The voices of those who have been silenced for so long in our democracy can speak very loudly during this legislature.
The heartfelt Uluru Declaration will help define the Albanian government and the future of the opposition led by Peter Dutton.
It will tell us a lot about our democracy.
The time has come for Uluru’s statement. Anthony Albanese’s first commitment in his election speech on election night was to promise a referendum to enshrine the voice of First Nations peoples in the Constitution.
It lands at the crossroads of the political upheaval that shakes democracies around the world and now here in Australia. The federal election has opened our policy. Is it difficult – not easier – to win a referendum?
Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to search, up and down arrows for volume. Clock time: 19 minutes 6 seconds 19 minutes New Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s victory speech in full
It’s already a climb. A “yes” campaign must get a double majority: a majority of voters and a majority of states.
Only eight of the 44 referendums have been held. For the last favorable vote, we have to go back to the seventies.
Historically, without bipartisanship a referendum is dead. And when it comes to a First Nations voice, we know where the Liberal-National coalition stands: it has already rejected it twice, under the Turnbull and Morrison governments.
Albanese is blowing in strong political winds. When asked during the election campaign if he would lead a voice in a referendum, Scott Morrison replied, “Why would he?”
So why would Peter Dutton do that?
Scott Morrison asked why he would bring a voice in Parliament to a referendum. So why would Peter Dutton do that? (ABC News: Nick Haggarty)
Dutton may ask, “What would Howard do?”
At first glance, the story is not a good omen for supporters of the Uluru Declaration. In 2007, Peter Dutton boycotted the apologies of then-Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to the stolen generations.
He later said that he regretted this decision, that he did not appreciate what it meant for the natives. Would you have a similar change of heart to support your voice?
The voice referendum will tell us what kind of leader Peter Dutton will be. Will he be tempted to wage a war of political culture?
In a party room largely stripped of moderates, Dutton could play with his conservative base and see this as an opportunity to inflict political damage on Anthony Albanese.
Perhaps it is more than recognizing the natives in the Constitution; it could be how Dutton sees his way to power.
He says his mentor and model is John Howard. When Dutton faces a Liberal Party identity crisis today, he will be reminded that Howard faced a similar existential challenge in the 1980s.
Then, a split between “wet and dry” (moderate and conservative) banished the Coalition from power for more than a decade.
Howard restarts the party. He appealed to the “Howard Warriors,” a disaffected old working class. He tried to make Australia relaxed and comfortable. He turned to values and identity: Gallipoli, ANZAC Day, Don Bradman. He campaigned against the Republic. He refused to apologize to the stolen generations and mocked the vision of the “black bracelet” of history.
On the voice referendum, Dutton may ask: What would Howard do? And about that, John Howard has already given the answer. Maybe an amazing one.
Prior to the 2007 election, Howard himself pledged to hold a referendum on the Australian people to formally recognize Indigenous Australians in the Constitution. He did not propose an indigenous voice; his recognition was even more modest and symbolic. But he did acknowledge that the Australian people, as he put it, “want to move”. Of course, he lost the election to Kevin Rudd.
The referendum has never happened. A Peter Dutton.
How do voters feel?
A successful referendum may depend more on Peter Dutton than on Anthony Albanese. Albanese, elected with an unfortunate primary vote of around 33 percent, has a tenuous mandate. He can’t take the voice referendum on his own. The Albanian would spend precious political capital. The stakes are high and personal for him.
One only has to consider the fate of former British Prime Minister David Cameron, who now says his great regret was to call a referendum on Brexit.
The British people voted in favor of leaving the European Union. Cameron lost his leadership.
John Howard promised to work for the constitutional recognition of Australian Indigenous people, but did not pledge to apologize. (Tracey Nearmy: AAP)
Peter Dutton can turn voice voting into a referendum on Anthony Albanese himself. So where do Australian voters sit?
No doubt the federal election has turned politics upside down as always. Some say it has marked a change in our political system, the end of the domination of the big parties.
Yes, the vote of the primaries of the two major parties has plummeted. Over the last 30 years, it has dropped from 90% combined to less than 70%.
But was it really a change or was it a catharsis? A catharsis is the release of repressed emotions. This is how this election felt.
We have seen this catharsis open up political flaws around the world. The tremors have already reached us.
Here, some experts say the message to major parties is that people are fed up with politics and division. They want a kinder policy and an end to cultural wars.
Really? What we have seen here is the politics of disruption.
The blue greens here are not that different from Trump supporters in the US. Yes, they want different things. They are urban, elite and less rebellious. But they come from the same sense of abandonment, disappointment, and despair. Psychology is the same.
Catharsis is being heard. All over the world, political catharsis has not led to more unity, but more and more division.
A gift, not a weapon
The most successful politicians have been the ones who have exploited the division. They have campaigned on values and culture. Nationalism has played a big part.
The strong man has been ascendant. Donald Trump typified it in the US; Elsewhere, Viktor Orban in Hungary, Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, Narendra Modi in India, Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Turkey, Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines have read a similar script.
Joe Biden defeated Trump. But Trump still received the most votes from any incumbent president. Polls show that he, or his anointed successor, is about to return the Republican Party to the White House.
These are the calculations Peter Dutton will make. Do you play division or try to get the center back?
Which John Howard will listen to: the one who refused to apologize or the one who finally accepted that the people wanted to move toward indigenous recognition?
The authors of the Uluru Declaration from the heart never wanted it to be a political document but a gift to the Australian people.
Polls show a steady and growing support for an indigenous voice. Maybe in this, like marriage equality or climate change, people are ahead of politics.
Political philosopher Duncan Ivison believes this. Uluru’s statement, he argues, presents an opportunity for “a refoundation of Australia.”
The authors of the Uluru Declaration from the heart never wanted it to be a political document but a gift to the Australian people. It offers an opportunity for everyone to walk together for a just and true future.
At a time of political division, he speaks of a place beyond politics. This can be your path to success: get it out of the hands of Peter Dutton or Anthony Albanese.
Otherwise he could die a political death.
Stan Grant is ABC’s international affairs analyst and presents China tonight at 9:35 p.m. on ABC TV, and Tuesday at 8:00 p.m. on ABC News Channel, and a Q + co-presenter On Thursday at 8:30 p.m.
Space to play or pause, M to mute, left and right arrows to search, up and down arrows for volume. Clock time: 2 minutes 21 seconds 2m 21s The Prime Minister criticizes the Coalition for publishing a statement on an asylum seeker operation on election day.