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

I was absolutely staggered this week to hear that Minister Linda Burney MP made the claim that the Voice would not give advice on Australia Day. I couldn't understand how she could possibly justify that statement. I've looked into it, and I want to make three points in relation to this.

First, in the constitutional amendment which has been proposed, subsection 129(ii) would empower the Voice to make representations 'on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples'. As former High Court judge Ian Callinan said:

What does "relating to" mean? … The proposed subsection does not make any reference to "core" matters. The words "in relation to" are words of the broadest possible import. Again, in the end, the High Court will decide what matters relate to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples. It should be carefully noted that the proposed amendment is unqualified; it does not say core matters, or matters wholly, predominately, substantially, partially, exclusively, essentially, basically, largely, entirely, currently, broadly, especially, or even beneficially related to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People. Everything is at large.

Second, those seeking to justify Minister Burney's position are pointing to the explanatory memorandum, which says:

23. The matters may relate to Aboriginal peoples or Torres Strait Islander peoples, or both.

24. The phrase 'matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' would include …

This is followed by a colon and paragraphs (a) and (b). It says 'include'; it doesn't say 'only'. That point has been made in the Australian today by both Anne Twomey and George Williams—constitutional law experts.

Third, the advocates for the Voice are saying they are going to make representations with respect to Australia Day. When those in the 'yes' campaign claim others spread misinformation, they should look at themselves in the mirror.