Hard to Reconcile Leeser’s Reasons for Resigning

Australian MP Julian Leeser speaks to media during a press conference in Sydney, Australia, on April 11, 2023. (AAP Image/Bianca De Marchi)

Commentary

When your opponents start praising you, it’s worth taking stock and examining your position.

The shadow attorney-general and spokesman for Indigenous affairs, Julian Leeser, may well reflect on the accolades and bouquets coming his way from his political opponents after his resignation from the opposition front bench over its decision to oppose “The Voice.”

Julian Leeser MP, the member for Berowra in Sydney, is a decent, well-meaning, and considered individual. In short, he is an asset to the Australian Parliament. It is to be hoped he continues to serve.

That said, his resignation from the front bench over his support for the concept of a Voice is both understandable and yet difficult to understand.

Understandable because Leeser has been a long-term advocate for constitutional recognition of Australia’s Indigenous people in the Constitution. Yet he also recognises the design being proposed is flawed.

In those circumstances, he was in a cleft stick, and something had to give. With Leeser, opportunism or a frontbench position would never be a motivator.

As he presented in announcing his resignation from the frontbench, he agrees with and supports his party and leader Peter Dutton, but on this particular issue, he respectfully, and one suspects regrettably, disagrees with his colleagues.

Many a Liberal has found themselves in such a position and chose to leave or cross the floor in a dignified manner without pulling the house down on the way out.

In short, the behaviour of a dignified and respectful individual, for which Leeser deserves admiration.

The front entrance of Parliament House in Canberra, Australia, on March 4, 2021. (AAP Image/Mick Tsikas)

It is to be noted the other side of Australian politics does not afford such flexibility. With the Australian Labor Party, you are absolutely locked in—to campaign against its position leads to immediate and automatic expulsion.

Leeser, thankfully, was not confronted with such an ideological straitjacket.

Still a Surprising Decision, All Things Considered

What is difficult to understand is that Leeser is willing to support the Yes case for The Voice despite knowing its flaws, which he has expressed.

Changing the Constitution is no small thing. Unforeseen consequences can’t simply be rectified over a cup of coffee.

Once in the Constitution, the issue is difficult to resolve, or amend, if poorly drafted. Correcting a flaw will be long and tortuous.

With the plethora of expert legal voices outlining the practical problems with the proposed Voice, let alone the principle of all Australians being treated equally, it is difficult to reconcile Leeser’s resignation.

Perhaps he has expended so much of his own energy and effort over a long period of time that he can’t step back sufficiently to acknowledge the dangerous flaws littered throughout this particular proposal.

While the excitement of some Labor government operatives on learning of Leeser’s resignation from the frontbench might reflect on the fact that their own members with misgivings aren’t afforded such an opportunity.

It seems though that Leeser’s heart and emotion held sway over his head and analysis. Most Australians, while initially motivated by a sense of goodwill, should, and one suspects will, analyse The Voice and vote on its fabric and not its vibe.

Vote With Head or Heart?

Recent polling indicates a decline in support for The Voice and, most tellingly, shows the strong No supporters have gained the ascendancy over Yes supporters.

This trend is also reflected in the crowd turnout at two recent functions for both campaigns held by the Liberal Party in Western Australia.

One addressed by Ken Wyatt, the former Indigenous Affairs minister advocating for the Yes case attracted just 20 attendees. The No function addressed by Indigenous Senator Jacinta Price attracted eight times the number.

Country Liberal Party senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and 22 Indigenous community leaders at a press conference at Parliament House in Canberra, Australia, on March 22, 2023. (AAP Image/Mick Tsikas)

It seems the longer the campaign continues, and the deeper the assessment of The Voice by the public, the more people are beginning to come to the same conclusions Leeser did. Yet unlike Leeser, they won’t let their heads be taken over by their hearts.

They rightly see the imperative to get the wording correct. Completely correct without any hint of ambiguity.

Forcing it into their Constitution, however well-meaning it might be, has really damaging consequences for the functioning of Australian governments and Parliament.

Leeser’s frontbench resignation does provide a much-needed distraction from the sagging support for The Voice, and some respite for the proponents who continue to flounder on its substance.

Many of them continue struggling to explain how will it work in practice: What its impact on the executive and Parliament will be? How it improves the lives of Indigenous Australians? And why it shouldn’t simply be legislated rather than implanted into the people’s Constitution?

Little wonder Leeser’s actions gained him praise from Voice supporters.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.