Dutton made the claim in a speech on the Voice referendum bill in the parliament last week,triggering unease among some Liberal MPs and underpinning an for political leaders to avoid making race the focus of the debate.
Nationals leader David Littleproud says he wouldn’t support including the claim that the Voice will “re-racialise” Australia in the official Yes/No referendum pamphlet.Alex Ellinghausen
Speaking ahead of a vote in the lower house this week,Littleproud said he expected every National MP would oppose the bill,positioning the party to steer the pamphlet for the No case which will be posted to about 12 million households in the fortnight before the referendum.
“One of the things the Nationals will want to make sure of is the tone of the pamphlet is respectful,” Littleproud said.
Asked whether he expected to see the “re-racialise” claim included in the No case’s argument,Littleproud said:“It wouldn’t be something I support”.
But he said the Nationals would not shy away from raising concerns that enshrining the proposed Voice in the Constitution would undermine Australians’ equality of citizenship.
”We’ve said from the very start a key tenet is all Australians are treated equally,” he said.
Dutton has not repeated his argument in the week since his speech,where he denounced the proposed change as something that would permanently divide the country by race and make Indigenous Australians “more equal” than non-Indigenous Australians.
The tone rankled with some Liberal MPs who,speaking on the condition of anonymity,said they were uncomfortable with the leader’s language but believed he would not restate the “re-racialise” claim in the future,and would instead focus on other arguments such as the lack of detail around the Voice,and legal risks posed by the constitutional change.
Asked about his language at a press conference on Monday,Dutton said there should be a “respectful debate on both sides of the argument” and again accused Yes advocates of “suggesting that people are racist because they don’t support the Voice”.
“Racial abuse of any nature is not acceptable,but we should point out that there is a rising level of frustration,I think is the best way to put it,from Australians who want to understand what it is the prime minister is proposing in the Voice,” Dutton said.
Delivering the annual Lowitja O’Donoghue Oration in Adelaide on Monday night,Anthony Albanese said Australians would reject “Chicken Little” scare campaigns about the Voice,as he ridiculed arguments from No campaigners.
“It’s only a matter of time before they tell us that the Voice will fade the curtains,” Albanese said.
“Australians won’t succumb to their appeals to fear and their ever more ludicrous invitations to jump at our own shadows.”
Prime Minister urges Australians to back Indigenous Voice to Parliament in Adelaide speech.
Dutton will vote in favour of the bill as will many Liberal MPs,in line with the Liberal Party’s position to allow the referendum to proceed despite opposing the Voice itself. However,a group of “designated dissenters” will vote No to ensure the Liberals have a say in the referendum pamphlet,among them Bowman MP Henry Pike.
Berowra MP Julian Leeser,the party’s leading Voice advocate,said he was open to being involved in authorising the Yes pamphlet.
The Australian Electoral Commission is legally required to to households at least 14 days before the vote,outlining in 2000 words each the cases for and against the referendum. The respective cases will be authorised by a majority group of politicians who vote Yes or No to the bill in the House of Representatives and the Senate.
The exact process that will govern how the pamphlet is put together has not yet been made clear by the Albanese government,but it is expected to involve the creation of separate Yes and No committees of MPs to finalise the wording. There is no requirement that the arguments be true or factually accurate.
One Nation leader Pauline Hanson,who is staunchly opposed to the Voice,has already declared,and will seek to include claims that the proposal is a “smokescreen to actually set up an Aboriginal state within the nation” and “another arm of parliament”.
But Littleproud said he expected the Nationals to have a dominant role on the No pamphlet committee and would collaborate with other parties,but indicated the Coalition could use its majority to exclude contributions it did not agree with.
“We will be careful about seeking input from those who seek to communicate a message that is disrespectful,” he said.
Cut through the noise of federal politics with news,views and expert analysis from Jacqueline Maley. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.