Anthony Albanese adopts new tone for Indigenous voice to parliament

The PM has embarked on a reset of his Indigenous voice to parliament campaign to engage the support of the Coalition.

Anthony Albanese told ­parliament Australia’s international reputation is on the line and that a No result could damage some key economic relationships. Picture: AAP

Anthony Albanese has embarked on a major reset of his campaign for an Indigenous voice to parliament to engage the support of the Coalition, promising to provide further detail and use a bipartisan committee to be set up next month to maximise support for the ­referendum.

The Australian understands the Prime Minister is planning to hold a national vote between September and December and will ­ensure the body cannot sit on powerful cabinet subcommittees such as the expenditure review committee, which informs the budget process, although it could make submissions.

After weeks of growing tension between Mr Albanese and Peter Dutton over the voice and an ­alcohol-fuelled crime wave in Alice Springs, the Prime Minister sought to shore up  the Yes campaign’s ­momentum in parliament on Thursday. 

Mr Albanese told parliament he was not opposed to compromise and negotiation on the voice referendum, but urged the ­Coalition to approach the issue with an open mind and heart.    

He warned that the stakes for the nation were high and that a ­defeated referendum would be devastating to Indigenous communities. Mr Albanese told ­parliament that Australia’s international reputation was on the line and that a No result could damage some key economic relationships.

“I want to maximise support for this referendum,” Mr Albanese said. “I am not here to say this is the government’s position: take it or leave it. I want to say to those opposite, I ask them to join me in having an open mind but importantly an open heart when it comes to these issues.

“I ask you to think about … how Indigenous Australians will feel if it is not successful, how Australians will feel and how Australia is perceived internationally as well, including our economic partners in the region.”

In his most impassioned plea to the Coalition yet, Mr Albanese said he could not do more than “stand here and offer genuine engagement in order to achieve a positive outcome”.

“This process cannot be one of Labor versus Liberal; we have to rise above this,” he said.

Mr Albanese said he had met the Opposition Leader six times so far on the voice and wanted to “engage genuinely” with him.

Coalition frontbenchers sympathetic to the voice welcomed the intention to engage, but said more detail still needed to be provided.

“I have been appealing for government to heed the call of people who don’t want to see a referendum fail and that they should provide as much … information as possible to negate the argument that there is insufficient detail,” said opposition foreign affairs spokesman Simon Birmingham.

Opposition legal affairs spokesman Julian Leeser challenged Mr Albanese to answer the 15 questions put to the government by Mr Dutton that sought to flesh out the voice. Some of these questions ­included who would be eligible to serve on the body; how would it help close the gap; what are the voice’s functions and powers; how much it would cost taxpayers; and whether the government would clarify the definition of Aboriginality to determine who could serve on the grouping.

Peter Dutton rejected Mr Albanese’s claims there had been bipartisanship so far, suggesting the Prime Minister had tried to claim “the high moral ground” particularly in the wake of the alcohol-fuelled wave of violence and crime which had gripped Alice Springs.

“Every Australian prime ­minister has a big heart and wants to see an improved situation for Indigenous Australians,” the Opposition Leader said.

“There is no moral high ground here. There is no lecturing to take place. Every Australian wants to see a better outcome for Australians, starting with those little boys and girls in Alice Springs at the moment, who are living an ­unimaginable life.”

Mr Dutton said the Coalition had approached the debate over the voice in good faith and offered “legitimate engagement” including when it was in government.

“It resulted in us taking a policy to the last election, which allowed for a local and regional voice, because we demonstrated that we wanted to hear, listen and act upon those local, Indigenous elders,” he said. “That was our ­approach. Since the election, there has been no bipartisan engagement, in terms of the approach around the legislation.”

Mr Dutton reiterated the need for more detail, and lashed the government for initially opposing the provision of a pamphlet for information on the Yes and No campaigns. “Australians in their millions at the moment have goodwill and have an approach, which I think is reflected in the view that we have taken constructively as an opposition, that is … that they want to understand the detail that the Prime Minister is proposing,” he said.

Indigenous Australians Minister Linda Burney told parliament the voice would not have a “permanent” seat at the table for national cabinet, nor would it have any veto powers over the decisions of government or its departments. The voice would also not have access to high-level cabinet committees, such as the expenditure review committee or the national security committee, but it would be able to make submissions, the Australian understands.

Mr Albanese made reference to moderate Liberals who had ­approached Labor members over the voice, saying the government had listened to their concerns by reversing its opposition to the ­provision of pamphlets for the Yes and No campaigns.

“For them, the publication of a booklet was important ... So we agreed,” the Prime Minister said.

While the reintroduction of the pamphlets was welcomed by ­Coalition MPs, there was a split within Liberal ranks over whether the Yes and No campaigns should receive public funding.

Mr Dutton said both cases needed to be funded equally, but some leading moderates including Senator Birmingham and Andrew Bragg clarified that they did not want taxpayer funds going towards campaign activities.

“I’m not keen to see large licks of taxpayer funding spent on running campaigns,” Senator Birmingham said. “There may need to be some administrative support for the standing up of official Yes or No campaign committees, but that’s about as far as I’d want to see anything go.”

Fiona Jose, the Empowered Communities’ Cape York representative, said the push for a voice needed to be above politics.

“Processes that encourage constructive engagement from all sides will help to build the positive collaboration needed for a successful referendum for constitutional recognition through voice,” Ms Jose said.

“This long overdue reform should be above politics and party political positions.”

Empowered Communities representatives met politicians from both sides of parliament this week to discuss the significance of a voice. Ms Jose said she was “very disappointed” Mr Dutton had not made the time to meet with them.

Mr Dutton was sent a letter by Empowered Communities, seen by The Australian, urging him to visit them in the next eight months. The opposition leader’s office told The Australian Mr Dutton had recently met with Indigenous leader and architect of the Empowered Communities, Noel Pearson, and that his frontbencher, Mr Leeser, met with the group this week instead.

Additional reporting: Paige Taylor