Speaker 1: Good morning and welcome to this special episode of The
Speaker 1: Daily OS. It's Tuesday, the tenth of October. I'm Sam
Speaker 1: and every day this week, TDA journalist Tom Crowley will
Speaker 1: be bringing you the Voice Explained series. We'll be running
Speaker 1: right up until the referendum, which is this Saturday. If
Speaker 1: you're listening to the podcast for the first time this week, welcome.
Speaker 1: I recommend starting with Monday's episode that will make things
Speaker 1: make a bit more sense. So the plan for this
Speaker 1: week is this special run of deep dives on the podcast.
Speaker 1: But if you want the headlines and what's making news today,
Speaker 1: you can head over to our Instagram or sign up
Speaker 1: to our daily newsletter that drops at seven am every morning.
Speaker 1: We'll be back with the regular podcast format from Monday.
Speaker 2: Yesterday, we looked at where the idea of a voice
Speaker 2: came from and the debate that ensued among First Nations people.
Speaker 2: We don't get the luxury of sitting around way for
Speaker 2: something better for me. It was like a huge bureaucracy.
Speaker 2: We need change now.
Speaker 3: The Voice is the easy way to fake progress.
Speaker 2: But as the Voice debate moves to Canberra, things will
Speaker 2: only get messier.
Speaker 4: A short time ago, I resigned as a shadow.
Speaker 5: Attorney signing, we have to suspep on dividing our nation
Speaker 5: along the lines of brands.
Speaker 6: And all of the noise that attempted to be created,
Speaker 6: Prime Minister is dividing your nation.
Speaker 2: Episode two, The Politics. Remember yesterday I told you that
Speaker 2: in twenty fifteen, a council was established to work towards
Speaker 2: a referendum on constitutional recognition for First Nations people, an
Speaker 2: idea with broad political support. But when that council spoke
Speaker 2: to First Nations people, a clear message came back. They
Speaker 2: didn't want symbolic recognition. They wanted something practical, They wanted
Speaker 2: a voice. The Council sent this message back to Minister
Speaker 2: Malcolm Turnbull, but one council member had doubts. Former Liberal
Speaker 2: politician Amanda Vanstone said, it is not clear that Australia
Speaker 2: will automatically approve whatever Indigenous Australia prefers without finding common
Speaker 2: ground before a referendum. What was intended to be a
Speaker 2: unifying and progressive move forward could turn into a lightning
Speaker 2: rod for discontent. Hearing those words six years later, they
Speaker 2: sound almost like a prophecy for the politically charged debate
Speaker 2: that we're having today. But that's getting ahead of ourselves.
Speaker 2: Soon after the ULARU Statement from the Heart was delivered
Speaker 2: in twenty seventeen, the then Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull rejected
Speaker 2: the idea of a constitutionally enshrined voice.
Speaker 1: The government does not believe this could pass at a referendum.
Speaker 2: Turnbul asked for more work to be done to flesh
Speaker 2: out the details of a voice, but for now, at
Speaker 2: least there would be no referendum.
Speaker 6: It would be in effect a third chamber now as
Speaker 6: to its prospects of referendum, it would have no prospect
Speaker 6: of success whatsoever.
Speaker 2: Then in twenty twenty two, the government changed all right.
Speaker 2: In his victory speech on election night, new Prime Minister
Speaker 2: Anthony Albanezi began with the voice.
Speaker 6: I begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land
Speaker 6: on which we meet. I pay my respect to their eldest, past,
Speaker 6: present and emerging, and on behalf of the Australian Labor Party,
Speaker 6: I commit to the ULARUS Statement from the Home.
Speaker 2: Prime Minister, thank you for speaking to the Daily Os.
Speaker 2: Good to have a chat again. Why did you start
Speaker 2: there and why was it so significant to you?
Speaker 6: Because it's important that we acknowledge the traditional owners of
Speaker 6: the land. Here we share this continent with the oldest
Speaker 6: continuous culture on earth. That is a source of great pride.
Speaker 2: The Albanizy government started pulling together the pieces for a referendum.
Speaker 2: At first it looked like there might be broad political support.
Speaker 2: Opposition leader Peter Dutton appointed Julian Lisa to be the
Speaker 2: Shadow Indigenous Affairs Minister.
Speaker 7: An incredibly bright individual and somebody who has contributed to
Speaker 7: our party for a long period of time.
Speaker 2: Lisa was a long term supporter of the Voice.
Speaker 4: The whole point of having consultative advisory bodies, and that's
Speaker 4: all they are, is to make better policy on the ground.
Speaker 2: And in August of twenty twenty two, sixty four percent
Speaker 2: of Australians said they were likely to support a voice.
Speaker 2: But soon a sticking point emerged over the question of detail.
Speaker 2: Now here's where we're about to get into the political weeds,
Speaker 2: and before we do that, it's really important to be
Speaker 2: clear about the difference between the Constitution and normal laws.
Speaker 2: Well we're voting on on October fourteen is a change
Speaker 2: to the Constitution, that's our national rule book. The Constitution
Speaker 2: would require that a voice must exist and that it
Speaker 2: must be a to give advice, but everything else would
Speaker 2: be left for Parliament to establish under normal laws the
Speaker 2: same way it does everything else. Questions like how many
Speaker 2: members are on the Voice and how they're chosen, those
Speaker 2: would be worked out by law.
Speaker 6: This is the nature of the constitution. It doesn't do
Speaker 6: that detail. That's true legislation. All it does a constitution
Speaker 6: is provide for the power if you like for that
Speaker 6: to happen. It says we'll have a defense for us.
Speaker 6: Does it say how many people will be in It
Speaker 6: doesn't say how many tanks Australia shall have or what
Speaker 6: planes the Air Force should fly.
Speaker 2: The Albanezi government chose not to reveal all its plans
Speaker 2: for those details. Instead, it published a list of principles.
Speaker 2: It included that the members of the Voice would be
Speaker 2: chosen by local communities.
Speaker 6: The Voice will be gender balanced and include youth.
Speaker 2: The Voice wouldn't handle any money, and it wouldn't deliver
Speaker 2: any programs.
Speaker 6: It will not so power over decisions by this Parliament
Speaker 6: or by the government.
Speaker 2: But Peter Dutton said this left too many questions unanswered.
Speaker 7: We haven't yet seen the final form of what it
Speaker 7: is the government's going to propose.
Speaker 2: This is Peter Dutton when I interviewed him in March
Speaker 2: this year.
Speaker 7: That's a reasonable question to ask, and that's why I
Speaker 7: hope a prime minister can provide that detail.
Speaker 2: That's been consistent messaging from the Coalition. A couple of
Speaker 2: weeks ago. I spoke to Coalition spokesperson Senator Jane Hume.
Speaker 8: It doesn't explain what the model is that we will
Speaker 8: be using for a voice to Parliament. We don't know
Speaker 8: how it's going to be constituted, who will be on it,
Speaker 8: what powers it has, what powers it doesn't have. And
Speaker 8: while we say don't worry, we'll take care of all
Speaker 8: of that later on, that's not good enough for the Constitution.
Speaker 2: There is wording in there that says that the powers
Speaker 2: of the Voice will be decided by Parliament. In what
Speaker 2: way are you worried that the wording will bind the
Speaker 2: Parliament in any way? If it says that Parliament has
Speaker 2: the power to decide what the Voice should look like.
Speaker 8: Well it will be a very powerful body, there is
Speaker 8: no doubt about that. We don't know, but we don't
Speaker 8: know how it will be powerful. You're essentially asking the
Speaker 8: Australian people to change, fundamentally, change the Constitution. It is
Speaker 8: a radical change, there is no doubt about that. And
Speaker 8: they're saying, then trust the Parliament to build something afterwards.
Speaker 8: Why wouldn't the Parliament build something beforehand?
Speaker 6: No, campaign have been talking about everything, but what the
Speaker 6: question is not changing the way our parliament functions, all
Speaker 6: the way government functions. What we're talking about here is
Speaker 6: an advisory group that will have the power of its ideas,
Speaker 6: but won't have the power of veto, won't have the
Speaker 6: power to fund programs. It will just have the power
Speaker 6: of its ideas to go forward. And that's why there's
Speaker 6: nothing to fear here. That's why this is such a positive,
Speaker 6: generous proposal from Indigenous Australians and why I believe Australians
Speaker 6: will vote yes.
Speaker 2: If there is nothing to fear in that bill, what
Speaker 2: harm could there be from releasing that and answering all
Speaker 2: those questions now?
Speaker 6: Because it's not my bill, it's a Parliament's bill the Parliament, but.
Speaker 2: The government is likely to know introduce a bill.
Speaker 6: No, the Parliament will do that and we'll work across
Speaker 6: the parliament, work with Indigenous Australians. What Australians are being
Speaker 6: asked to do is you feel like put the principle
Speaker 6: in there. It then is importantly up to the Parliament
Speaker 6: and it will change over time as it should as
Speaker 6: do other laws. This is no different. It is just
Speaker 6: giving that constitutional intriment that there should be an advisory body.
Speaker 6: That's all it does.
Speaker 2: The longer the conversation about details went on, the clearer
Speaker 2: it became that Peter Dutton was leaning towards NO. But
Speaker 2: it was the Nationals who became the first party to
Speaker 2: officially oppose the Voice.
Speaker 5: We have to stop dividing our nation along the lines
Speaker 5: of race.
Speaker 2: One of their newest senators, justinter NAMBIKMP Price argued the
Speaker 2: Voice was divisive.
Speaker 5: Why should I, as an Indigenous Australian be governed under
Speaker 5: a separate entity than the rest of Australia.
Speaker 2: A few months later, Peter Dutton officially joined the No campaign.
Speaker 2: His Indigenous Affairs spokesperson Julian Lisa quit and was replaced
Speaker 2: by Price.
Speaker 4: I've had many respectful discussions with colleagues about the Voice
Speaker 4: over the past year. I've listened to their views and
Speaker 4: they've heard mine, but ultimately I haven't been able to
Speaker 4: persuade them.
Speaker 2: Dutton also began to describe the Voice as divisive.
Speaker 7: The Prime Minister is dividing the nation with his divisy
Speaker 7: voice proposal by deliberately refusing to provide detail to the
Speaker 7: Australian people.
Speaker 8: Unfortunately, this became an election issue, an electoral issue, a
Speaker 8: political issue. We didn't choose to take it that way.
Speaker 8: That was a decision of the Labor government and of
Speaker 8: Anthony Albanesi specifically, and he cut the Coalition out of
Speaker 8: the conversation.
Speaker 2: Do you regret that you were nable to get bipartisan
Speaker 2: support for this referendum? No referendum succeeded without that before.
Speaker 6: It's unfortunate. I went out of my way to try
Speaker 6: to do that. Peter Dutton decided to announce support for
Speaker 6: the No campaign even before the process had been completed,
Speaker 6: and that's unfortunate. Peter Dutton of course walked out on
Speaker 6: the apology, didn't just oppose it being given. He said
Speaker 6: earlier this year that he regretted doing that. He acknowledged
Speaker 6: that there was no downside. This will be no downside
Speaker 6: from a yes vote in this referendum, just an upside.
Speaker 6: Just like before marriage equality, you might recall people being
Speaker 6: told that existing marriages would be undermined. Well, that hasn't happened.
Speaker 6: The fear campaign was not valid, and the fear campaign
Speaker 6: here is not valid.
Speaker 2: On the other side of politics, the Greens were also
Speaker 2: having difficulty working out their position on the Voice. Their
Speaker 2: Indigenous Affairs spokesperson was Senator Lydia Thorpe, who we met
Speaker 2: yesterday and who has had issues with the idea of
Speaker 2: the Voice since its beginning at all. Rue Lydia Thorpe
Speaker 2: quit the Greens over her stance.
Speaker 3: Now I will be able to speak freely on all
Speaker 3: issues from a sovereign perspective without being constrained by portfolios
Speaker 3: and agreed party.
Speaker 2: Positions, and so the political battle lines were drawn. In
Speaker 2: the early months, the No campaign gained a lot of
Speaker 2: ground support for the Voice. In opinion pols has dropped
Speaker 2: from more than sixty percent a year ago to well
Speaker 2: below fifty percent. To succeed the referendumill need fifty percent
Speaker 2: nationwide and fifty percent in at least four states, a
Speaker 2: result that everyion poll suggests will not happen. If we
Speaker 2: wake up on October the fifteenth, then it is a no.
Speaker 2: Is that something you'll take personal responsibility for? What will
Speaker 2: the path forward look like?
Speaker 6: I've given Australians the opportunity to have their say, and
Speaker 6: I'm very hopeful and I'm optimistic that Australians will vote yes.
Speaker 6: It is important. I think that after such a long
Speaker 6: period of time of being promised to vote, that Australians
Speaker 6: will get the opportunity to lift our whole country up.
Speaker 8: I think on the fifteenth of October we're going to
Speaker 8: feel very bruised. Whatever the outcome is, the nation will
Speaker 8: be bruised. And it didn't have to be this way.
Speaker 8: That's why I respectfully say no, but I also regretfully
Speaker 8: say no.
Speaker 6: No nation has ever been made stronger, more unified by fear.
Speaker 2: The battling amber has been fierce, but on the other
Speaker 2: side of the country things have looked a little different.
Speaker 6: And I've had a lot of the oldies come up
Speaker 6: to me and be're like, well, I'm voting now.
Speaker 9: Our communities are voiceless, our children are voiceless, our women
Speaker 9: are voiceless.
Speaker 2: Tomorrow, come with me on a journey to regional Wa.
Speaker 2: I'm Tom Crowley reporting on Yoori country to hear the
Speaker 2: voices that are often left out of our political conversation.
Speaker 1: Politics really understand Heran Wadach.
Speaker 9: We're supposed to live in our first world country and
Speaker 9: our people live in fourth world conditions.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to this special episode of The Daily OS.
Speaker 1: If you like what you heard or you learned something
Speaker 1: you didn't know, the best way you can show your
Speaker 1: support for the Daily Os is by sending this to
Speaker 1: a friend to keep the conversation going. This episode was
Speaker 1: written and presented by Tom Crowley, produced by Joe Kylie,
Speaker 1: and edited and mixed by Ninako. We'll be back with
Speaker 1: episode three tomorrow. Until then, have a great day.