News location:

Canberra Today 15°/17° | Wednesday, May 1, 2024 | Digital Edition | Crossword & Sudoku

The Voice is ‘a distraction’, says Anderson

Former deputy prime minister John Anderson… condemned the “shaming” of those – many of whom were not against recognition as such – who were asking “legitimate questions” about the referendum.

Former deputy prime minister John Anderson has joined group spearheading “no” campaign on the Voice, reports MICHELLE GRATTAN

FORMER deputy prime minister John Anderson is one of the six- member committee launched on Monday to spearhead the “no” case in the Voice referendum.

The Voice No Case Committee’s “Recognise a Better Way” campaign argues the Voice is “the wrong way to recognise Aboriginal people or help Aboriginal Australians in need”.

The committee includes four indigenous members and two former ministers.

The indigenous members are NT Country Liberal party senator Jacinta Price; Warren Mundine, a one-time president of the ALP who ran as a Liberal candidate in 2019; Ian Conway, who started and developed Kings Cross Station in the NT and Bob Liddle, owner of Kemara enterprises.

Anderson, former leader of the Nationals, was deputy prime minister between 1999 and 2005. Gary Johns was a federal MP in 1987-96 and served as special minister of state in the Keating government. Later he became a critic of Labor. He is the former commissioner of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission.

Anderson said he could not support race-based measures in the constitution. He described those race provisions that are currently there as “regrettable”.

He condemned the “shaming” of those – many of whom were not against recognition as such – who were asking “legitimate questions” about the referendum. “It’s not the way that Australia should be doing business.”

Anderson also said there was a refusal by the “expertocracy” to listen to people with lived experience. He cited the debate over access to alcohol in NT communities – elites were saying the right to consume alcohol was more important than the safety of women and children.

The Recognise a Better Way campaign put forward what it described as “a positive three-point plan”. This would recognise Aboriginal prior occupation in a preamble to the constitution, establish a parliamentary committee for native title holders, and support Aboriginal community-controlled organisations.

“The Voice to Parliament is a distraction from important issues that need to be undertaken to improve the quality of life of Aboriginal Australians. Aboriginal Australians do not need more voices; they need a way into wider society,” the group said in a statement.

The group will be issuing discussion papers and holding meetings across the country.

On Thursday opposition leader Peter Dutton will attend, virtually, a meeting of the government’s referendum working group that is advising on the Voice.

Dutton has put an extensive list of questions to the government about the Voice, on which the Liberals still have to reach a position.

Nationals leader David Littleproud told reporters on Monday he personally supported the insertion of a preamble acknowledging indigenous Australians were here first. He believed there would be broad support for that in his party room – which has declared opposition to the Voice.The Conversation

Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra. This article is republished from The Conversation.

Who can be trusted?

In a world of spin and confusion, there’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in Canberra.

If you trust our work online and want to enforce the power of independent voices, I invite you to make a small contribution.

Every dollar of support is invested back into our journalism to help keep citynews.com.au strong and free.

Become a supporter

Thank you,

Ian Meikle, editor

Michelle Grattan

Michelle Grattan

Share this

2 Responses to The Voice is ‘a distraction’, says Anderson

Glen Davis says: 31 January 2023 at 4:13 pm

I am opposed to the whole concept of the “Voice”, whether it is done by referendum to change the constitution or done by legislation.
Just as I oppose similar ideas in NZ called “Three Waters”
The proposal is claimed to ensure that the views of Aboriginals is expressed and heard on every subject before the Parliament.
The two related reasons for my opposition are
1 it encourages conflict and separation on grounds of race and
2 Australia would then cease to be a democracy. Our constitution seeks to guarantee all voters of equal representation in the national parliament and government. It enshrines a House of Representatives designed to represent all voters equally and a Senate representing State views. The Voice makes some unequal.
The mechanisms for that are contained in the Electoral Act which dates from Federation.
Labor pretends “the Voice” is all about whether the change is done by Constitutional amendment or by legislation.
No, I am opposed to the change whichever way it is done.

Reply
Glen Davis says: 31 January 2023 at 7:38 pm

Notice “the Voice” is singular?
The opinions and views of Aboriginal members of our society are diverse on most subjects, for many reasons including tribal affiliations. Among the many things wrong with “the Voice” is that it fraudulently suppresses diverse views. This concept is severely ill-conceived.

Of course the views of Aboriginal people are welcome and should be expressed and available for consideration. How is that best done? Australia has some exceptionally good mechanisms. There is not a single MP in Australia who has not been approached by Aboriginal voters to express wishes and opinions.

With the end of the controversial and racist White Australia Policy, Australia implemented “ethnic broadcasting” – programming for ethnic minorities. Yes, all ethnic minorities.

The Special Broadcasting Service is an Australian service broadcaster launched in 1977. About 80 percent of funding for the company is derived from the Australian Government. SBS operates six TV channels and seven radio networks. SBS Online is a video streaming service. Like all broadcasters, SBS is alert and diligent to reflect audience opinions. It survives by doing that well.

SBS was Australia’s carefully-considered, unique adjustment to white racism. Is there more to be done? Surely, yes, but this is the right Australian way to do it. If SBS needs more resources and talent supplementation to do better, that is the way to express the voices of our minorities of all kinds.

Reply

Leave a Reply

Related Posts

News

Brittany likes to have the last word 

Most people dread the process of writing a eulogy, as it typically signifies the death of a close relative or friend. However, for Brittany Davidson eulogy writing has become an integral part of her income. 

Follow us on Instagram @canberracitynews