Anthony Albanese gave a wide ranging speech at the National Press Club on Wednesday afternoon in which he touched on the failure of the Indigenous Voice to Parliament.
The Prime Minister suggested he wanted the referendum to go ahead because he believed Australia should have the Voice – but that he didn’t neccessarily believe the referendum would be successful or that the majority of Australians were on board.
‘We supported a Voice To Parliament. I wanted it out of conviction. Not out of convenience,’ Mr Albanese said.
‘It’s not easy to win a referendum in this country.’
‘The Voice To Parliament didn’t come from me. It came from First Nations people who had a constitutional convention at Uluru under the former government under a process that they set up that led to that in 2017.
‘We put it to the Australian people which was their gracious request. That was something I said I would do, and we did. We also said we would respect the outcome and we have.’
The Voice would have been spectacular legacy for Labor and Mr Albanese, but its rejection by 60 per cent of Australians at the polls has been slammed across the political spectrum as setting back Indigenous reconciliation by decades.
Mr Albanese in particular was criticised for making the Voice part of his 2022 election victory speech and not negotiating bipartisan support from the Coalition beforehand.
James Blackwell, Research Fellow in Indigenous Diplomacy at Australian National University, said the PM ‘treated the referendum like an election campaign but without the usual level of resourcing and advocacy’.
Mr Albanese has said the government will not pursue the Voice in another form, despite Foreign Minister Penny Wong saying this week that the country will eventually wonder why there was ever an argument against it.
‘What we are now working towards is practical reconciliation. How do we close the gap?,’ Mr Albanese said in his Press Club speech.
‘The truth is that every government, Labor or Conservative have not done well enough, because if we did, then we wouldn’t have the life expectancy gap, the education gap, the housing gap, the health gap.
‘We wouldn’t have first nations people having diseases that no one in this room will have to worry about. What we are doing is addressing those issues.’
Mr Blackwell is unconvinced.
‘The government’s current attempts at Indigenous policy remain exercises in seeking consent over genuine consultation,’ he said.
He called the proposed economic empowerment agenda for First Nations people a prime example.
‘Aside from the lack of codesign and meaningful engagement, such policies have been bandied about for the better part of two decades and still have not substantively moved the dial.’