Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support this bill, the Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice) 2023. Since being elected to this parliament almost seven years ago, I don't think there's been an issue that I have thought more about or had more conversations with colleagues, the community and First Nations people about than the Voice to Parliament. I want to mention Minister Burney, who's always been happy to talk and answer questions about this, and my senatorial colleagues Senator Stewart, Senator McCarthy and Senator Dodson, and their strength and advocacy as well. It's also enabled me to get to know Professor Megan Davis and Eddie Synot, who have dedicated a lot of their time, effort and energy to the Uluru Statement from the Heart, and also Dean Parkin, who I have met on a number of occasions.

For me, the Uluru Statement from the Heart coincided with not long after I was elected to parliament, so it's been a constant of my time in the Senate. I've always been interested in and followed its development since that time both in the parliament and through my party. I believe there is an historical and moral argument that justifies the Voice, but I think that's been well argued by many of my colleagues and others. I instead plan to focus on the practical, as, for me, that is the most important part of what this Voice will achieve.

As I said, I've always been interested in how the Voice will work and what practical difference it can make. When I've been travelling, what I observe is: 'What can the Voice do for the people in Napranum, Hope Vale, the Torres Strait Islands or Lockhart River? What can it do to help the growing number of Indigenous and First Nations people who call South-East Queensland home?' I think it's the fastest-growing area of the country for First Nations people. Since forming government and taking on some new responsibilities, it's enabled me to broaden my experience and understanding of the challenge facing First Nations people, like the glaring disadvantages in education results.

I spent a few days last week travelling around the Barkly region of the Northern Territory. I visited Tennant Creek, Ali Curung, An Bladder Witch and Arlparra. I was there to discuss the federal government's role in the Barkly Regional Deal. That deal was developed by the previous government after a tragic and horrific event that occurred. The response was a deal between three levels of government—the federal government, the Northern Territory government and the local council. It did not formally seek agreement from traditional owner groups. It has required a lot of hard work since to get that engagement from communities across the region. With what I observed at Tennant Creek, Ali Curung, An Bladder Witch and Arlparra, I can't help but conclude we would be making faster progress if these communities had a voice—and, yes, a permanent one, and one enshrined in the Constitution. This is what, for me, makes my experiences that I keep coming back to. It's how I see the ultimate question that will be resolved by this referendum.

There are two options that are going to be available to you: recognition in the Voice so we can make a meaningful and practical difference to the lives of First Nations Australians; or the status quo, which equals more of the same. That is what is going to be on offer. The overwhelming majority of those opposing this bill are the same people who have been in power for the last decade. There is no substantial progress. I'm not suggesting that they weren't well-intentioned—governments of all persuasions have been well-intentioned—but improvements have not been made. Report after report, Closing the Gap statement after Closing the Gap statement, day after day, little progress, more words. Something has to change. Well-intentioned governments aren't achieving.

I consider myself very practical. I think about the Voice in a practical way. The federal government is spending money to improve educational outcomes for First Nations Australians, to improve health outcomes for First Nations Australians, to reduce Indigenous incarceration. We are spending money in remote communities, like I observed last week. I could go on and on. Well-intentioned governments are going to continue to do this, but how can we expect a better outcome unless we do something different? The reality is: we can't. I believe the Voice can make a difference. It can make these well-intentioned governments more effective, improving outcomes and, at the end of the day, making for better government. All of Australia will benefit from this.

I want to talk briefly about the campaign, because in my time here it's often been reflected that these big debates and big decisions in this chamber and in the broader community bring out the best of our civic discourse. There are already significant signs that this won't be the case with this debate, in this chamber and in the broader campaign. I like to think I understand campaigning and politics and understand that there are situations when campaigning takes on a brutal element. I hope that is not the case with this campaign, but I fear otherwise. I consider the selfless work of those First Nations Australians who undertook significant and meaningful consultation in the lead-up to the Uluru Statement from the Heart—the consensus-building, the patience in the face of a snail-paced government, and consistent advocacy from them. They deserve to be treated with respect.

I understand that people are entitled to vote no and campaign for no. But I believe that this debate and the upcoming campaign deserve the best version of our civil discourse. Imagine understanding the history of the Voice and the dedication, passion and patience from those who've advocated for it and what they have done, and being aware that only four of the 19 Closing the Gap targets are on track, yet coming into this debate in this chamber and the broader community with slogans that truly belong in a substandard student union campaign. I'm not going to repeat them, but I would say this. If you don't know, find out more. You know whose voice it is: it's a First Nations voice that will make us a better country.

I am confident that the majority of the Australian population think we can do better for First Nations Australians. The reality with this debate is that only one side is advocating for better prospects for First Nations people that Australians can embrace. For me it's simple: status quo, or improved outcomes. I am confident that the Australian people want improved outcomes. I support this bill and look forward to voting yes later this year.