site advertisement

Television Interview - Flashpoint WA

Press conference – Parliament House, Canberra

ANTHONY ALBANESE, PRIME MINISTER: Good morning. Today, I’m very pleased to announce that Air Marshal Darren Goldie AM CSC will be Australia’s inaugural National Cyber Security Coordinator. Air Marshal Goldie has served Australia with distinction for more than 30 years with the Royal Australian Air Force, including most recently as the Air Commander Australia. He will commence his term as National Cyber Security Coordinator on 3 July. Strengthening Australia’s cyber security is a fundamental priority for my government. It underpins the way that we live, the way that we work and the way that we communicate. And the appointment of the National Cyber Security Coordinator will be an essential component of providing this protection. The Coordinator, together with the National Office of Cyber Security within the Department of Home Affairs, will ensure we are well positioned to respond to the opportunities, but also the challenges that are there in this digital age. In this role, Air Marshal Goldie will support the Minister for Cyber Security to lead the coordination of national cyber security policy, responses to major cyber incidents, work of whole of government cyber incident preparedness efforts and, of course, strengthening Commonwealth cyber security capability. This work will be done in collaboration with key policy, operational and security agencies. It builds on the work that we’re doing, not just in government, but also with the private sector. Earlier this year, I hosted a cyber security industry roundtable, with leaders of business as well as with the public sector in Sydney. Minister O’Neil has been responsible for the ongoing coordination there. We see this as a vital component of what modern government needs to do to respond to what are new and emerging challenges which are there, but also the incredible opportunities that come from advances in new technology. Now I’ll ask the Minister to respond and then you will hear from Air Marshal Goldie. Happy to take questions on those issues and then move to questions about broader issues as well.

CLARE O’NEIL, MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS AND CYBER SECURITY: Thank you, PM and good morning everyone. Cyber security is without question one of the most concerning national security issues that we face. When we arrived in government we found this policy area in an absolute mess, there is just no question about that. We had no coordination of cyber activity across the government. We were about five years behind where we should have been on public policy. In fact, we didn’t even have a Cyber Security Minister, so it’s not too surprising that we ended up where we were. The PM has taken control of this problem, making a decision as soon as we were elected that for the first time Australia would have a Cabinet Minister for Cyber Security, and we have undertaken an enormous amount of work over this previous year to try to play catch up. Today, a really important piece of the jigsaw puzzle is being put in place, with the appointment of Air Marshal Goldie as Australia’s first National Cyber Security Coordinator. Air Marshal Goldie will drive the work across government in cyber security with force and velocity that is needed to meet what is a very substantial and seriously growing challenge for our nation. His term will commence on 3 July 2023. As the PM said, his roles broadly will be to lead work of cyber security across government. This is really important because what we have seen in the Australian government, common to governments overseas, is that cyber security responsibilities are strewn across a whole range of parts of government departments, and indeed in the private sector and the community as well. So Air Marshal Goldie’s role in part will be to bring all that activity together. Air Marshal Goldie will also be leading cyber incident response for our country. I want you to understand how serious a problem it was that when we arrived in office, there was no cyber incident response coordination occurring in the Australian Government. That is an extraordinary thing and we should not have been there. So Air Marshal Goldie’s work will be very important in making sure that when we do experience significant national cyber incidents, there is one person across government who is going to coordinate the national effort to manage those incidents. Air Marshal Goldie will help us prepare for future cyber incidents. Many of you will know that the Australian Government for the first time has started to engage in significant war gaming exercises, with sectors where cyber incidents are going to pose a national security threat if they occur, and Air Marshal Goldie will take on that responsibility. Air Marshal Goldie will also play a really important role in helping us deal with a very significant issue we face, and that is Commonwealth cyber security, a very big problem for our country. So I’m very pleased to be here with Air Marshal Goldie, and if you’re comfortable Prime Minister I’ll hand to him to make some comments.

AIR MARSHAL DARREN GOLDIE, NATIONAL CYBER SECURITY COORDINATOR: Thank you Prime Minister, thank you Minister. Ladies and gentleman, good morning. As the Minister, said I am Air Marshal Goldie. I have had the privilege to serve the Australian people for the last 30 years in the Australian Defence Force, and I look forward to serving in this new role.

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, why hasn’t the government released the Mrdak review into cyber security and could we please get a view from Air Marshal Goldie about our state of cyber capability at the moment please?

MINISTER O’NEIL: The Mrdak review is a Cabinet document and will not be released. And I perhaps might just say we will let the Air Marshal get his feet under the desk I think before he starts his job. But I have been really clear with the public. Cyber security was in a mess when we arrived in office. We’ve taken really firm, decisive action over the last year to correct that situation and the appointment of Air Marshal Goldie is a really important part of making sure we manage this properly as a country.

JOURNALIST: We had briefings on the Defence Strategic Review, why not release parts of it or?

PRIME MINISTER: Because we’re a serious government and a serious government has serious responses. Just like the Defence Strategic Review has not been released in full, our priority is security. This isn’t a game. This has serious consequences, cyber attacks, and we respond seriously. And Cabinet documents are for the Cabinet.

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, will the Australian Government declare the Russian diplomat squatting on the embassy site persona non grata and what are you doing to get rid of him?

PRIME MINISTER: I’ve asked for questions really clearly at the beginning about this and then I’m happy to move to other questions.

JOURNALIST: Will the Coordinator give advice to businesses or tell businesses when they should or shouldn’t pay a ransom, when they should or shouldn’t go public with what’s happened. Is that the sort of role we’re looking at?

MINISTER O’NEIL: Thank you, so this is going to be a really important part of the Coordinator’s work, and one of the things I’d just point out is there’s a big conceptual shift we’ve got to make with cyber security. In the past, we’ve seen national security matters as principally the concern of government. One of the reasons that cyber is such a really significant and different challenge is that it has to be a partnership approach. The national security that we face as a country is dispersed amongst citizens and businesses. And one of the most important things that Air Marshal Goldie will be doing will be working with companies who are under attack and working with citizens to manage cyber incidents when they occur.

JOURNALIST: So if he says they should pay a ransom, they should do it?

MINISTER O’NEIL: I think we’re getting a bit ahead of ourselves there, if you don’t mind me saying. The Australian Government’s clear position is that Australian companies should not pay ransoms. It’s really important that we deprive these cyber scumbags of the proceeds of their crime. And we will all be safer the more Australian companies refuse to pay ransoms. We have had some very significant incidents recently where companies have done the right thing and I credit them for it.

JOURNALIST: Minister, in terms of, you mentioned the lack of a coordinated response when you first took office. How much of a difference do you think that would have made to some of the bigger cyber security attacks that we’ve seen or cyber attacks that we’ve seen?

MINISTER O’NEIL: So, the consequences of this are extremely severe. And the reason is that when we have major cyber attacks, they have each their own quality and character. So just think about the difference between what we saw in Medibank in the Medibank incident and the Optus incident. They’re actually very different in their impacts on the community. We did not have the coordination mechanism in place when Optus occurred, and the only reason that the Australian Government responded so well to that incident is because the Prime Minister took control of the matter, coordinated the Cabinet, literally minister to minister, to resolve some of the issues around coordination. Now that is not a functional way to run cyber security in this country. It directly points to the importance of the appointment made today.

JOURNALIST: We’ve seen concerning reports the past week about the hack from HWL Ebsworth. You haven’t made statements in Parliament as with Optus and Medibank. What can you tell us about that and how concerned are the security agencies?

PRIME MINISTER: Can I say as well, I made a statement about that last Saturday in Melbourne but Minister.

MINISTER O’NEIL: So HWL Ebsworth is a very significant incident, and the Australian Government is deeply concerned about it. I would place it in the realm of the most significant cyber incidents that we’ve experienced as a country over the last year, along with Latitude, Optus and Medibank. What’s been really important with this particular incident is that the cyber incident response coordination function, which we have been building over the last eight months or so, was on the ground with this company from the very beginning. Now that doesn’t stop negative impacts from cyber attacks. What I would like Australians to understand is that success in cyber security in our country is not reducing cyber risk to zero. We live in a digital age. I’ve spoken in the Parliament about the fact that we learned last year the National Australia Bank experiences 50 million cyber attacks a month. The Australian Taxation Office, 3 million cyber attacks a month. Our goal is not to eradicate cyber attacks, but in part to make sure that whenever we get hit by a cyber attack we’re able to get back up off the mat quickly, and that is exactly why we are here today, appointing Air Marshal Goldie to manage this significant risk for the country.

JOURNALIST: Are you able to confirm exactly which departments and who is exactly affected by that hack?

MINISTER O’NEIL: Not at this stage.

JOURNALIST: Minister, can you perhaps share some of the reasons why you’ve decided to appoint an Air Force Commander rather than say someone with greater cyber security industry experience?

MINISTER O’NEIL: Air Marshal Goldie has been responsible for managing security in the Air Force. Cyber security is a part of every security issue that the Air Force faces, so he’s got significant experience from that regard. I would just say, something that I don’t think is well understood about this area, is that cyber incident response is not principally a technical problem, it’s an operational problem. If you think about Medibank and Optus, the ones that I think our nation’s most familiar with, a lot of the issues are very practical and operational. How do we replace the driver’s licenses of millions of Australians? How do we replace their passports, how do we ensure that we’re working across government to get information off the dark web that shouldn’t be there. So we are incredibly confident and very pleased that this commendable person, who has served his nation in uniform for so long, has agreed to take on this responsibility.

JOURNALIST: Are we able to get some further comments from Air Marshal Goldie about the role, and what he thinks he’ll bring to it, what challenges are ahead?

AIR MARSHAL GOLDIE: Sure, I think the role is centred on the concept of leadership. Australia is fortunate enough to have some of the best cyber practitioners in the world, they are well led. What I think my role will centre on, the coordination and leadership role, and information both to the Australian people and to the Australian Government.

JOURNALIST: In your experience, do you think that Australians understand the challenges we really face when it comes to cyber security?

AIR MARSHAL GOLDIE: I think the cyber challenge that Australia faces along with the rest of the world is dire. That challenge will continue to increase in its complexity and severity and I think we are all in this together as a nation and it will behove us all to continue to be educated.

JOURNALIST: A question on the Voice?

PRIME MINISTER: Can we just deal with this first and then I’m happy to go to other things.

JOURNALIST: May I just clarify, Air Marshal Goldie, how were you selected for this role, was it through the recruitment process or were you accosted by Minister O’Neil’s office in the first place?

AIR MARSHAL DARREN GOLDIE: The secondment to this role was subject to a Cabinet process so I think it’s probably better if I allow the Minister to respond.

PRIME MINISTER: I’ll respond as the Chair of the Cabinet. We have proper Cabinet processes. We talk through, I discussed with the Minister and with other ministers in the security space who the best person was for the job. And I must say I was very pleased that, to me, the Air Marshal stood out as someone who had that proven record of leadership, of being able to coordinate across the security space, in our defence forces and I believe he is an outstanding choice and I’m very pleased, and I do want to thank as well the CDF for agreeing as well to this secondment. It is important that we, if you’ll excuse the pun, marshal all our forces in the best way possible to deliver. So the Air Marshal will be responsible for the coordination of national responses, but also, throughout his career he’s shown a capacity to work across a vast number of people. We need to mobilise the private sector, we need to mobilise as well consumers. We all have a responsibility. Simple things, turn your phone off every night for five minutes. For people watching this, do that every 24 hours, do it while you’re brushing your teeth or whatever you’re doing. There are simple things that you can do as well. So this is a task for all of us, it’s a task for the private sector in particular, to get much better at ensuring security issues are dealt with, but it’s also, of course, a responsible for government to show leadership and the Air Marshal will certainly be doing that, and I thank him for joining us here today. Happy to take questions on other things.

JOURNALIST: On the Voice, can you guarantee that the referendum will be held this year regardless of any polling, any community sentiment, the referendum will be held this year?

PRIME MINISTER: When I spoke at Garma last year, and I go back to that speech, one of the things I said then was, ‘If not now, when?’ 1967, we had a referendum where Indigenous Australians were counted for the first time in various censuses and other activities. We had the Apology in 2008 as the first act of the new government. When you look at constitutional recognition, John Howard spoke about that last century, it’s now 2023. I outlined last year a timetable that included very clearly, the introduction of legislation in March, a committee process between March and June and then a Senate process to adopt it. I note that when the Senate passed the legislation for a referendum this year, what it did was, this week, there were no votes on any amendments put forward, none. The National Party decided last year they would oppose it before they knew what the question was. And the Liberal Party decided at the executive level that they would oppose it regardless of what came out of the committee process, before it had even begun. There are Indigenous Australians who have spent decades, Aunty Pat Anderson, Noel Pearson, Marcia Langton, and others. I had here yesterday, with the Barunga Statement, the leaders of four Land Councils in the Northern Territory who have all, Central Land Council, Northern Land Council and others, all presenting a new Barunga Statement to this Parliament, saying yes. The idea that you will just keep this process going forever, a process the majority of which has occurred while the Coalition was in government. The Coalition established a Joint Parliamentary Committee, chaired by Julian Leeser and Senator Pat Dodson. We had the Tom Calma and Marcia Langton report that went to Cabinet not once but twice, established by the former government. You had lots of opportunities. I spoke with then-Prime Minister Morrison on the first day of the Parliamentary sitting in 2019, the only time I entered that office during that term. And I said then, if you want to advance this, which was a commitment from the Coalition, and nothing happened, in terms of no legislation, let alone a referendum. I say, if not now, when? We can get this done. And when it’s done, Australians will recognise Indigenous Australians in our Constitution. And the other thing that it will do is it will allow for us to have the opportunity to listen to the voice of Indigenous Australians on matters that affect them. And so I’m committed to having a referendum, the legislation has been passed, and I have said, as I’ve said now continually, the referendum will take place in the last quarter of this year.

JOURNALIST: When was the Government made aware of the Russian diplomat allegedly squatting on the Yarralumla site? What actions are available to the Government and further to that, why was Russia granted approval for the lease back in 2008 in the first place?

PRIME MINISTER: I’m not responsible for 2008, but the world was different in 2008 as well. It was a different time, but I think people would have to look at that process that occurred than. What my government’s responsible for is now, and my government has responded. We responded to national security advice and we responded swiftly, and I thank the Coalition and all the crossbenchers for their support in doing so. On June 15, the Home Affairs Act 2023 terminated the Russian Federation’s lease that they had proposed for a diplomatic presence next to Parliament House. So make no mistake, last week the Parliament did take decisive action to resolve the national security challenges that were presented by this site. We’re confident of our legal position and when the National Security Committee, and members, when we considered this, of course, we anticipated that Russia would not be happy with our response. We expected that, but we’re very confident of our position and processes are under way for the Commonwealth to formalise possession of the site. But can I make this point? The national security threat that was represented by a Russian Embassy onsite are not the same as some bloke standing on a blade of grass on the site, that we don’t see really as a threat to our national security.

JOURNALIST: You might not see it as a threat, but it’s thumbing their nose at you, it’s a pretty strong gesture, pretty obvious gesture, and you’re powerless to do anything about it, aren’t you?

PRIME MINISTER: I’ll tell you what we have the power to do. We have the power to show that we understand and respect the law, and that’s what we’re doing. We’re going through processes, we’re very confident of our position.

JOURNALIST: Does that process, Prime Minister, include perhaps declaring that individual persona non grata, and deporting him? And would you have any concern for our diplomats abroad?

PRIME MINISTER: We’re confident of our position that it will be resolved.

MINISTER O’NEIL: I’d just reiterate what the Prime Minister said there. The national security concern that we were seeking to manage was the proposal to build a second Russian Embassy a stone’s throw from Parliament House. And the Parliament worked together, in a way that’s somewhat unique these days, to deal with that matter very expeditiously. We’ve dealt with the national security matter. As the PM has said, a bloke sitting on a site is not a national security threat to this country.

PRIME MINISTER: And particularly when it’s so cold out there.

JOURNALIST: It’s nothing compared to Russia.

PRIME MINISTER: That’s a fair point.

JOURNALIST: Just on housing, there’s a housing crisis at the moment and the main government legislation to deal with it has been delayed by three months in the Senate. That’s a long time to wait for Australians who are looking for a solution to this. Are you planning any additional measures in the meantime to perhaps work towards a solution for this?

PRIME MINISTER: Well look, the Greens and the Coalition combined in what is a new No-alition in blocking this legislation, which is what it’s doing. It is completely irrational for the Greens political party to say they support more public housing and then block legislation, a $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, which will result in 30,000 additional social housing units, including 4,000 reserved for women and children escaping domestic violence. The time for these political games is well past. This isn’t the first time it’s been deferred, it’s the second. And I don’t understand what the thought processes are behind doing this. It is quite irrational and we remain committed to the Housing Australia Future Fund. We have processes in place that will advance those issues, and we also, of course, just last Saturday announced $2 billion of immediate injection into public housing. That comes on top of the $1.6 billion extension in the coming financial year of the Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement. It comes on top of the $2 billion additional we put into community housing funding to be available. It comes on top of the largest increase in rent assistance in 30 years. It comes on top of one of our first actions in government was to bring forward the $575 million that was sitting there to support housing. And it comes on top of the measures that we had in the Budget for build to rent, that will result in between 150,000 and 250,000 units, affordable units and private-sector rental properties being made available by providing that incentive. The key here is supply. The Coalition talk about that but they’re blocking it. The Greens talk about it, and they also talk about social housing, but they’re blocking it. And it is incomprehensible that at a time when housing is an issue and where everyone knows that housing supply is the issue, that they continue to block this legislation.

JOURNALIST: Just one more question on Russia. Are you, has the compensation claim been filed by Russia for the building on the site and does it concern you, this suggestion of further legal action?

PRIME MINISTER: No, we actually support the law. Russia hasn’t been real good at the law lately. Russia has abrogated its responsibility as a nation state, and particularly, as a member of the Security Council. Their illegal and immoral invasion of Ukraine shows its contempt for the rule of law, for national sovereignty and for the way that it conducts its affairs. Australia will stand up for our values and we will stand up for our national security. And a bloke standing in the cold on a bit of grass in Canberra is not a threat to our national security. And I think, frankly, that Russia’s response here, we did predict that they wouldn’t put out a media release welcoming the legislation. And one of, the advice that we sought and gave the crossbenchers and the Coalition, and we thank them again for their support, was that we needed to act in the way that we did, swiftly, by passing the legislation through. The site is secure and we’re comfortable with our position.

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, just on the exchange between you and the Opposition Leader yesterday in the House of Reps. You suggested his comments were heartless and him calling for the referendum to be put off. Is this the kind of debate Australians should expect getting closer to the referendum?

PRIME MINISTER: Let’s be clear about some of the questions that were asked in the Parliament this week. When it is very clear, and I don’t think anyone argued, is arguing, that a Voice would have any right of veto, any right of veto whatsoever. That’s the real issue here. So the argument that Indigenous Australians who are facing in facing an eight-year life expectancy gap, higher infant mortality, more chance of going to jail than going to university, will sit around and discuss where Australia’s defence base should be, is quite frankly, contradicted by the words that are in the constitutional change, that’s advanced, are contradicted by the Second Reading Speech of the Attorney-General, making it clear that it is about where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have differences. I think that when you have that, those facts there, that are understood by all Australians across the board, the fact that the Senate sat until 4am in the morning last Saturday, answering questions about some road in Victoria and whether that would be a priority, is in my view, disrespectful of those Indigenous Australians, including people like Linda Burney, the Indigenous Affairs Minister, who cares passionately, passionately, about closing the gap that is there. I think that’s disrespectful, and I think, I said yesterday in the Parliament that the Leader of the Opposition’s speech lacked empathy and I stand by that.

JOURNALIST: Prime Minister, you’ve made a more sort of concerted effort than usual this week to sort of explain the Voice in more positive terms, I think to people on FM radio interviews and that sort of thing. Could you talk us through I guess the effort and the weight that you personally and the Government more broadly will put behind the campaign over the next number of months?

PRIME MINISTER: We understand this is a historic opportunity. When you have a referendum and it’s defeated, I can’t think of one that comes around a year later. This is a historic opportunity to make a difference, to show respect for Indigenous Australians and, importantly, about some of the debate as well. We have made an effort and we’ll continue to, as I have since, well, for a considerable period of time. Frankly, since 2017, the Uluru Statement from the Heart was handed down. I think it’s a very gracious and generous request. The no right of veto, the Solicitor-General’s opinion that we released for all to see – remember, if this was six months ago, I would have been standing here in this courtyard, and I would have got a couple of questions saying, ‘What does the Solicitor-General think?’ Well, you’ve seen what the Solicitor-General thinks. You have seen what Justice French thinks, what Justice Hayne thinks. This enhances our democracy, it doesn’t interfere with it. There’s no right of veto. And I think that for some of the fact that the Opposition that’s been expressed, some of it, people can have different views about it, respectfully, and can have a view that the Constitution should never change, or from a range of perspectives, might come to the position of not supporting a change. I respect that. But some of the arguments that are put forward, that people know are not true, the people putting them forward know are not true. The fact that this doesn’t have any veto right over any parliamentary legislation. I don’t believe that Senators arguing that a road in Victoria was going to be the subject of the Voice believe that that’s the case. I don’t think that the people who ask questions in the Parliament this week about interest rates and the Reserve Bank don’t understand that the Reserve Bank is independent, and the idea that the Voice is going to sit around and the Governor of the Reserve Bank is going to say, ‘oh, I wonder what the Voice thinks?’ Like, seriously. This debate is too important for that politicisation. And people, I think, have to rise to the occasion. My government intends to rise to the occasion. I think that business has risen to the occasion. Faith groups have risen to the occasion. The NRL, AFL, Cricket Australia, Tennis Australia and other sporting organisations have risen to the occasion. And can I pay tribute to people like Julian Leeser who has risen to the occasion, Bridget Archer who has risen to the occasion. The Premier of Tasmania, along with every other Premier and Chief Minister have all risen to the occasion. And I sincerely hope that Australians rise to the occasion. If they do, it’ll be like the Apology. People opposed it for years after years after years. Said it would have all of these consequences, which were not true. It was a moment of national unity. I pay tribute to Brendan Nelson then, who rose to the occasion as well, even though some in his own party were opposed to it. Leadership isn’t about just doing the easy things. It’s about doing things that are hard. Changing our Constitution is hard. There’s no certainty, but it requires leadership. And if not now, when? And if not under my prime ministership, under whose?

JOURNALIST: What does the Solicitor-General think of the housing bill and has he advised that it being delayed twice is a failure to pass?

PRIME MINISTER: We have received that advice. We again, to pre-empt your question, no we won’t be releasing advice to the Government, because we don’t do that but he of course has advised –

JOURNALIST: Does it back your public statements that that’s a failure to pass?

PRIME MINISTER: Yes, it does.

JOURNALIST: Rishi Sunak has said that he supports the Bank of England’s interest rate rises. Do you support Phil Lowe’s interest rate rises?

PRIME MINISTER: The Reserve Bank are independent of government.

JOURNALIST: Is any form of federal intervention into the ACT Government’s forced takeover of the Calvary Hospital appropriate? After the passing of Territory rights, is it OK to have the Senate Inquiry into what is going on?

PRIME MINISTER: Well that’s a matter for the Senate that often act in mysterious ways to those of us who are in the House of Representatives. I support the rights of the Territory to determine its own positions. I don’t, as I’ve said consistently, I regard that faith-based organisations, whether it be the Catholic Church or other churches, have an important role to play in provision of social services. And I don’t regard this as a precedent. And I think that they will continue to play an important role, whether it be in healthcare, in aged care, in disability care – they’re an important part of our social policy architecture in this country.

JOURNALIST: Just back on the Voice of the scope of the Voice, is there any more you could do between now and the referendum to give more certainty around at least what your government would do in terms of what the Voice could advise on, what it couldn’t advise on, on your watch at least?

PRIME MINISTER: Look, the legislation itself was clear and the Attorney-General in his second reading speech, which does have legal consequences, of course, made it very clear that it’s a matter of where there are different consequences. Something that is general, for example like the defence of Australia, that’s not a different impact on Indigenous Australians. The Voice will concentrate, as the provisions show, provision two is very clear, that on matters that relate to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. And provision three, of course, provides for the legislation in the Parliament. So what I have said privately to those people who are opposing the Voice, but I’ll say it publicly as well, I would envisage that if the referendum is successful, there will need to be legislation, there will be a process of putting together that legislation, to decide the functions, procedures of the composition of the Voice. And I would hope that, I would seek to get as much consensus as possible around that. I’ve said that to the Leader of the Liberal Party and the Leader of the National Party. And I think that would occur, because it’s in the interests of it going forward that there be as much ownership in this building as well of those processes so it doesn’t change. But of course, the whole point of it being legislated is to reinforce the fact of the primacy of this Parliament. The primacy of this Parliament. So it doesn’t interfere with any of that. But I know that Indigenous people that I’ve spoken to, whether they be in my local area or whether it be across the country in the meetings I’ve had. I’ll tell you what Indigenous Australians don’t do, they don’t say we want a Voice to decide where a road will be or a defence base will be. They say, we want a Voice because we’re frustrated by our circumstances, by the gap in education, in health, in housing. We’re frustrated by the lack of opportunity for our young people going forward and I think that Australians know that that is the case. The Uluru Statement from the Heart, I’d encourage people to read. It will take you about two minutes. You can fit it on one A4 page. That’s the request. And to read the words that are there, in the referendum going forward, that are very clear as well. And one of the things we did with the wording, there was a tweak between the Garma speech and the final wording, added in the word, to make it clear, ‘may,’ and added in what government it was referring to, the Commonwealth. But it also added in some important tweaks in the third clause, to make it even clearer the primacy of the Parliament going forward. Thanks very much.

View Original | Disclaimer

Have Your Say

We acknowledge and pay our respects to the Traditional Owners of country throughout Australia

Disclaimer | Contact Us | AusPol Forum
All rights are owned by their respective owners
Terms & Conditions of Use