I was talking with a friend about the Voice in the light of the prime minister’s speech at Garma during which she’d had tears in her eyes listening to the events unfold. I agreed with the ABC presenter that it was a momentous day, but when the two of us, my friend and I (and her rambunctious, friendly, intelligent dog), were crossing the park I said that the most important thing about the day wasn’t what Albanese said but the fact that the Opposition spokesperson was present.
This morning a Sydney Morning Herald headline agreed with me, drawing me in to read a story in which he said that more detail is needed. But the thing I like the most about Labor’s proposal is that it contains two parts: one to establish the Voice in the nation’s founding document, and then Parliament deciding how it should be formed and what form it should take.
This open-ended strategy almost circumvents Leeser’s misgivings as any future government would also be able to change the formulation of the Voice. Doing things this way should give the Liberals confidence that nothing is set in stone forever in this term of government, and that alterations, improvements, adjustments and tweaks can be made at any time well into the future.
Given this new way of thinking about a Voice I think we’re in a better position to sit down and feel comfortable that there’s no need to panic – or to kill the idea. This would be my main worry, and having the Liberal Party along for the ride (and the Nationals as well) is central to the success of the Uluru Statement from the Heart. Let’s reflect on Albanese’s wise words: this is mere courtesy, and it’s also very practical since the way we’ve been managing things up to this point obviously aren’t working very well (though no doubt there have been success stories).
Opening a new page can be liberating, and we’ve got an opportunity with the USftH to do just that. It’s time to lift the covers and find our future written within.
