Labor Needs to Clarify Indigenous Definition in Australia: Coalition

A member of the Koomurri dancers holds up an Indigenous and Australian flag during the WugulOra Morning Ceremony on Australia Day at Walumil Lawns, Barangaroo in Sydney, Australia, on Jan. 26, 2020. (Jenny Evans/Getty Images)

Opposition Indigenous Australians spokesman Julian Leeser says the Labor Albanese government needs to clarify the definition of Aboriginality to determine who can sit on a voice to parliament.

In a letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese earlier this year, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton asked 15 questions of the proposed voice, including whether the government will confirm the definition of Aboriginality to determine who can serve on the body.

Asked if this question was insulting to Indigenous people, Mr Leeser said there were several definitions, and the government needed to specify which one they would use for the voice.

“This is a matter for the government to clarify,” he told Sky News on Sunday.

“We’ve asked the government to provide answers to that, as we’ve asked them to provide answers to who’s going to be chosen, how will they be chosen?”

Leeser said people, including Indigenous Australians, were asking this question.

The Liberal Party is yet to decide its position on the voice, while the Nationals are opposing it.

The referendum on the voice will be held in the later half of this year, with the working group on the Indigenous voice finalising its advice to the government.

Legislation is expected to be introduced to parliament by the end of the month and will contain the wording of the question that will be put to the public.

Voters will cast their ballot in a referendum later this year to decide whether to enshrine the voice and recognise Indigenous people in the constitution.

But before the vote is held, the government is aiming to pass legislation that will change how referendums are carried out in a bid to make the process similar to that for elections.

Northern Territory Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, part of the “no” campaign, said equal public funding for both sides of the debate was essential for coalition support of the bill.

“Making changes to this piece of legislation also affects future referendums,” she told ABC TV.

“The establishment of an official ‘yes’ and an official ’no' campaign ... alleviates the opportunity for misinformation and also goes down the road of being able to identify where funds and donations are coming from.”

Indigenous Australians Minister Linda Burney said the government had made a significant concession by agreeing for pamphlets to be sent to households outlining both cases.

“We hope the opposition sees this and meets us halfway,” she said.

Labor backflipped on taxpayer funding for the pamphlets after strong opposition from the coalition.

Speaking on the referendum machinery bill, opposition frontbencher Angus Taylor said the coalition wanted equal government funding to the “yes” and “no” cases in addition to the establishment of official campaign organisations.

“It’s clear that if we’re to have a strong process for the referendum, we should be ensuring there is a structure in place for those processes and regulatory bodies to start their work,” he said.

Science and Technology Australia, which represents 115,000 of the nation’s workers, announced it would formally back the “yes” case.

The organisation’s president, Mark Hutchinson, said the peak science body shared a vision of national unity.

“We want all Australians to see the inspiring first cultures of this land as a great source of shared national pride—and a voice will bring us another step closer to that goal,” he said.

One Nation leader Pauline Hanson announced she will join former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce and former Labor minister Gary Johns to launch a bipartisan “no” campaign in Tamworth this month.

“Make no mistake, black nationalism activists will not stop with the voice,” Hanson said.

“They will continue until they have their own nation within Australia.”