Radio interview – 2GB Drive with Chris O’Keefe
CHRIS O’KEEFE, HOST: Prime Minister, thanks for joining us.
ANTHONY ALBANESE, PRIME MINISTER: G’day Chris. Good to be with you and congratulations on the new gig.
O’KEEFE: I appreciate that. Now, I want to start by asking, what does it mean for reconciliation if Australia rejects the Voice?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, it would send a bad message re reconciliation but it would also send a bad message in the way that Australia is perceived internationally. This is an opportunity to unite the nation, a chance to move Australia forward together, to show that we’re a mature nation. And bear in mind, Chris, that this is a process that has been going for more than a decade. In 2012, a process was established under the Gillard Government that went for five years. And over those five years, leading up to the Uluru Statement being adopted by the overwhelming majority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples after hundreds of meetings around the country over that five years, they produced this statement. There was then a process of a parliamentary committee that was co-chaired by Pat Dodson and by Julian Leeser, who’s now the Shadow Minister for Aboriginal Affairs in our national Parliament. And it produced an interim report and then a final report. And then you had the process that you referred to, the document that you read over the weekend by Tom Calma and Marcia Langton, they produced a draft report and then a final report, which is over 260 pages of detail. So this has been a long time coming. And the question before people will be very clear. It is, ‘Do you want to have that recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in our nation’s birth certificate?’ That’s the first question. And as part of that, what they have said they want themselves is to have a Voice. Not a Voice that sits above the Parliament and gets to make decisions and make laws. But a Voice of consultation on matters that affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. And that is not too much to ask. This is a very gracious request from Indigenous people. And that’s why I believe that Australians, when they consider these issues over the period of this year, I sincerely hope that a majority of them do decide to vote yes. Just as, with the apology to the Stolen Generations, there were a whole lot of issues raised that ended up, now that that’s occurred, I don’t think anyone, even those who oppose the apology, now say that that was the wrong thing to do. And this will be the same. I’m very confident that once this occurs, with the support of the Australian people, that they will see that we’re stronger as a nation as a result of this.
O’KEEFE: But it’s more than just feeling good about things, right?
PRIME MINISTER: Absolutely. It’s about how you make a difference to people. And one of the things, Chris, that has driven Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to this position is that we need to close the gap. For 120 years, governments with the best of intentions have made decisions for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, often without having appropriate consultation. This is a different perspective. It’s how do we do things with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities.
O’KEEFE: Sorry to interrupt, but isn’t there some merit then, to what Peter Dutton is proposing? That is, legislate the Voice, get a model, see if it works. If it delivers the outcomes to close the gap and delivers better social outcomes for our Indigenous people then have a referendum on it and enshrine it in the Constitution. See if it works first and then vote on it?
PRIME MINISTER: Well, he’s not proposing that and he doesn’t propose that. That was a position that some in the Morrison Government were taking. I’m not quite sure what his position is at the moment. But the fact is that Indigenous people themselves have said that they want the Voice enshrined in the Constitution. Now, the details of how it operates will be the subject of legislation, that’s the whole point. Over a period of time the success of the Voice will be determined by the capacity of the Parliament to enact the laws re the functioning of the Voice. Because the Voice isn’t above the Parliament, it’s subservient to it. And that’s why the wording that was put forward is very clear. The draft wording that I have is, ‘The Parliament shall, subject to this Constitution, have power to make laws with respect to the composition, functions, powers and procedures of the Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander Voice’. A very deliberate decision, which is in the Calma and Langton report as well, makes it very clear that this is something that doesn’t seek to override the Parliament. It’s not a third chamber, which was what was said at one stage by some members of the former government. It’s something that will enable, though, if there’s a policy that has a direct impact on education, health, all the outcomes where the gaps are there for Indigenous people, then they should be consulted.
O’KEEFE: But, Prime Minister, we don’t know if it will work.
PRIME MINISTER: What we know, Chris, is that what is happening now is not working. We have a massive gap in incarceration rates, in educational outcomes, in health outcomes, in life expectancy.
O’KEEFE: No question.
PRIME MINISTER: In infant diseases, in justice issues. And what we know from experience is that the programs that are working the best are those such as justice reinvestment programs that’s been undertaken by the New South Wales Government, the Indigenous Rangers Program, community health clinics, where Indigenous people are involved.
O’KEEFE: None of that is in the Constitution.
PRIME MINISTER: No, because you don’t put that detail in the Constitution. The position of prime minister is not in the Constitution.
O’KEEFE: But what I’m asking is, do you not have some sympathy for the viewpoint that if you legislate, set up a model and then see if it works, go to a referendum, and then enshrine it in the Constitution?
PRIME MINISTER: Indigenous people themselves have been through this period for a long period of time, as I outlined. And we’ve got to have some respect for the views and the processes. This isn’t a couple of people sitting around making these decisions. If you look at the Calma and Langton report, it goes through the extraordinary number of community consultation meetings et cetera that they had in order to come up with this process. And that was after the Uluru Statement that also saw an incredible consultation process as well. And that is why this is an enormous opportunity. The point about the functioning of the Voice and the details is that that will be subject to the Parliament on an ongoing basis. Now, we change the way that functions operate through the Parliament all the time, various advisory bodies. What the Voice being enshrined in the Constitution will do, though, is ensure that there must be a body on an ongoing basis. But it will, of course, be subject to the determination of the Parliament. The Calma-Langton report recommends a committee of the Parliament that would oversee the functioning of the Voice on an ongoing basis as well.
O’KEEFE: I just want to play you some comments by Tony Abbott, the former Prime Minister. Have a listen.
TONY ABBOTT, FORMER PRIME MINISTER: I think there’s near universal support for acknowledging Indigenous people in the Constitution and I would be more than happy to see some statement in the Constitution to the effect that Aboriginal people were here first and we respect their culture, et cetera. But this is so much more than recognition. It’s really about governance. It’s getting towards co-governance of the sort which is being moved towards in New Zealand with the Maori people. And I just think that we need to have a very, very long, hard look at this before we go down this path, because, again, I stress changing the Constitution is for keeps and that’s why it should never be done lightly.
O’KEEFE: I have some sympathy for that view, Prime Minister, and I think it seems that your political calculation in terms of the politics of seeing the referendum become a success, is that you’re asking Australians to vote on emotion and conscience rather than vote on a model.
PRIME MINISTER: That’s not right, Chris. We’re asking Australians to vote, just as what our Constitution does is establish a series of principles. If you look at the Constitution, it’s not as big as what the old phone books used to be. It outlines, as I said, it doesn’t even have a statement in there about the prime ministership in the Constitution. But what it is doing, with due respect to Tony Abbott, who I have respect for, I don’t question the fact that he is someone who cares about the gap which is there with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. But the fact is that this is not a co-governance model. It’s not a co-governance model at all. It’s subservient to the Parliament. And if people have suggestions that are constructive about the draft wording that I gave at Garma now almost six months ago, very early on. What people said to me was, we don’t know what the question is, we don’t know what we’re going to be asked to vote on. So I went along as one of my first acts as Prime Minister, and they’re not my words, they’re words that came from some of the most eminent people of legal mind in this country to get it right, consistent with the work that has been done over the previous decade, and they’re out there for all to see. If people have a suggestion, then by all means make the suggestion, because that will itself be subject to legislation when the Parliament has to have a referendum, we have to legislate for it, so there will be a debate about that in the Parliament, there will be an opportunity to do just that if there is a suggestion. But it’s very clear that this is not a co-governance model. And that’s made clear in all of the work that’s been done. Including, bear in mind, this is not my proposal, this is something that has arisen through both sides of politics. Which is why it is surprising that, given the previous government was there for nine years and it is the group that established the Joint Parliamentary Committee, co-chaired by Pat Dodson and Julian Leeser, who’s still responsible for this area of policy in the Coalition now. It’s the government that established the Calma and Langton process, that had people like Jeff Kennett and Frank Brennan and a whole range of people as members of it. And they go through all of that process, they’re in government for nine years, the body goes to Ken Wyatt, who takes this document to the Cabinet not once but twice, then they say, ‘We don’t know anything about the detail’. Well, there is an enormous amount of detail out there. One of the things that we have done is we’re working through the processes.
O’KEEFE: But Prime Minister, with all due respect, it’s less the Opposition you now need to convince, it’s the Australian people. And I’m getting texts all over the place saying they have absolutely no idea what the Voice is all about. So good luck with the campaign because I just hope it doesn’t descend into some really nasty stuff that I fear it will.
PRIME MINISTER: It’s a lot easier to appeal to fear rather than hope. We’ve tried for 120 years, we have tried to improve the living standards and to close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. This is an opportunity to unite the nation. It is not complex. Two things: recognise people in the Constitution, and a body that will be consulted. It won’t have any determining factors, it will just be able to be consulted on matters that affect Indigenous people. That is what is at stake here. Nothing more, but also nothing less than what I think our great country deserves.
O’KEEFE: PM I appreciate your time. I hope you can convince people it’s more than the vibe. Thank you so much and enjoy your afternoon.
PRIME MINISTER: Thanks, Chris.