On Monday, the Nationals party room came to a joint position to oppose the proposition of a constitutionally enshrined Voice to Parliament.
I support the party room’s decision — at this point in time. I strongly believe if a referendum is put to the people of Australia proposing to alter the Constitution to create a new instrument of government, then the people are entitled to know what that instrument is, how it would be formed and what impact it would have in improving the health and prosperity of First Nations people. This last point is what I am focused on working to achieve.
I have reservations about a constitutionally enshrined instrument of government based on race. In my maiden speech to Parliament, I said that “my observation of my community is that we seem to do better when we celebrate each other’s different cultural identity but moreover embrace each other’s humanity — humanity being a stronger bond between us than any attempt to be amplified by race, gender sexual orientation or religious view”. I believe this is the way we need to move forward as a society. I hope the Indigenous people in Nicholls do know they have a voice. My predecessors in this role have facilitated meetings between local First Nations leaders and government ministers, and I commit to doing this even more extensively.
I believe that the deliberate lack of detail, and the Albanese government’s refusal to provide any detail, means the referendum risks failure.
Ultimately, every Australian voter will have to make a choice, and without sufficient detail many will also tread cautiously.
A failed referendum sets reconciliation back a long way — and I don’t want to see that for First Nations people or our nation. Though the motives for voting against the referendum would be, in my view, lack of detail, many would impugn a racist motive, and this creates more division.
Historically, there are wrongs to be righted, and we need to be able to unite on this issue. Surely the best way to do that is to provide the detail and work together to convince Australians of the merits. This is not what the government is currently doing.
As I stated, I am against the Voice proposal at this point in time. My Coalition colleague Shadow Minister for Indigenous Australians Julian Leeser has proposed that the government needs to provide answers to seven questions in order for Australians to have confidence in supporting a Voice to Parliament.
• Who will be on the Voice?
• How will these people be chosen?
• What powers and functions will it have?
• How will it represent the diverse communities that make up our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples?
• How will it address the real issues that affect people’s lives every day in communities?
• Will regional and local bodies exist?
• How will the government ensure the body hears from voices who don’t already have a platform in Australian public life?
Labor has proposed a simple question for a possible referendum to be held before the next election: “Do you support an alteration to the Constitution that establishes an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice?”
Without detail we risk unintended consequences, and it is my responsibility as an elected representative to carefully analyse something so significant. What the Parliament will decide on will be the wording of a proposed amendment of the Constitution. If that does pass, it will go to a referendum and it will be up to each and every one of the constituents of Nicholls to make their own decision based on the information before them.
Sam Birrell is the Federal Member for Nicholls