Could we risk increased racism as a result of the Voice legislation introduced to South Australian Parliament?
Apparently these are the concerns only held by an individual full of ‘hatefulness and bigotry’ – that’s if one were to listen to the South Australian Attorney-General’s speech last week when introducing the historic bill.
I disagree. I can only assume and hope that those Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples that question the timing and likely effectiveness of the bill have been spared such wrath and name-calling.
What about an approach based on needs, not race? Surely this would capture those Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders left behind without such a focus on race.
What the First Nations Voice ignores is the fact that almost three-quarters of those living in poverty, and who are either homeless or at imminent risk of homelessness, are in fact not Indigenous.
It seems many in the community would agree with me but are too afraid to speak their minds.
The South Australian Commissioner’s Second Engagement Report suggests the possibility of an Aboriginal Commissioner to oversee claims for connection to Country. It also explicitly states that ‘under the current model, there is no requirement for voters to submit proof of Aboriginality documentation as part of their declaration’.
Apart from concerns around the focus on race, I also take issue with the cost and the potential blow-out from the proposed bill that will likely pass Parliament in less than two weeks.
With the number of regions to be represented yet to be prescribed, the actual number of elected members for both the Local and State First Nations Voices is left out of the bill, as is the number of committees that the Voice may ultimately establish. What’s not left out is guaranteed resourcing for the Voice and provision for as many committees as the Attorney-General sees fit.
Ironically, last year when I proposed a piece of legislation to secure resourcing for the Children and Young Person’s Visitor, it received unanimous support from the crossbench but was shot down by Labor. The Visitor is responsible for ensuring the safety and wellbeing of kids in state care, of which Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are greatly over-represented.
This begs the question of whether the rush for a state Voice to Parliament is about tangible benefits to those most vulnerable in the Aboriginal community or merely strokes an out-of-control Labor ego?
Get-out clauses that seem to exempt elected Voice members from having to provide parliamentary reports on request or from even having to attend Parliament, if asked, make the bill seem like a blank cheque from the South Australian taxpayer. It leaves the possibility that those Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders who are most vulnerable will be once again left ignored and without a voice.
The silenced voices in the current climate are from those who believe we should be seen as fundamentally equal under the law and are those who don’t want more money spent on wasteful bureaucracy.
Sarah Game MLC is a One Nation member of the South Australian Legislative Council
