Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to discuss the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Amendment Bill 2022. Of the 44 referenda that have been put to the Australian people, only eight have succeeded. Personally, this will be the first referendum that I will vote in, and it's worth remembering that this will be true for more than six million Australians. It is vital that Australians have trust in any referendum and understand the process they are participating in.

This bill is amending the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 in preparation for the referendum on an Indigenous Voice to Parliament and will apply these proposed changes to the conduct of this referendum and any others that follow. It is very important to note that this bill is not dealing with the issue of the Indigenous Voice to Parliament, but rather the way in which any future referendum campaign is conducted in Australia. This bill makes a number of non-controversial changes to the act to bring the operation of the referendum in line with the Commonwealth Electoral Act.

The bill suspends the provisions of the referendum act that require the production and distribution of a 'yes' and 'no' case on the proposed constitutional change and imposes restrictions on the government otherwise spending money on a referendum campaign. It will regulate donations and expenditure for referendum campaigns and impose reporting obligations. It will ban foreign donations of amounts of more than $100 being used for a referendum campaign and ban foreign campaigners authorising referendum material.

The bill updates the referendum act to generally bring it into line with the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, which has been amended recently. In this age of disinformation, it's so important that the government takes the lead and provides clear information to Australians about the referendum procedure and has a strong and robust referendum process. We have raised three points with the government to address our concerns about this process: we've asked for a restoration of the pamphlet to outline the 'yes' and the 'no' cases, for the establishment of official 'yes' and 'no' campaign organisations and for appropriate funding of these official organisations.

I'll now talk about why these changes are required. These measures are fundamental to having a referendum with informed voters and having a process with integrity. It is also the basis on which other referenda have operated and will be consistent with this precedent, and it is the way we practise democracy in Australia.

The government has stated that the purpose of removing this provision relates to the modernisation of the referendum process in the digital age. Other arguments have included the desire not to publish a significant amount of printed material that will not be read and will end up in landfill. However, Labor did not explain why the removal of the pamphlet in its entirety could not be replaced with a digital pamphlet or that the AEC will continue to provide printed material to households, as part of the referendum.

In evidence to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, the AEC provided evidence that the pamphlet to all households would be expected to cost approximately $10 million. And the AEC noted that around 40 per cent of Australians rely on the printed material that the commission, in conducting an election, provides to households. It's an important number to repeat, Mr Deputy Speaker: 40 per cent of Australians rely on the printed material that the commission provides when conducting an election. We need to remember that there are a large portion of Australians who are not digitally literate. We have an obligation and responsibility to provide them with easily accessible information on this referendum and any referendum in the future.

I do understand that the community are concerned about misinformation and I share their concern. We know that, unfortunately, electoral events are increasingly influenced by misinformation. The ACCC reported that 92 per cent of the respondents to the ACCC news survey had some concerns about the quality of news and journalism they were consuming, and that analysis had 'identified concerning consumer and competition harms across a range of digital platform services that are widespread, entrenched, and systemic'. That is why printed booklets in official campaigns are so important.

We now operate in a social media world which has changed the way in which we consume information. Through social media, artificial intelligence and deepfake videos, we've adapted to getting news that we can no longer trust. In many ways, we are losing the ability to trust our eyes and ears. Sometimes this is innocent, but, as other members have spoken about, there are bad faith actors that are looking to use these new technologies and platforms in social media to mislead and undermine campaigns. That's why we need these official 'yes' and 'no' pamphlets—to give greater certainty to all Australians.

Freedom of speech and democracy ensures that we can express and seek differing points of view to make up our own minds; to form our own opinions and make our own decisions. Democracy depends on this. Labor has not made any provisions for an official 'yes' and 'no' campaign organisation to be established. This is of concern in relation to the implementation of modern electoral regulations on donations and foreign interference. An official campaign structure will provide boundaries for the AEC to coordinate education on the responsibilities of organisations and individuals participating in the campaign. The regulatory auditing process to administer these regulatory schemes would be assisted by having official campaigns to provide a starting point for enforcement and education by the AEC. We welcome the government's announcement that they will restore the pamphlet; however, having an official 'yes' and 'no' campaign would make things simpler for the regulatory environment and for the proper conduct of the referendum. It would go a long way to countering the misinformation that could be distributed through digital and social media.

An official campaign structure is going to be the best way for our regulators to ensure appropriate education and enforcement of the electoral laws for this referendum and future referendums. We know that a significant number of participants and organisations in this referendum will not be associated with political parties or regularly participate in electoral events, so having a single point of coordination to provide education and to commence any audit process for donations or foreign interference is the best way to ensure the integrity of this referendum.

As I said earlier, we have a whole generation of Australians who have never voted in a referendum. Here in Canberra we're very engaged every day. It's literally our job and the job of our staff to be engaged in the detail of the political process. But I think we all know that many Australians are not engaged with the political process. That's not a criticism of them: it's a fact—it's an observation. They're focused on putting food on the table. They're focused on taking their kids to sport and being engaged with their communities. So we can't forget that many people are not engaged in this process yet and will not become engaged in this process until much closer to this referendum or to any future referendum. So having official campaigns is important, to ensure that when they do seek information they can go to a trusted source. As I said, an official campaign structure will go a long way to helping those Australians who have not voted in a referendum or who are not engaged to understand the process they're undertaking, and what exactly they're being asked to change.

The bill makes fundamental changes to how referenda are conducted in Australia and they go beyond what has been done in the past. In particular, there's the removal of a requirement for a pamphlet to be provided outlining the cases for and against the change. We will support a bill that allows for a referendum with informed voters and a process with integrity based on this precedent. This is what is expected in a strong and robust democracy. We cannot alter our electoral laws based on one referendum. A change to this document should not be undertaken lightly; our Constitution has served our nation well and has resulted in our strong and stable democracy.

As I said, we have called for three things: firstly, the restoration of the pamphlet to outline the 'yes' and 'no' cases, and it appears that this has been agreed to by the government. We have also called for the establishment of the official 'yes' and 'no' organisations, and for appropriate funding for these official organisations. As it stands, the government has not agreed to these two points. I urge the government to reconsider; as I've outlined, official information and official campaigns are so important in a digital age—in a world of misinformation. It's also important because it allows Australians to have an understanding of the process they're about to take part in. Almost six million Australians have not engaged in this process previously, and it's so important that we give them some confidence in this referendum.

See this speech in context