Michaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Hansard source

I'm going to quote Senator Nampijinpa Price here. That was as clear as mud. Everything you have just said just goes to the point. We are talking about an implied constitutional duty to consult by giving notice and providing information and an implied constitutional duty to consider. These are actually critical. You have just said, and in fact Senator McCarthy said, that you want to get people involved 'from an inception of thought'. That is a huge problem now because they have a constitutional right under clause 129(ii) to make a representation. We now have it on the record that you want them to be involved from 'an inception of thought'.

In relation to the implied constitutional duty, how is the Voice going to make representations in relation to policy development, or anything, if it doesn't know that the policy is being developed? Senator Watt, you are also a lawyer. You have lawyers sitting here. This is a very serious issue. You can have a constitutional right. They have a constitutional right as set out in clause 129(ii). That constitutional right is to make a representation.

If you read many of the submissions from eminent constitutional lawyers that were provided to the select committee that looked into this, one of the very issues they raise is in relation to what flows from a constitutional right. Are there then implied constitutional rights? Senator McCarthy has now said that she wants people to be involved—I would say from day one, but Senator McCarthy's words were 'from an inception of thought', which therefore means there must therefore be a duty on the government to actually notify them. I'm trying to find out at what stage the government is going to notify the Voice of, for example, policy development to ensure that they are able to fulfil their constitutional function of making a representation. It is actually a very serious legal issue, as you know.