Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I'd like to start my contribution on the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Amendment Bill 2022 today by acknowledging the traditional custodians of the land on which we meet, the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people. I pay respects to their elders past, present and emerging. I especially want to acknowledge any First Nations people who may be in the chamber today and any who may be watching. Thank you for care of country over thousands of years.

As a nation we will have an important opportunity later this year to begin to work towards righting a past wrong by ensuring that First Nations people are recognised in our Constitution and that their voices will forevermore be heard directly at the highest level of our federal parliament whenever it is seeking to create a law that directly impacts on First Nations people. This seems like a really simple thing to wish for for those who have come before us: recognition and empowerment. And yet this ambition is far from achieved right at this moment in time. From my personal perspective, I believe it's a privilege to be part of the generation that is prepared to step into this uncomfortable space and begin the process of transforming our nation into a land where we're all rightfully respected and where we can all connect on the basis of a shared history that goes back over 65,000 years.

I hope that everyone will join with me in voting yes with ambition, optimism and determination in the referendum when the opportunity arises. You see, I do believe it's unacceptable that our 122-year-old Constitution does not recognise the first people of Australia. How can the document on which all truth of our nation is based be silent when it comes to recognising the sovereign nations that existed here prior to white settlement? The conversations around enshrining an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament in the Australian Constitution are currently taking place right across our country as people seek to come to grips with what it means exactly for them and what impact it may have on them. From my perspective, a constitutional voice will not just be symbolic; it will be a substantive recognition. In the words from the Statement From the Heart group, who are without a doubt much closer to this than I, the proposals are simple and elegant—and they make the essential changes required. They describe the Voice as being a modest request that will deliver a fair go to Indigenous Australians, as a practical step which will give us our best chance to close the gap and as a unifying moment for all Australians.

But what exactly does it mean to enshrine this Voice in the Constitution? And why is the mechanics of how we do it so important? It's because the Voice needs to be enshrined in our Australian Constitution to ensure it remains a permanent part of our democracy. Constitutional enshrinement can only be achieved through a referendum, so all Australians of voting age will have the opportunity to have their say about this proposition at the ballot box. But, given this, the machinery in place to conduct this process of change must match the weight which this moment carries. The proposed amendments to the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 are important, and I'm conscious that the last referendum was held in 1999. I agree, then, with the importance of modernising the legislation that will govern how this referendum is conducted. The referendum vote will be the culmination, but not the end, of a long-overdue national conversation about the rights and dignity of our First Nations people. We must accept that this conversation needs to be evidence based and facts led. As a nation, in order to mature and to take steps forward together, we must look to create spaces where respectful conversations can occur. During the week of action this last month, the Uluru Statement from the Heart launched a series of yarning circles. The yarning circle concept is used by many First Nations people across the world. It's a space for active listening and reflection. This is the approach that I hope we can all take collectively in the lead-up to the vote.

The bill as drafted suspends the operations of the provisions of the Referendum Act that require the preparation and distribution of a pamphlet with 'yes' and 'no' cases for the referendum question. I don't agree with this provision and, indeed, have had people from within North Sydney express their concern that this resource would not be available to them. Of course, communications have changed since the pamphlet was first introduced in 1912. As a member of parliament, I do have opportunities to engage with my voters directly and regularly through a wide range of sources, including direct email, social media, website communications and radio and television commentary. I will do these things, but they should be in addition to and not instead of an official fact-checked pamphlet which has been worked on by the members of parliament. In this context, I welcome the undertakings from the Prime Minister that the bill will be amended to ensure a factual, informative resource will be distributed nationally. The pamphlet must be clear. It must be factual. It must have a factual explanation of the proposal with concise and considered arguments for and against. Importantly, it would be in addition to and not a substitute for a civics campaign. Ultimately, I believe this resource will help the community of North Sydney and the vast majority of the Australian community engage in a respectful discourse, and we will all be better off for it.

I also note and support the recommendations that the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters have made following their inquiry into the bill relating to enfranchisement and participation in the referendum. All communications from the government and the Electoral Commission must be clear, factual and impartial, and provided in appropriate formats for all Australians, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds, and older Australians.

I'm was also supportive of calls for the Electoral Commission to prioritise increasing the enrolment rate for First Nations people prior to the referendum. The current rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander enrolment and participation in elections remains low, at just 84.5 per cent compared to a 97 per cent overall enrolment rate. Indeed, the estimated number of unenrolled Indigenous Australians has come under 100,000 for the first time, to just 87,000. That is significant, but that still leaves a balance that remains at nearly the equivalent of an entire electorate worth of voters who are not enfranchised. We must do better.

In an age of disinformation, truth in political advertising laws at a federal level is urgently needed. Currently, political ads are not fact checked, with the validity of content, be that truthful or otherwise, left up to the voter to determine. Deliberate misinformation and misrepresentation continue to erode trust in government and our democratic institutions by the electorate. For this reason, I support the introduction of robust laws that prohibit false statements and misattribution in political advertising in any election process. So I support the member for Warringah's amendment, which would prohibit misleading or deceptive political advertising. I think it's a practical, popular and proven way to clean up our politics whilst approaching the regulation of political advertising with caution and respect for our constitutional freedom of political communication.

In mirroring the financial disclosure provisions of the Electoral Act, this bill has inevitably picked up on the problematic aspects of our current electoral laws. I welcome the move to regulate referendum donations and spending, but unfortunately the bill has adopted the less desirable provisions, including a lack of real-time disclosure and the retention of a high donation threshold. I believe this is a missed opportunity for overall positive reform. This moment deserves a process and a framework that is not just up to scratch but is the most efficient it can practicably be. Again, I can't stress enough the weight that this moment carries. We can't afford to get it wrong.

As an advocate for integrity in this parliament, I acknowledge the transparency and integrity that these amendments will bring to the voting process. Importantly, the amendments will also increase accessibility for many Australians. Behind this referendum is a principle, a principle of recognition of our First Nations people. The question at the centre of the conversation—do you support an alteration of the Constitution that establishes an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice?—is absolutely what matters. Recognition is a simple statement of fact that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were indeed the first people here and form part of the oldest continuing culture on earth, yet Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people continue to experience a lower quality of life outcomes than Indigenous Australians. Despite good intentions, governments and parliaments by themselves cannot provide lasting solutions. A voice is a practical way to achieve this recognition in the Australian Constitution and facilitate Indigenous people directly advising politicians about what really works in their communities, offering practical solutions to their unique challenges, including jobs, health, education and justice. It will also ensure that policies and laws deliver practical results on the ground and secure value for taxpayer investment.

This is a conversation that needs to be had with respect, and each of our communities' ambitions need to be heard through this referendum process, ensuring that no one voice is more important than another. Ultimately, everyone has the right to their own opinion, and the machinery of the referendum will ensure we each have the right for that opinion to be counted. Together we are going to have a conversation that matters about how constitutional recognition will take all of Australia forward as a nation, and I believe the proposed amendments would help to ensure that.

Ultimately, the Uluru statement is an invitation from First Nations peoples that has been issued to all Australians. I hope the people of North Sydney and all Australians can accept the invitation with kindness and respect, and I look forward to working with my community and all of my fellow members in this place to ensure the conversation that takes place is respectful and provides the space for us each to make our own decision.

See this speech in context