is solely about whether Australians support constitutional recognition and a voice to parliament.

From the Heart director Dean Parkin. Picture: Liam Kidston

Indigenous leaders campaigning for the voice say the referendum is solely about whether Australians support constitutional recognition and a voice to parliament, with details of how the advisory body would work to be decided afterwards by politicians.

Cape York Land Council chairman Richie Ah Mat said Opposition Leader Peter Dutton and others calling for more detail were “fear mongering” and it would be better for the country, and Australia’s international reputation, for there to be bipartisan support for the “once-in-a-lifetime” opportunity.

“Why is there this fearmongering, this objection to a voice to parliament? It’s just incredible,” he said. “They’ve all come out of the woodwork, and it’s like, they don’t give a damn about the blackfella. The natives, they want something, and it’s not going to cost money, they want something just to right the wrongs of being shot at, when they first landed. They shot our people, most of our people. Imagine if the boot was on the other foot?”

Dean Parkin, director of the From the Heart campaign for the voice, said Australians would know exactly what they were voting on when they stepped into the polling booth this year.

“Some parts of the debate are currently focused on issues that are separate to the question that will be put to the Australian people,” he said. “Australians will be asked to support two things at the referendum: recognising Indigenous people in the Constitution and a voice to parliament. A simple yes or no question of support.

“They won’t be asked about particular voice models or details – that is the job of the parliament to legislate after the referendum, which follows the history of how referendums are decided in our nation.”

Cape York Partnership group CEO and Empowered Communities representative Fiona Jose agreed with activist Noel Pearson that demands for detail were a diversion, noting the Coalition “will get to haggle over every aspect of detail in the parliament after a successful reconciliation”.

“They’ll get to have their say,” he said. “Even then, the model isn’t set in stone. Australia can continue to use the parliament to evolve the model as required, for all time, as we continue to build a stronger and stronger partnership together. If Peter Dutton and his Coalition don’t support constitutional recognition through voice, it is not because they have the answers for Australians, or for Indigenous people. Twenty-one of 26 years in government with much failure and backward momentum is testament to that.”

While Indigenous Australians Minister Linda Burney has said the voice would not advise on taxation or defence issues, Ms Jose said the body should have a say on tax policy that “affects us”.

“Where it doesn’t, which is what the minister was talking about, of course the voice won’t be involved. The Indigenous voice will be busy focusing on real issues that affect us like addiction, joblessness, and crime and violence – issues that have not sprung overnight and require (a) partnership approach with people at the coalface to develop short and long-term solutions,” she said.

Mr Dutton on Tuesday rejected the suggestion he was “playing politics” on the voice and said he was open to voting yes at the referendum but still wanted the detail. “If people don’t understand or the Prime Minister can’t explain it, or at the moment he’s making a political decision not to release the detail because he thinks that’s his best chance, then I think the Prime Minister is going to lead us to failure with this referendum, and I think that would be a tragedy,” he told 3AW radio.