The Voice Will Go Everywhere: Have Voice, Will Travel! By James Reed
Our own Ian Wilson LL. B argued this a few days ago at the blog, that PM Albo’s claim that the Voice to parliament, if successful in the coming referendum, would not be limited to narrow issues traditionally viewed as “Aboriginal.” All issues, including defence, taxation, social security and immigration etc. impact upon Aboriginal people. It seems completely logical. And, the constitutional law expert who help draft the final wording of the constitutional amendment has said that the Voice cannot be “shut up,” and is not limited in scope. That too sounds reasonable, and I imagine, as Ian argued, that the High Court would conclude that going to the extent to have a referendum to change the constitution indicates the Voice should not be limited.
Too bad for Albo if the Voice turns on his mass immigration program, which threatens Aboriginal health and housing as much as the rest of us!
“Parliament will not be able to “shut the voice up” and the Indigenous body will speak to “all parts of the government” including the cabinet, ministers, public servants as well as statutory offices and agencies from the Reserve Bank to Centrelink, according to top referendum working group member Megan Davis.
A key architect of the Uluru Statement From the Heart and one of six members of the working group that negotiated the final wording of the constitutional amendment with the government, Professor Davis said parliament could not stop the voice from making representations or “shut the voice up”.
The clarification on the broad remit of the Indigenous voice comes after Anthony Albanese this week argued that parliament would have primacy over “what the voice will consider” – a remark that was corrected by legal experts who explained this would be beyond the reach of politicians.
Labor members of a new parliamentary committee testing the wording of the Prime Minister’s proposed constitutional amendment said they hoped the inquiry would rebuff criticisms from “naysayers and doomsayers” and bolster the Yes campaign.
Noel Pearson, a champion of constitutional recognition for Indigenous Australians, said he was confident the nation was heading towards success and that negotiations over the wording of the constitutional amendment had “landed in a very sweet spot”.
Mr Pearson said Professor Davis had “always been our leader in relation to the constitutional law” and was “our most expert spokesman on the drafting.”
Professor Davis and fellow constitutional law expert Gabrielle Appleby from UNSW, writing in The Weekend Australian, argue that the new body will not be “limited to matters specifically or directly related to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples” and it will have the power to “speak on a broad range of matters”.
“That is the point,” the professors write.
Professor Davis, UNSW’s Balnaves chair in constitutional law, and Professor Appleby say the voice could advise government across the policy spectrum from environment and climate to defence or financial matters, but stress that it should choose where it makes its representations carefully.
“It would include matters relating to the conduct of elections, given the under-enrolment of First Nations people in our electoral system,” they say.
“It would include criminal matters, given the over-representation of First Nations in our criminal justice system.
“It’s important that the voice speaks not just on matters that directly, or explicitly, affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, but on matters that have an indirect but significant effect on them.”
The pair say that, if the voice speaks on more general matters, such as financial policy or defence, its representations will be “weighed up against a number of other interests and groups” and have less political persuasion. “It will have to spend its political capital wisely,” the professors write.
“The voice will be able to speak to all parts of the government, including the cabinet, ministers, public servants, and independent statutory offices and agencies – such as the Reserve Bank, as well as a wide array of other agencies including, to name a few, Centrelink, the Great Barrier Marine Park Authority and the Ombudsman – on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
“This isn’t to be feared.”
The Coalition is concerned by the wording in the constitutional amendment that gives the voice the power to advise the executive government.
Leading Liberal moderate Simon Birmingham signalled his hope for this to be reconsidered in the parliamentary committee process. “By putting it in the Constitution, it does then provide another layer of wording that can be contested through High Court challenges where constitutional challenges are heard,” Senator Birmingham told the ABC.
Labor MP Shayne Neumann, who has been appointed to the committee, said the inquiry should help to smooth over concerns with the existing wording.
Comments