Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Gallagher) to questions without notice asked by Senators Cash and Thorpe today relating to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.

What we've got here, what has been revealed through the debate and public discourse, is that we are seeing some significant gaps with the aspirations of those that really do want to make a difference to the lives of Indigenous people across this country. I've stood here in this place and talked about the experience that I've got and my deep, abiding commitment to closing the gap and to seeing the disparity that exists between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians eliminated. To me, it's not just something that we should see shrink; it's something that we should all strive to see absolutely eliminated. It's not right that life expectancy is cut short and that abuse and other issues, such as those of educational attainment and child mortality, continue to exist. Absolutely we must listen to those that our programs can influence and affect. We should be getting their advice.

But what we're seeing with this government is a big gap between the aspirations of those who do want to see the lives of Indigenous people improved and what's actually being pushed, dealt with and delivered by way of this referendum question that we have now legislated and that's going to be going before us. The gap that needs to be addressed is, of course, with those issues that I was talking about, but what we have is a big gap between those aspirations and what's actually being proposed.

What we know is that we're seeing that, particularly from those who are proponents of the Voice—like Mr Mayo, who is a union official, I'd say, based on the things that I've seen. I didn't really know much of him before, but, having seen what he says, he's certainly a radical Labor unionist who speaks out, and, no doubt, speaks his mind, but what we are seeing is him prosecuting arguments that really go against the grain and against the civil discourse that is necessary when addressing such important issues as closing the gap. We know that the Voice is risky because it's going to impact upon our democracy. But it's also risky because of the types of people that are behind it and the things that they're espousing the Voice will be able to do.

We are seeing a big disconnect between what those on the other side are saying is a 'modest' proposal, and those on the outside who are calling for the Voice saying that it's going to have a really big impact. They don't seem to go hand in hand. How can it be 'modest', on the one hand, but, on the other hand, have a really big impact? Proponents of the Voice, part of the Referendum Council—many of them—have called for Australia Day to be moved, or maybe even be abolished. So there is a big disconnect between this idea that it's just a 'modest' proposal and those saying that this is going to be something that will make a big difference. Now, I don't think you can have both. You can't have both.

There are ways that this government could address the intent and the motivation—the real, positive motivation—of those that bring forward these ideas, that we could have better representation and that we could have a better connection between the ideas of addressing and closing the gap and the actual implementation. But that's not what's being proposed here.

We know that the Voice is risky. We know that the Voice is unknown, because the government is not giving us detail. It's like someone going for a job interview and signing the contract without knowing what the wages are going to be, without knowing the hours they will work and perhaps not even knowing what the duties of the job are. So it's crazy—it really is—to expect that Australians can make a decision on one of the most important things that they'll ever have to make a decision on, and that is, of course, the Constitution of this country, when what we're being asked to do is to sign a blank cheque. It's unknown.

And of course what we're seeing is that it's dividing Australians. Now, at best, what those that are supporting the Voice could hope for is that maybe 50 or 51 per cent of Australians will support it. Well, that is a divided nation, and it's not something that I think we should be pursuing.