The Labor government is standing firm against calls for public funding for the yes and no campaigns for the voice to parliament referendum, even drawing backing from a Coalition frontbencher who appeared to break ranks with the Liberal leader’s stance.
Simon Birmingham said taxpayers shouldn’t foot the bill for campaign advertising, despite it being being a condition of opposition leader Peter Dutton’s support for the referendum bill.
Prime minister Anthony Albanese on Thursday confirmed an official information pamphlet would be distributed even though his ministers had criticised it as outdated and unnecessary, saying the government will do “what we need to do” to win support for the voice to parliament referendum.
As part of changes to the machinery rules governing referendums before Australia’s first referendum since 1999, the government proposed that the preparation and distribution of a pamphlet should be abandoned because of claims it was outdated in the internet age.
But after criticisms from the Coalition, Greens and groups on both sides of the campaign, Labor has reversed course and agreed to facilitate an official pamphlet. Finance minister Katy Gallagher said on Wednesday the government “will make that change” in an attempt “to work across the parliament to reach agreement on this”.
A parliamentary inquiry into the Referendum Machinery Act proposals is due to report on Friday.
The special minister of state, Don Farrell, said in a statement last year that the Referendum Act “does not reflect modern delivery and communications methods” and that “there is no longer any need for taxpayers to pay for a pamphlet to be sent to every household”.
At a Canberra press conference on Thursday, Albanese was asked if he backed those comments and whether the reversal was a bid to get the machinery changes through parliament.
“Both things are right,” he responded.
The exact details about the pamphlet, such as what it will look like and who would be asked to contribute the official positions of each campaign, are still subject to negotiations.
Prof Megan Davis, co-chair of the Uluru statement from the heart, raised concerns in a tweet Wednesday that “misinformation and fabrication and racist messaging will be mailed nationwide”.
The prime minister said communication methods had changed since the last referendum, but added that the government wanted to “engage constructively” with others in parliament on the referendum.
What has happened already?
The Albanese government has put forward the question: "Do you support an alteration to the constitution that establishes an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice?" The PM also suggested three sentences be added to the constitution:
- There shall be a body, to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice.
- It may make representations to parliament and the executive government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
- The parliament shall, subject to this constitution, have power to make laws with respect to the composition, functions, powers and procedures of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice.
How would it work?
The voice would advise the Australian parliament and government on matters relating to the social, spiritual and economic wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
The voice would be able to table formal advice in parliament and a parliamentary committee would consider that advice. But all elements would be non-justiciable, meaning that there could not be a court challenge and no law could be invalidated based on this consultation.
How would it be structured?
The Indigenous voice co-design report recommended the national voice have 24 members, encompassing two from each state, the Northern Territory, ACT and Torres Strait. A further five members would represent remote areas and an additional member would represent Torres Strait Islanders living on the mainland.
Members would serve four-year terms, with half the membership determined every two years.
“One of the senators approached me and said this will make a big difference,” Albanese said. “We will do what we need to do to broaden support for this … we want to maximise support.”
“I want this to succeed. I’m not being dogmatic about this.”
He noted the strong support of all state and territory leaders on the voice referendum, heaping further pressure on Dutton’s Coalition to join the campaign and rubbishing the opposition leader’s calls for public campaign funds.
“I’ll just say to my colleagues on the hill, this isn’t the opportunity to look for division. This is the opportunity to look for national unity,” Albanese said.
“Taxpayers shouldn’t be funding the campaign of yes and no, that should be up to people to fund. There should be equal funding, and there will be under the proposal we have.”
Birmingham, the former finance minister and now shadow minister for foreign affairs, told Radio National on Thursday that the Coalition welcomed the reinstatement of the pamphlet. He said it would help stamp out “conspiracy theories” around the referendum.
But Birmingham wasn’t as strident in his requests for public funding as Dutton, noting that the last referendum had seen $7m in funding provided to each campaign.
“I’m not keen to see large licks of taxpayer funding spent on running campaigns,” Birmingham said. “There may need to be some administrative support for the standing up of official yes or no campaign committees. But that’s about as far as I’d want to see anything go.”
It’s understood some crossbench members are considering amendments to the machinery act to mandate factchecking of the pamphlet. Warringah MP Zali Steggall, who has campaigned for laws on truth in political advertising, said she would back such a concept.
“Australians want to make a fact-based decision about the way they vote in the upcoming referendum without scaremongering, misinformation or disinformation getting in the way,” she told Guardian Australia.
