Interview with Ben Fordham on 2GB

[](https://www.2gb.com/delay- it-yes-campaigner-andrew-bragg-on-voice-referendum/) **Subjects:** Voice referendum E&OE……… ‍ **Ben Fordham** Senator Andrew Bragg has been a fierce supporter of the Voice. He still is, as far as I know. He's now urging the Prime Minister to rethink his approach to the referendum. The Liberal Senator for New South Wales, Andrew Bragg is on the line. Senator, good morning to you. **‍** **Senator Bragg** G'day, Ben. How are you? **‍** **Ben Fordham** Good. Let's be clear, you're in the 'Yes' camp. **‍** **Senator Bragg** I am. **‍** **Ben Fordham** What are you sharing with us this morning? **‍** **Senator Bragg** Well, I have always been a supporter of this concept because I think it will help people make better community level decisions. But I fear that the process has not yielded enough consensus to garner a 'Yes' vote. And I think it would be worth considering recalibrating at this stage to save the concept and to deliver a successful referendum. **Ben Fordham** We are in a situation at the moment where if Anthony Albanese doesn't change his approach, we are risking this most important and long overdue recognition in the Constitution going down. We can't afford to do that. **Senator Bragg** No, we can't. And I'm not surprised that we are where we are because this is not a routine political issue. Changing the Constitution is a double majority, very hard to do. And so you need some consensus. And the processes that have been set up have not yielded any consensus or any centre ground. And that's why we are where we are. So that needs to change. Otherwise, we're heading for pretty rough territory. **Ben Fordham** Okay, let's just go through a couple of steps here. First of all, is the Voice tanking? **Senator Bragg** Well, I don't think there's enough centre ground to sustain it. **Ben Fordham** When you say to sustain it, what do you mean? In order for it to get across the line, there's just not enough middle ground for the 'Yes' vote to prevail in October. **Senator Bragg** Exactly. And this is one of the reasons why many people recommended that the government should have established a committee last year, a committee of the Parliament, to look at this and make bipartisan recommendations about the way forward. Instead, the government introduced their own Bill, made no concessions, no changes, and insisted upon no changes. So therefore, there were no concessions given and no centre ground is apparent today. **Ben Fordham** So what are you proposing this morning, Andrew Bragg? **Senator Bragg** Well, I think that recalibration could be done in many ways. One thing that could be useful would be to set up a proper committee that runs for four to five months and then you run a referendum in the middle of next year instead of this year. I believe that there are different ways you could word the Voice. There are more simple amendments that could have been considered. I mean, we had a shambolic committee process that ran for just four weeks earlier this year which recommended that the Voice could not be improved in any way. Now, this is a concept which has been drafted in dozens of different ways over the last few years. So to argue that it can't be improved is just intellectually dishonest. **Ben Fordham** So you think we'd be better off delaying it? ##### **Senator Bragg** Well, I think it needs to be recalibrated. Otherwise, we risk losing the lot. **Ben Fordham** What would you say to Anthony Albanese right now? ##### **Senator Bragg** Well, my view has always been transparent about this, that you can't treat this like a routine political issue. They should have established a committee last year to look at how you can build some consensus around the legal wording and also the detail. I mean, on the marriage debate, only just five, six years ago, there was a Bill on the table which people could look at before they voted on. I would have thought on the Voice, there would have been at least an Exposure Draft Bill that could have been considered alongside the referendum question. **Ben Fordham** When Father Frank Brennan, who has been fighting for the rights of Indigenous Australians for 40 years, came out on this program earlier this year and said, "if he doesn't rethink the wording here, this thing is a strong chance of failing" I appealed to the Prime Minister to say, I think you need to listen to Father Frank Brennan. Does he need to change the wording? You've obviously suggested he should be considering delaying it until next year. But what else can be done? What about the other idea that I put to the Prime Minister this week? The suggestion that you can have both. It's a bit like that little girl on the old taco ad when they said, do you want the hard taco or do you want the soft one? And she said, why not have both? He can have his Voice through legislation and we can recognise Indigenous Australians in the Constitution through a referendum? **Senator Bragg** Well, I don't think it's the right thing to let go of the Voice in the Constitution concept. I think you can do both. But as I say, you need to have a proper wording which can be, which can meet the key test of being accepted by the middle ground. That's the key test here. I think there's a problem with the product and I don't think any marketing can necessarily fix it. **Ben Fordham** What about that idea that Father Frank Brennan put forward along the way and others where they said, Look, if we made it clearer that it's only Ministers who have a responsibility to consult the Voice as opposed to the words Executive Government, which potentially drags in hundreds of thousands of public servants, wouldn't that be clearer? Wouldn't Australians understand that more clearly if they knew, okay well, there's only a certain number of Ministers. And when Ministers are drafting policy, they bounce it off the Voice and the Voice can approach those Ministers too. **Senator Bragg** Look, it could be. The point here is that the original proposal was about giving advice on specific laws and policies about Indigenous people. And the question is, does the current drafting do more than that? And so these are the questions that were raised during the four week joke of a committee process we had, where no serious consideration was given to these matters. So it's been a very frustrating process. **Ben Fordham** All right. Well, look, I don't think anyone is really keen on hearing anyone sitting on the fence at the moment. And I'm not suggesting you are, but I just want to be really clear as we round up this interview. And I'll just repeat, support in February, according to Newspoll, 56%, now 41%. Resolve Poll, 60%, down to 49%. Essential, 65% down to 47%. You want the referendum delayed. **Senator Bragg** I don't think it's in the interest of the country that a referendum on reconciliation is defeated. And there's still time in this Parliament to recalibrate the Voice and the recognition question to build that centre ground that's needed to win a referendum. **Ben Fordham** And if it was delayed until sometime next year, it would allow more time to get the house in order. **Senator Bragg** Well, they need to have a proper effort of building bipartisan support that can improve the product because it's the product which is in question here, not the marketing. **Ben Fordham** We appreciate your time. Thanks for jumping on. **Senator Bragg** Thanks, Ben. ** ** **[Ends]**