Opposition Leader Peter Dutton says the proposed Indigenous voice is an overcorrection, telling federal parliament the referendum proposal would be a reckless roll of the dice.
Debate on enshrining an Indigenous voice in the constitution began on Monday ahead of a referendum on the issue later this year.
Mr Dutton said the referendum would further divide the country, warning the proposed constitutional change should be setting off alarm bells.
“Changing our constitution to enshrine a voice will take our country backwards, not forwards. The voice is regressive, not progressive,” he told parliament.
“Our constitution is not something to be toyed with lightly.”
The bill on the voice will finalise the wording that would be placed in the constitution should the referendum succeed and the question that would be put to voters.
Mr Dutton reiterated his previous criticism of the voice proposal, arguing not enough detail was known about the model.
The proposed voice would permanently divide the country by race, he said – in claims rejected by the government.
“This referendum on the voice will undermine our quality of citizenship. It’s an overcorrection,” Mr Dutton said.
“If the government wants you to vote on a voice not knowing what it is or what it can do, the approach is a reckless roll of the dice.”
Debate on the voice in parliament follows the release of a parliamentary committee report on the bill, which recommended it pass without changes.
The Liberals have called for constitutional recognition for Indigenous people, but back a legislated body for regional voices, rather than a national entity.
Yet Mr Dutton labelled the process a “kangaroo court”, saying there was no constitutional convention to go over the changes.
Indigenous Australians Minister Linda Burney rejected the claims, saying the concern was part of a misinformation and scare campaign.
“In 2023, it is time for recognition. It’s time for an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice to the parliament, because (they) have not enjoyed the same opportunities of so many other Australians,” she told parliament.
“Constitutional recognition through a voice to the parliament is about giving Indigenous Australians a say in matters that affect us. It means delivering structural change.”
Ms Burney said the process to establish the voice had not been rushed, instead being developed over many years with the support of Indigenous people and outlined in the 2017 Uluru statement.
While concerns have been raised on the voice being able to advise executive government, the minister said the approach was the right one.
A vote on the bill is expected to be held in the lower house next week, before debate shifts to the Senate.
The referendum is due to be held between October and December this year.
Nationals leader David Littleproud said the voice would not adequately address the issues facing Indigenous people in regional areas.
“It will create another taxpayer funded level of bureaucracy in Canberra. A nation needs a better bureaucracy, not a bigger one,” he told parliament.
“The reality is that vulnerable communities have real issues which require practical and frontline evidence based responses, which empower local elders and leaders rather than adding more red tape to the way government operates.”
But Liberal MP Bridget Archer flagged her intention to support the voice, arguing it would be more than just a symbolic body.
“This referendum provides an incredible chance to begin writing so many wrongs and to bring about tangible differences in quality of life outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people,” she said.
“Most Australians agree that the status quo isn’t acceptable and that as a country, we must do better. Here’s our chance.”
By Andrew Brown in Canberra
