Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Hansard source

In continuation, Perry Hamilton from Griffin said: 'I have been trying to work out why the Prime Minister and the Labor government are so hell-bent on including the Voice into the Constitution when they can simply legislate right now.' Peter Perkins from Kippa-Ring said: 'The Voice may make representations to the parliament and the executive government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. This is a nebulous statement. To draw the long bow, everything parliament discusses or proposes relates in some way to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. I will be a "no" voter, and I am very concerned about many unspoken issues.' John from Clontarf said: 'I was sitting in the lunch room with colleagues and the topic of the Voice came up. The feedback I heard was they're sick of being pushed around, being told what to do, and sick of the conversation, and this was from both Indigenous people and non-Indigenous Australians.' Mike and Terra from Clontarf are voting no. They say that this voice proposal in the Constitution represents the Aboriginal industry only and not Aboriginal people in remote areas, and they've done a lot of travel into remote areas.

With the shadow minister for Indigenous Australians, Senator Nampijinpa Price, I recently did a 'politics in the pub'. We had an opportunity to go to a school. Then we had about 350 people for a 'politics in the pub', and it was quickly sold out, more quickly than when I've run it with a treasurer or former cabinet minister. One of the things I asked Jacinta about was her name. I said, 'Your name is Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price. What does "Nampijinpa" mean?' She explained that it is her skin name. It was a very interesting meeting. She spoke about the Voice when asked, and she doesn't support it either.

When we talk about a voice, I think we can all agree that it's important to listen to all voices. Here are some of things some my respected and highly qualified colleagues are saying. Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price has said, 'I don't want to see my family divided along the lines of race, because we are a family, a family of human beings. Senator Kerrynne Liddle said, 'The scope is far too wide, and it gives Indigenous people a benefit above and beyond other Australians in the founding document, the Constitution.' Former prime minister Tony Abbott stated in his address to the Joint Select Committee on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice Referendum: 'The Constitution belongs to all of us.'

Prime Minister Albanese refuses to provide even the most basic detail on the Voice model. He wants you to vote on a Saturday, and then, come Monday, he will spend however long he needs to workout the detail. That's like putting foxes in charge of the chook house of our Constitution. Details should come before the vote, not the vote before the details. This process is without precedent. Informed decision-making is one of the leading features of autonomy for the individual in today's society and is undoubtedly one of the major issues that have arisen with the process this government has taken to introduce the referendum to Australians.

There are already hundreds of bodies across the nation that represent Indigenous views: the National Indigenous Australians Agency, the NIAA; the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies; the Lowitja Institute; Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet; Closing the Gap; NAIDOC; the National Native Title Tribunal; Indigenous land corporations; the Registrar of Indigenous Corporations; and Indigenous.gov.au. There are also four main national bodies that represent Indigenous Australians: the National Consultative Committee, the National Aboriginal Conference, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission and the National Congress of Australia's First People. There are also 11 democratically elected First Nations people in the House and in the Senate. Where is their voice? Does their voice not mean anything? MPs and senators have a responsibility to represent their state or territory or their electorate.

I would like to say also that discussion from codes like the NRL and other sporting bodies and businesses is unhelpful and is only driving more people to vote 'no'. They don't want to be told what to do by a sporting group or big business.

See this speech in context