Voice to parliament could be PM's lasting legacy for all Australians

Linda Burney on ABC RN Drive with Patricia Karvelas - Wednesday, 30 October 2019

PATRICIA KARVELAS: Linda Burney is the Shadow Minister for Indigenous Australians. Linda Burney welcome.

LINDA BURNEY, SHADOW MINISTER FOR INDIGENOUS AUSTRALIANS, MEMBER FOR BARTON: Hi Patricia.

KARVELAS: Professor Marcia Langton says she supports a constitutionally enshrined voice and doesn’t see what the government is proposing as a departure from the Uluru Statement. What do you make of that?

BURNEY: I have not heard that statement. And you’re absolutely right. Both Marcia and Tom are both very respected Indigenous leaders. And I welcome their appointment. I think there is a departure though between what the government is proposing and that’s a legislated voice; and the Prime Minister has made it clear that he will not support a referendum to enshrine a voice in the constitution. He’s been saying that since the 10th of July. And what the Minister has proposed in his statement is a legislated voice to the government, which is also Patricia, a departure from the Uluru Statement which set a enshrined voice to the parliament.

KARVELAS: Marcia Langton says the crucial thing now is to determine what Indigenous people actually want from this body or from this voice. Does this look to you like a process that can achieve that - a two-step process where a voice is perhaps legislated, and later there can still be a referendum to enshrine it?

BURNEY: I think that can be achieved but I am saying very clearly Patricia, that the Prime Minister needs to put some clarification around the very point that you’ve just made. If the government is going to pursue a legislated voice, then the Prime Minister needs to be very clear about whether or not down the track, that that will be enshrined in the constitution. It is not Labor’s position – or pursuit to have to do that – that’s the responsibility of the Prime Minister. Labor has been very clear and consistent all along with what our position is.

KARVELAS: Ken Wyatt is proposing a voice to government rather than a voice to parliament. What is the difference here? I mean, I think sometimes our listeners might be thinking what kind of semantics – like I do think we need to decode a lot of this. What does that mean?

BURNEY: I don’t know what that means. And you’re right, it does need decoding. I was surprised, and it was the thing that jumped out at me from Ken Wyatt’s statement, that it would be a voice to government. I very much agree with what he’s saying, that we need to have – hearing the voices from local and regional, but I was surprised to see the word government instead of parliament. And what that simply means for everyone listening is that the voice would be advising the party in power – in government – not the whole parliament, and certainly what Uluru wanted was a voice to the whole parliament.

KARVELAS: So given the voice is still at the centre of what people want right, it seems the Uluru Statement and what we’re hearing today – the government also wants to move towards a referendum just to recognise Indigenous Australians – should they press pause on that until they clarify all of this?

BURNEY: They haven’t made any statements that I’ve seen publicly on that for some time. And it’s one of htose other things I think, very frankly Patricia, the Priem Minister needs to clarify. Because I think that it confuses people, when they hear, ‘oh, we’re going to have a legislated voice.’ People would be saying out there, ‘yeah but what does that mean in terms of referendum?’ Does it mean that there’ll be recognition? And I at this point in time – my understanding from private discussions, is that the Prime Minister is still in favour of moving to a referendum to recognise people in the constitution – which of course there’s no – has no legal standing. I hope that the co-design process will also explore that, and I’m calling on the government to clarify that point.

KARVELAS: You’ve raised concerns about the membership of the national and regional co-design groups. They will include non-Indigenous people – should this be an Indigenous-only process?

BURNEY: I’m open about that – what I’ve said Patricia is that I’m anxious to hear who the other 18 people are on the group that the Minister is putting together, led by Marcia and by Tom. I think it’s really important that those other members be clarified. And I think that would also clarify in the minds of many, the direction this thing is heading in. I don’t particularly have a problem with non-Aboriginal people being on it, particularly, non-Aboriginal people that have got and been involved in these discussions for some time. But I do note, and I go back to the principles that the Labor Party has in place – that the group should be a majority of Aboriginal people, and most importantly Patricia, there should be gender equity on the group.

KARVELAS: You’re still encouraging people to participate …

BURNEY: I am.

KARVELAS: … in this co-design process, regardless of their view on a legislated versus constitutionally enshrined voice – why do you want them to be at the table?

BURNEY: I listened carefully to Thomas Mayor this morning on Radio National, and he’s certainly made the point that he would be participating in the co-design process to put forward his view, which is the view of what the Uluru commitment was, and that is an enshrined voice to the constitution. I’ve obviously had a number of people ring me today – some of them very disappointed and upset about the announcement. And I’ve said consistently, all views are important. And they need to be put to the co-design process. And if the bar is made Patricia, that there needs to be a unanimous voice, I would be very very cross about that because that is as silly as saying that all non-Aboriginal people should have the same view about a particular issue. There is obviously going to be a variety of opinions put forward; a variety of positions; and it is then up to this group of 20 to distil that point of view to the government.

KARVELAS: The Chair of the PM’s Indigenous Advisory Council  Roy Ah See says that if the government doesn’t like what this process delivers, they’ll just rip it up and start again. Is that a concern you have?

BURNEY: It is a concern – as you know, and I know you have stuck with this for a long time – the changes in Aboriginal Affairs are incremental.  And this is another step in the road towards equity and towards self-determination, and the aspirations of First Nations people. And that’s what it must be. But it can’t be something that the government thinks is going to be acceptable to the government – the government and certainly the party I represent will respond and listen and pay heed to what First Nations people say.

KARVELAS: So what’s your role in all of this? What’s Ken Wyatt offered to you and Labor? Because this has to be a bipartisan process if this is to be successful?

BURNEY: Well that’s why I’m – at first I thought it must have been a mistake – the word government, because that certainly doesn’t spell out to me bipartisanship, but I am an optimist as you know, and I am still saying on behalf of the party that I represent, this can only work if it’s bipartisan. This can only work if there’s a collaborative approach. But we will be informed by what the co-design process says and that has been a consistent position. I want this to deliver to Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders right across this country a step forward in making sure that the parliament is responsive to what Aboriginal people are saying.

KARVELAS: How about the timeline? You’ve spoken before about your fears that the government is running out of time to deliver something. There’s a 12 month consultation period – it could be extended – how do you feel about the timeline?

BURNEY: I think the timeline is really important. And an extension in my view would undermine and certainly send a message that the Prime Minister is not serious about recognition – and let alone entrenchment of a voice in the constitution. The timeline is of essence if there is going to be a referendum in this term of government, particularly Patricia, if there is an election in the first half of the 2022. So this cannot meander along. This has to have some definite timeframes. And do you know what? People need and want those timeframes.

KARVELAS: How about the Prime Minister’s engagement on this issue? Has he been engaged on this issue?

BURNEY: Well that would be something you would need to talk to the Prime Minister about. I hope he’s been engaged. I certainly know that there have been discussions with him. And I think that if he really thought about it Patricia, he would recognise this as an incredible opportunity to have a legacy in this country that no other Prime Minister has, and that is to bring to the parliament a voice requested by Aboriginal people to advise the parliament so that there can be better outcomes for things like school, education, clean water, housing and incarceration.

KARVELAS: Thank you so much for joining us.

ENDS

LINDA BURNEY

TRANSCRIPT - WEDNESDAY, 30 OCTOBER 2019