Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to also speak on this utmost significant bill, the Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice) 2023. I find it challenging on many levels to do so, because there have been very good words and it's been a very good debate, and I am aware that I identify as a European Caucasian male that has never walked in that path. But it's a confronting thing. There were a very good words and some very good things. Some of the things I will say are not what I would like to think of myself at times, but they are authentic, and I will say them.

In my view, this bill is dividing our nation and the best thing for it is it not be put. Whether the polls are right that say it is losing or the polls are right that say it is winning, they are all showing that there is an almost equal divide between the Yes and No camps. Twelve months ago when I came here, starry eyed and full of dreams, this was not where I wanted to be, and I think this bill sums up a lot of things that I think are going on down here.

There was strong support, I think, across the chamber for recognition. I think a recognition bill voted on by 90 per cent plus of Australians would have brought Australia together. I think it was a great opportunity to heal some wounds. If the Voice in itself was something that could fix many problems—all the problems—I think it would be a different conversation. But I think this is another step in not having answers to the many problems.

So we divide Australia. We either enshrine—and let's not say we're racist—some racism in Australia or we build resentment in Australia, and that is not a good thing. As I said, I would like to be better, but sometimes I feel the resentment. I've experienced it in regional towns, when this is the only country that I've ever lived on—the only country I've ever lived in—and up to five times a day I am welcomed to it. There is a saturation level where that becomes problematic for me. I will say that. When I sit in the chamber of the Australian parliament and there are three flags here and only one can ever accept me, that is confronting to me.

But I accept the problems that go on in regional communities. When we went out with the Nationals, we saw some truly horrific conditions and some truly horrific things. There are many problems that rural and remote Aboriginal communities face. It is not just dislocation from culture or a change in their life that has been forced on them but also geographical isolation from hope, and that is as much to blame as anything here. Everything that is said about lower life expectancy is true, and it's true what's said about lower outcomes in life and higher crime. I think I said in one of my first speeches here that, if I were so far from anywhere and I had money, time and nothing else, I certainly wouldn't be where I am today. I doubt I would have stayed out of prison, and I doubt I would have stayed out of pubs—I doubt all these things.

But many of the communities I've spoken to, many of the people I've spoken to, have spoken about this on-the-ground local action, these regional voices and money getting to the places it's needed, not industrial, city based action. If you're in the city, you have these things. You don't have the isolation, you have some opportunity and you have greater diversion and things. All those things exist; in the bush, they don't. We see that, and I want to fix that. I want to fix that for Aboriginal Australians not because they are Aboriginals but because they are Australians.

I will say that this referendum will go down the line of racism or resentment, and we are better than that as Australia, as a Senate and as a parliament. What disappoints me is that there were plenty of opportunities not to get here. There were plenty of opportunities to take everyone on this journey. The Voice could be legislated. I get the fact that it wouldn't be enshrined in the Constitution—I get that and understand that—but it could have been. We could have come together with recognition, and we could have shown that we are a better nation. We could have shown so many things.

But this is my authenticity. We've all heard some great words—they're better than I could deliver—but this is my problem. I will give some words, as I said to many people, next week about my first 12 months here and what I know, what I feel and what I see, and I think our parliament terms are too short. I think that we often take the sugar hit of the short-term fix, of the populistic end of the wedge—of all these things in policy. I've worked in campaigns. It was my job to get people elected, it was my job to bring the governments down and it was my job to put people up. I didn't think it would be my job here to do that, and I think I'm trying to act better than that here. I know I can do those things; I'm just trying not to do that here.

But here we are, and a decision was made not to have a constitutional convention where we could hash things out and find common ground. A decision was made to link the Voice to recognition. A decision was made to sit until the wee hours of, probably, Saturday morning to get this through. I'm told—maybe reliably, maybe not—that we are going to dispense with the roll call as is the norm for constitutional votes for the absolute majority.

This is not the way it should have been done. These journeys have to take people with us. On these journeys we have to take Australia with us, and we haven't. It's not the fault of anyone; it is the fault of everyone. We stand here today about to pass something that will make our nation worse. It may make the lives of some people better. I get that. I accept that. But there are also other ways to do that. There are better ways to do that.

When I go out there, I see programs that work. I see Blackrock industries, where they take Indigenous Australians who have served time and train them in skills and put them in the mines. They have a four per cent recidivism rate. It's great for people. This program has problems getting funding year on year. I see money going to projects that I'd class as whitefella guilt. We can't fix the problem, so we throw money at the problem. We know it won't make a great difference, but we do it so we can feel a little better. We don't address the real problems. We don't address these things.

In my maiden speech, I said that we live on an old land but we are young nation. We are making many, many mistakes as we grow. We can learn things from our First Nations people, if we do it together. This doesn't do that. I place great faith in the democratic institutions of our country. I am honoured to be here. I wanted to be here so that, when a big decision was made, I was in the room—and I feel I am doing that today. That is an upside. But on such an issue that has such grave concerns going forward, on such an issue that will divide us and won't make our nation as a whole better, it's a sad day. I am coming up to my first 12 months here and, as an overshare, due to my disappointment in what I've been able to achieve in my first 12 months I am going to see a psychologist for the first time since my divorce because I am feeling that I am part of something not achieving. That's a problem.

This change, despite what I hear the other side say—and I know we've all got our marching orders, but I am talking from the heart here—isn't fully disclosed. They have high expectations of what it could do, but there are risks. It is not risk free. More information may have made it better. More information may have given us a chance to flesh out what we truly agree on, which is more than we think, and make this better. But enshrining in the Constitution one group of people for any reason is wrong.

I get that I have had white privilege all my life. My family love me. I was supported. I get that 100 per cent. That's why I am where I am. At my high school in Newcastle, we had Kirinari lodge up the road and people coming to school from Lightning Ridge and Walgett in western New South Wales. There were great boys. Ashley Gordon, among the first signings for the Newcastle Knights, came through that program. I saw some of the problems that they experienced too. Among the sporting few at the time, they were in our basketball team. There were in our rugby league team. I got selected for zone largely because I had Ashley Gordon standing outside me and, whenever I passed him a dodgy pass, he went through a gap before I knew what had happened, so I looked good. But I saw the struggles. I saw walkabouts or them going missing. I saw huffing. I saw the stress that these guys were under and I saw their lives. I see that still in communities that we turn a blind eye to. Everyone talks about Alice Springs. Everyone talks about all these things. But, as I've said, if you have nothing to live for, why wouldn't you take those risks?

Because this is so unknown, the fear is real. People who talk to me in my community—I don't say 'fear mongering'; we always say there is nothing to fear but the unknown, and there is so much unknown in this. We have something in the Constitution that is permanent and something in the Constitution that isn't well disclosed, and I don't think anyone will stand up here and say it will fix all of our problems. It will fix some of them, and, to me, to risk the Constitution in that way is not a good thing.

I am far from a constitutional lawyer. I think law 101 was the best three years of my life at the University of Newcastle! There are dissenting views, as there are on every legal opinion. Enough money will get you the right opinion. When there is no consensus on matters of law, I would err on being safe over brave, and this does not do that. There are all of these things, and we have evidence from former justices of the High Court Robert French and Kenneth Hayne. They concur that implying a duty to consult across a wide range of matters would make government unworkable. I don't know how unworkable it would be, but it would be harder, and I don't know how effective it would be.

I come back to my core belief, my core position, on this. It's not the talking points of the government or the opposition or anything like that. We are here today talking about changes that hurt Australia. And the worst possible case for Australia, and I think unfortunately the most likely one now, is that this is put and this goes down. We're not talking about that here; we're talking about when what this does when it gets up. Just think of what it does to First Nations people and think of what it does to the country when it goes down.

These are political points now. By not disclosing or by not having the convention, by linking it together—not an A and B, here is recognition here is this—cognitively, it has been set up knowingly. I get that. It is a wedge for our side. I 100 per cent understand why it was done. If you were going to win 60 to 40, I get it. Well done. But that is not the case anymore. It is real, and we have to start looking at real things if this goes down. If anyone gets up and says that would be a great outcome for Australia, I would be amazed. It might be a great outcome for some politicians here or some politicians there, but it's not a good outcome for Australia.

I wish I had better words. I wish I didn't have to disclose some of my own weaknesses, as a person who has not walked in those shoes. But I cannot vote for this. I beg anyone listening from government to pull this bill. (Time expired)