Andrew GEE MP INDEPENDENT FEDERAL MEMBER FOR CALARE

WHAT IS THE VOICE?

Later this year Australians will be asked to have their say in a referendum about whether to change the Constitution to establish an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. The Voice would give advice to the Australian Parliament and Government on matters that affect the lives of Indigenous Australians.

WHY IS THE VOICE NECESSARY?

It’s hard to believe, but Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are not recognised in our nation’s founding document. This wrong must be made right. The Voice provides that recognition in a meaningful way.

The aim of the Voice is to get better outcomes for Indigenous Australians by ensuring they have a say on issues that affect them. For example in housing, education, health and jobs.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have lower life expectancy, higher suicide rates, higher infant mortality rates, and worse educational outcomes than non-Indigenous Australians. The gap isn’t closing, and despite well-intentioned governments, the current approach isn’t working. We need to change it up. The Voice is about listening and getting positive, tangible outcomes in communities around Australia.

BUT DON’T WE ALREADY HAVE INDIGENOUS PARLIAMENTARIANS?

We do, but like governments, individual parliamentarians come and go, and they represent parties. The Voice would be independent and be above partisan party politics. Having it in the Constitution provides independence, consistency, and continuity.

IS THE VOICE LEGALLY AND CONSTITUTIONALLY SOUND?

Yes. A host of constitutional law experts and organisations have given the Voice the tick of approval as being legally and constitutionally sound, including:

• Former High Court Chief Justice Robert French

• Former High Court Justice Kenneth Hayne

• Leading constitutional law barrister Bret Walker SC

• Leading constitutional law professors

• The Solicitor General of Australia

• New South Wales Bar Association

• The Law Society of New South Wales

• The Law Council of Australia

• The University of Sydney Law School

• Flinders University Law school

• The University of New South Wales

• Adelaide Law School

• University of Queensland constitutional lawyers

• Gilbert & Tobin Lawyers

WILL THE VOICE HAVE THE POWER OF VETO OVER LEGISLATION?

No. Myth busted. There is no veto. This means it would have no power to overrule Parliament, and any advice it gives would be non-binding.

WILL THE VOICE “GUM UP” THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WITH COURT CHALLENGES AND STOP BUDGETS, CHANGE ANZAC DAY, TAKE LAND, BAN FISHING, STOP NUCLEAR-POWERED SUBMARINE CONTRACTS OR CREATE A SEPARATE STATE?

No. Myth busted. Leading constitutional law barrister Bret Walker SC has described claims the Voice would lead to endless court challenges and the “gumming up” of the wheels of government as “nonsense” and “too silly for words”. It’s an advisory body that will be subject to the rules Parliament makes for it. It won’t have the power to ban anything. These wild claims are ludicrous.

Will The Voice

BE A THIRD CHAMBER OF PARLIAMENT?

No. Myth Busted. The Voice can’t and won’t introduce bills or run programs. It will be subject to the rules set for it by Parliament.

WHO

WILL BE ON THE VOICE?

Members of the Voice will be chosen by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and serve for a fixed period. It will include Indigenous Australians from every state and territory, the Torres Strait Islands and representatives from the regions and remote communities. It will be subject to the rules made for it by Parliament.

WHY CAN’T WE PUT THE RULES OF THE VOICE IN THE CONSTITUTION?

Because our Constitution provides the broad framework for governing our country and we leave it to our elected representatives via the Parliament to pass legislation about details such as rules.

For example, in 1901 the Constitution gave the Australian Government the power to set up a High Court and other courts. It wasn’t until 1903 that Parliament established the High Court through legislation. Then in 1975 the Parliament set up the Family

Court through legislation.

Another example is that in 1901 the Constitution gave the Commonwealth the power over currency but left it to the Parliament to work out things like what the notes are and what they look like. In 1910 a law about notes was passed. Banknotes finally got issued in 1913.

The Voice will be set up by the Parliament and subject to its rules.

DOES THE VOICE GIVE ANYONE SPECIAL RIGHTS?

No. Myth busted. The Voice does not give any group any special rights. It’s an advisory body that doesn’t give any rights to anyone. This has been confirmed by eminent constitutional lawyers and former High Court judges.

ISN’T THE NATIONAL INDIGENOUS AUSTRALIANS AGENCY (NIAA) THE SAME AS THE VOICE?

No.

Not at all. Myth busted.

Unlike the proposed Voice, the NIAA is not independent of government, it’s part of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. Only 22% of its staff are Indigenous. It can be abolished at the stroke of a pen. It can’t give advice to the Parliament.

Oh and the NIAA doesn’t have a $30 billion budget (another myth busted there on the way through).

WOULD THE VOICE STOP ME DIGGING A HOLE IN MY GARDEN OR ON MY FARM?

No. Another whacky myth busted. It’s an advisory body folks! The Voice would not be able to force the Parliament to do anything it doesn’t want to do. The vegie garden is quite safe.

I’M SAYING YES!

Want to add your face to our Voice feature? Email andrew.gee.mp@ aph.gov.au

I’m Councillor Peter Batten, and I’m supporting an Indigenous Voice to Parliament.