The AIM Network

The Meanjin essay: The Voice and Australia’s democracy crisis

Title screenshot of the essay at Meanjin

With Stephen Charles AO KC

The dire state of truth in Australia’s civic space crystalised in 2023. We had seen the waning influence of News Corp’s impact on our elections and assumed it meant that enough of us were becoming inoculated against the propaganda. The defeat of the notoriously mendacious Coalition government might have signalled a ceasefire, a moment for the ‘conservative’ parties to rediscover their integrity. We had underestimated, however, the strategising of vested interests. The year also revealed starkly what happens when the world’s instant communication platform, X (formerly Twitter), is owned by one malevolent billionaire. All these forces converged in a grim battle over the Voice to Parliament referendum.

The overwhelming rejection of Scott Morrison’s Coalition government in 2022 had been in large part an indictment of its lack of transparency and integrity. Revelation had followed revelation about the brazen pork-barrelling undertaken with the help of colour-coded spreadsheets kept in a ministerial office.1 The flood of deception, echoing Donald Trump and Boris Johnson, was such that Bernard Keane assembled a whole book on it.2 Solid gold Liberal seats were lost to community independents known as the ‘teals’ who were focused on climate action and integrity.

Anthony Albanese’s government was sworn in with the expectation that it would move efficiently to introduce the integrity platform it had promised, including an anti-corruption body and whistleblower protections. So, 2023 saw the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) enacted and its commencement. In the first months, it received over a thousand submissions, which it had to cull to the few it can investigate.3 Of course, Australia won’t know which claims of corruption are being tested because Labor was seduced by the Liberals into constraining public hearings: they will only take place in ‘exceptional circumstances’.4 Public hearings are vital for such bodies in fulfilling their primary object of exposing public sector corruption; they educate the sector about the nature of corruption and deter others from future misconduct. The fact that the NACC will only rarely exhibit its work causes Australians to be less confident that corruption is being pursued at all. Other reforms remain stalled. It is scandalous that whistleblowers Richard Boyle and David McBride continued to face court action for their heroic efforts to expose serious wrongdoing to the public. The 2023 Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme was a brilliant demonstration of the debasement of our public service; that the few bravest truthtellers among them should continue to be persecuted instead of celebrated is a blight on Labor’s record.

This year, Peter Dutton’s Opposition could have chosen to build itself up as a more electable proposition by developing policy directions and proudly declaring that corruption was in the past. Instead, Dutton put all the Opposition’s chips on the culture wars: the Albanese government was to be made a one-term proposition by defeating the Voice referendum using whatever weapons were available. Dutton’s party worked alongside activist groups and News Corp to foster chaos and confusion.

The fact that disinformation and misinformation around the referendum seemed so often to tie back to the mining sector was revealing. Clive Palmer spent $2 million of his own money on swaying South Australia and Tasmania in the final weeks of the campaign.5 Gina Rinehart attended the glamorous ‘No’ team victory party at the Hyatt Regency in Brisbane.6 While some of the mining sector supported the Voice as part of their environment, social and corporate governance goals, behind the scenes the fossil fuel sector continued to play its long-term wrecking game.

The war on the Voice – and the chance it might strengthen First Peoples’ protection of their Country – is emblematic of the long game of alliances of sector interests, big donors and canny strategists. The battle against the regulation of tobacco from the 1950s became the campaign to disrupt certainty about the science of climate change.7 The goal was public confusion. Now, epistemological chaos is set to damn us all. Information has been weaponised to divide the public and steal victories for vested interests. The damage done to democracy by cyclones of disinformation tearing through social media is only compounded by the leaders who legitimise it.

Just as US Republicans tried to ride the tiger of populist nativist fury to power over the Obama years, the Coalition in Australia is hoping to regain power by fuelling suburban and rural anger at the so-called ‘inner-city elites’. Conspiracists enraged by pandemic health measures united with culture warriors against ‘woke’ to fight any project that signals empathy, justice, expertise or inclusion. This year also brought to public attention the growing Christian right takeover of ‘conservative’ party branches that has infused Pentecostal cultish ideas into that mixture.8

The Voice to Parliament referendum hijacked by lies

The shame of 2023 was the No campaign against a Voice to Parliament becoming enshrined in the Australian constitution alongside an acknowledgement of First Peoples’ existence in the country before European settlement. The plan to place the Voice in the constitution rather than merely legislate it emerged from the long consultation that formed the Uluṟu Statement from the Heart. First Peoples representatives asked Australians to grant them a permanent body to advise on matters relating to them. By placing it in the constitution, the body could be reformed over and again, but not axed without another referendum.

The decision of the National Party to oppose the Voice took place before the wording was finalised. The Liberal Party, in the wake of Peter Dutton’s embarrassing loss in the Aston by-election, declared its intent to follow and campaign against the body. These choices were not surprising. The fossil fuel sector has a decades-old architecture of influence working assiduously to muddy debates; one of its targets is Indigenous communities taking environmental action to obstruct resource- extraction projects. The Coalition has acted for decades to deter genuine climate action in Australia, and its attack on the Voice was, in part, another gift to the fossil fuel sector.

The right’s lies about the Voice began when the Uluṟu Statement was first issued in 2017. It was almost immediately labelled a ‘third chamber of Parliament’, a ridiculous mischaracterisation.9 In 2023, the Opposition’s parliamentary leaders depicted it as an inchoate power grab with ‘insufficient detail’. Experienced politicians know that the constitution only provides the barest outline: the working consequences of a constitutional amendment are forged by legislators, which would have happened in negotiation with First Peoples representatives. The inaugural legislation could be renegotiated as limitations or problems became apparent.

The Voice had approximately 60% support before the referendum campaign began. By the end of the campaign, the No majority stood at roughly 60%. A percentage of that No contingent was a ‘progressive No’ that believed Treaty should come first or that no cooperation with the coloniser could be helpful. The Voice was to have no ability to compel action; the very modesty of the proposal – likened to a school student representative council – drove these voters to campaign against it. The Yes campaign faced the typical challenge of Australia’s hesitancy regarding constitutional change. Moreover, it would have inescapably faced social media disinformation about the body, but the decision of political leaders around the country to fight – and fight dirty – was disastrous. What should have been a campaign above politics was dragged into the culture wars, with First Peoples as the most damaged casualties.

News Corp was at the centre of the media campaign against the Voice. While the organisation claimed to be explaining both sides…

The essay continues at Meanjin, where a digital subscription is only $5 per month or $50 for a year.

 

[textblock style=”7″]

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

[/textblock]

Exit mobile version