Voice: Albo speaks from both sides of his mouth

by SEAN BURKE – PRIME Minister Anthony Albanese is telling voters his Voice proposal is no big deal while at the same time telling Aboriginal activists that it’s “a very big deal, indeed”. 

Former prime minister Tony Abbott told The Institute of Public Affairs last week that Mr Albanese was taking Australia down the wrong path on reconciliation. 

I really do wish the Prime Minister would decide that he is on the wrong track and pull this whole thing. But I don’t expect him, at the 11th hour, to have a change of heart.
Tony Abbott
Former Prime Minister

He said the Labor Prime Minister was signalling to Aboriginal leaders that Indigenous sovereignty was at the heart of the Voice proposal.

“Mr Albanese is telling the Indigenous leadership, the activist leadership, that this is ‘a very big deal, indeed’ – which ‘restores in large measure the sovereignty that you had illegitimately taken away from you in the years following 1788’.”


Mr Abbott said the Voice proposal needed to be scrapped.

“I really do wish the Prime Minister would decide that he is on the wrong track and pull this whole thing.

“I don’t expect him at the 11th hour to have a change of heart. But, either way, there is going to be damage and division done by this.

“I think the least amount of damage will be done by a successful No vote because that will enable us to start again and do recognition, if it is to be done, in a unifying way.”

Mr Abbott said the Voice proposal was not only “divisive and dangerous” but also “incredibly cumbersome and enormously expensive”.

“The key thing is the proposed Section 129.2 which will come into the Constitution should this referendum as currently drafted be carried,” he said.

“This section provides that the Voice has a right to make representations to the parliament and to the executive government on matters ‘relating’ to indigenous people.

“Now, this is effectively a right to make representations on everything.”


He said such an outcome would significantly clog up an already “constipated” legislative process.

“This means that all significant decisions will need to be advised in advance to the Voice in reasonable time. The Voice needs to be resourced sufficiently to be able to consider the matter carefully and then if it chooses to make representations, the relevant decision-maker is going to have to take them seriously.

“And quite possibly, if the relevant decision-maker decides not to heed advice from the Voice, it may then have to give the Voice some kind of right of comeback.

“At the very least, what this means is that all significant decision-making is going to be much slower and much more cumbersome.

“The whole apparatus of government is going to get bigger and more unwieldy.

“So there is time and expense being added to decisions which, as we have seen, are already incredibly constipated and extraordinarily expensive.”PC

Voice ‘dangerous and divisive’…

MAIN PHOTOGRAPH:  Anthony Albanese. (courtesy BBC)

10 thoughts on “Voice: Albo speaks from both sides of his mouth

  1. “A submission about implications of the Voice to Parliament by two ‘well-respected’ legal experts has been labelled ‘terrifying’
    A submission about the legal implications of the Voice to Parliament, from two “respected” constitutional law professors has been described as “terrifying” by Chris Merritt, while Amanda Stoker said it was “concerning”. ”

    “Asked about the practical benefits of the Voice, Mr Pearson instead said simply that “the Voice is an expression of recognition.”

    No Mr.Pearson, recognition would be to acknowledge the Aboriginal Australians here in and before 1788, no strings attached, no revival of Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islands Commission – to become Voice. You also commented that Voice has been on activist agenda for over 16 years, so since ATSIC was abolished.

  2. Rubbish Mr. Jones!

    — I don’t squeal and I’m exceptionally clean!
    — And Bigot?
    What ARE you on about?

    — NOTE BENE —

    During his student years, Tony Abbott spent much of his holidays in the Australian outback, befriending and working for the betterment of our remote Indigenous tribes! He loves and knows these people!

    How many of our politicians have done the ‘hard yards’ as Abbott surely has?

  3. Not being considered are the 80 per cent approximately of Australians who claim to have Indigenous ancestry, and most other ancestors, who are doing well. Isn’t it an insult to them for activists and Albo Labor to be misrepresenting them by claiming that a new Voice would help disadvantaged Aborigines?

    How about direct action to country communities where the approximately 20 per cent disadvantaged by distance and lack of government services are located? And for the cultural differences to be worked through by qualified people. Practical help like Senator Price and others have recommended including safe houses for school children in areas where they escape to the streets to avoid problems at home.

  4. The ‘VOICE’ will divide our Australian Society in a shocking way, along racial lines.
    The ‘VOICE’ will hold up or even decimate the whole legislative process.
    The ‘VOICE’ will put forward – in fact demand – unrealistic, ridiculous claims and outcomes when it comes to ‘treaties’ and ‘truths’.
    The ‘VOICE’ will build very valid resentment amongst 97% of the population against the Indigenous 3%, the opposite effect to what is desired.
    The ‘VOICE’ is morally and legally, a terrible concept.

    Make the hundreds of Indigenous organisations, agencies and committees already in existence and very well funded ACTUALLY WORK! We do not need more!

    1. Voice sales and marketing is deceptive, Voice is not the same as Recognition for the Australian Aborigines who were here when the British Empire’s First Fleet arrived in 1788. Coalition governments since Howard Government have considered appropriate wording for insertion in the Constitution, no strings attached, just a simple recognition of history.

      Albo Labor & Aboriginal Activists refer to Recognition as the reason to vote in favour of their Voice proposal which is a new Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islanders Commission, Commission replaced by Voice.

      After Tony Abbott addressed the Voice Committee Aboriginal Activist Noel Pearson spoke. He warmed the parliamentary joint committee of the consequences of a “No” vote. “Reconciliation will die, it would be dead” he said. And then when he was asked about the practical benefits of the Voice, Mr Pearson instead said simply that “the Voice” is an expression of recognition.

      Mr Pearson also said when questioned that Voice is not new, it has been discussed for over sixteen years. Well true, ever since ATSIC was abolished for being an expensive for taxpayers failure.

      On SBS recently Albanese Labor Cabinet Minister Linda Burney described the referendum objectives as being: “Voice+Treaty+Truth”. Another behind the Voice promotion rarely mentioned agenda – treaty, truth telling and return of sovereignty to 3-4 per cent of fellow multicultural Australians because they claim to have Indigenous ancestry, most of whom also have ancestors who arrived on and after 1788.

      Why should the citizens today of the Commonwealth of Australia created in 1901 with Federation of States, the former Colonial Governments of the British Empire, be responsible for the good or bad behaviour of now deceased people? Why should descendants of now deceased people be compensated by the Commonwealth of Australia and citizens, and for what reasons and purposes?

      I agree subject to the wording that Recognition of Australian Aborigines place in the history of our country would be appropriate for insertion into our Constitution. However, I am opposed to locking in another ATSIV and related hidden agenda.

      And why if a new “Voice” is needed is there no mention of cancelling the many existing Voices, they must not be worth the funding expenses?

  5. Is speaking from both sides of your mouth similar to speaking; as the Indigenous American Indians refer to it as forked tongue?

  6. He needs something on his resume, running with the hounds is another way to go.

  7. The voice will be overwhelmingly endorsed.
    And conservative bigots like Abbott will be on the wrong side, again.
    It is so much fun watching these filthy old monarchists squeal as Australia ignores them.


Comments are closed.