Calls for treaty to come before an Indigenous Voice to Parliament neglect “the biggest” coming together of First Nations peoples on these issues, says referendum working group member Thomas Mayo.
Senator Lidia Thorpe on Monday announced her resignation from the Greens to pursue leadership of what she called the “Blak sovereign movement”, which she said she couldn’t continue to do from within the party given leadership support for the Voice.
“It’s like you’re telling people that your wish list is already agreed,” Mayo told Crikey. “But it’s not. And it’s one person, who doesn’t represent [all] Indigenous people. She represents the state of Victoria.”
Thorpe has been a vocal critic of Labor’s plan to take the Voice to a referendum this year, instead calling for truth and treaty to come first, claiming a Voice could undermine First Nations sovereignty.
Some constitutional experts, including legal scholars such as Anne Twomey and George Williams, along with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, have rejected the suggestion that a constitutionally enshrined Voice to Parliament would undermine sovereignty.
The Greens, led by the party’s First Nations network, want to introduce a $250 million truth and justice commission as a step before treaty, with the aim of “exploring, understanding and reckoning” with Australia’s colonial past. The party has since resolved to support the Voice.
Mayo said the treaty-first position undermines the consensus reached by the hundreds of signatories to the Uluru Statement from the Heart, which accounts for treaty and truth-telling as well.
“It’s ridiculous,” he said. “Because as if Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who have a strong desire for treaty — it’s true that most do, but not all — would establish a representative body [such as the Voice] and not go and pursue agreement-making and truth-telling.”
He said pursuing agreement-making is an important distinction to make because the statement in its current form would pave the way to form various agreements. “Treaty isn’t the only show in town.”
The Yes campaign for the Voice was given valuable momentum this week, following a January period dominated by calls from Invasion Day rally organisers to reject the Voice, and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s calls for more “detail”.
Liberal Senator Andrew Bragg, a member of the party’s moderate faction, on Wednesday released a position paper that described the Voice as a “liberal solution” to reconciliation and called on Dutton to embrace the framework.
“This is not a ‘woke’ agenda. It’s not identity politics and it isn’t a separatist agenda which denigrates Australia,” Bragg said.
Bragg laid out five conditions that would need to be satisfied in exchange for his support, of which four have already been met. He still holds reservations about ensuring the Voice’s subservience to Parliament.
“The concern is that if left open to judicial review, the High Court could stipulate the process of consultation between the Parliament, the executive and the Voice, or invalidate proposed legislation or executive decision-making on the grounds that the representation of the Voice has not been given proper consideration.”
Lacking detail remains the sticking point for Dutton. Mayo, as a key member of the referendum working group, met with the opposition leader last week to talk over the framework. Dutton left the meeting claiming the group hadn’t answered all of his questions, but he committed to further meetings.
Mayo said those who want “to confuse voters” are “not going to stop asking for details”. He said they are “not going to stop asking questions that they already have the answers for”.
