Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I believe that in the run-up to this year's constitutional referendum it is extraordinarily important that the debate is conducted in a respectful, civilised fashion. But I also believe that the Australian people have a right to have all the details and information before they vote. That means the Australian people have a right to know what is the full government agenda associated with their proposal for a constitutionally enshrined voice. The fact of the matter is, in the minutes from 13 'regional dialogue' consultation events, held in 2016 and 2017 as part of the national consultation process about how to best recognise Indigenous Australians in the Constitution—the document which is available on the NIAA's website—there is an inextricable link between the Voice and treaty. As it says on page 17:

Any Voice to Parliament should be designed so that it could support and promote a treaty-making process.

Then, on page 19 it says:

In relation to content, the Dialogues discussed that a Treaty could include a proper say in decision-making, the establishment of a truth commission, reparations, a financial settlement (such as seeking a percentage of GDP) …

That's actually contained in the Uluru Statement from the Heart. It is unacceptable that, when the Prime Minister goes on no less than Radio National Breakfast with the ABC and is asked seven times what the position of the government is in relation to treaty, on seven occasions he refused to give a direct answer to Patricia Karvelas. Thereby he refused to give a direct answer to the people of Australia. The people of Australia have a right to all of the information and details before they vote in the referendum later this year.