Interview with Patricia Karvelas on ANC RN Breakfast

04 April 2023

Subjects: Voice Referendum

E&OE………

Patricia Karvelas

Andrew Bragg is a Liberal Senator and supporter of the Voice to Parliament. He joins me now. Welcome back to the program.

Senator Bragg

G'day, PK.

Patricia Karvelas

What do you want the Party Room to decide tomorrow?

Senator Bragg

Well, my view has always been that this is a vote of the Australian people. It's not a vote for politicians. Our job is to give advice to people if they're wanting to hear from us about how they should vote for the upcoming referendum. And in the past few decades, when we've had public votes on the Republic and on Marriage, the Liberal Party has not sought to bind its members and Senators to a position. So that would be my starting point.

Patricia Karvelas

So you want a free vote for the frontbench as well, because obviously you have the right to do what you want under the Liberal rules as a back backbencher, but you want everyone to be able to determine their own position.

Senator Bragg

Well, my starting point is that we have not sought to bind people in the past. And you've had John Howard voting 'no' for the Republic and Peter Costello voting 'yes.' And then you had Malcolm Turnbull voting 'yes' on Marriage and other members of his Cabinet voting 'no.' That has always been part of the Liberal tradition. So that is my starting point.

Patricia Karvelas

And is that the starting point of the leadership? Does Peter Dutton agree with you?

Senator Bragg

Well, I'm sure there'll be mixed views, but I think it's important to look to history here about how things have been managed in the past. I mean, internal differences are a reality in politics, and things can be handled well or things can be handled poorly. I think the Marriage is a case in point of something that was handled very poorly. I mean there should never have been a public vote on that issue, and it dragged out for years. I mean, it could have been handled with a simple conscience vote. So I think sometimes things are made much worse than they need to be.

Patricia Karvelas

It's interesting you raise that because yesterday your colleague, Julian Leeser, called for the second clause in this proposal by the government that allows the Voice to make representations to the Executive Government to be scrapped. Do you agree?

Senator Bragg

I think firstly, Julian Leeser has made an outsized contribution to this debate over the past 10 years. I thought his address yesterday was very reasonable, and he raised a lot of good issues. Julian also made the point that it should be able to make representations to the Executive, but that needs to happen in a way which is safe for the overall institutional framework in Australia. That's what he said.

Patricia Karvelas

Yeah, but he wants to remove that clause which makes it explicit in our Constitution. We know that Indigenous leaders that have been pouring over these details for many months want it explicit in the Constitution. What do you think?

Senator Bragg

Look, I agree with Julian that there should be a provision for the Executive to be spoken to by Indigenous communities. When you go into communities, that is the obvious benefit of this system that's been proposed, that the decision makers are often members of the Executive or part of the Executive. So it needs to be there in some form, but it needs to be the right set of words. And now we finally have this Parliamentary inquiry, we can do the job that should have been done last year of looking at these words.

Patricia Karvelas

But okay, so if it remains in the Constitution because that's the view of the Committee and the Indigenous group, can you live with it?

Senator Bragg

Well, the Committee has only had one meeting and we haven't done any of the analysis yet. And the job we have now is to review the words and make recommendations. Now, that is a really important role. As I say, I wish this had happened last year because it would have been much better if the Bill was introduced last week, had come after there'd been a Parliamentary Inquiry, because we want to maximise bipartisanship here on these matters. And it's been very difficult. I mean, I've been a long term supporter of this concept, and this is the first opportunity that I'll have to have any input into this at all. So it's been very difficult.

Patricia Karvelas

Okay, let's go to another point. Julian Leeser was essentially calling for the referendum to be delayed if it can't pass. He says there isn't enough support for it. Do you really think it should be delayed?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think it's too early to say that, and we need to see what the Committee recommends. And my sense is that this Committee will demonstrate how necessary new institutions are in parts of Australia, and I think it can do some very good work. But it will also need to look closely at the wording, which is its job. Its job is to review the Bill that's now in the Parliament. So I think it's too early to say.

Patricia Karvelas

Indigenous leaders have made it clear that they want it this year. They want this referendum. In fact, they've been calling for it, as you know, because you've been working in this space and you are very passionate about the idea for a long time, they don't want any more delay. Don't you need to honour what they're asking for?

Senator Bragg

Yeah, I think so. And that's why I'm pleased this Committee has finally been set up because it can now look at the wording, but it can also look to generate some positivity, I believe, about the benefit of new institutions to support Indigenous people in our country to make community level decisions about service delivery, but also to talk to Government to get better outcomes. I think that this idea should sell itself. It's a very good idea. And I feel that it has incurred a lot of brand damage because of the way that the process is run in some way. Now, I'm not saying that's anyone's particular fault, but it could have been run in a way which maximised support across the Parliament.

Patricia Karvelas

I understand that's your criticism of the government's process, and you've previously made it, but I've never found you to be someone who holds back. Do you also think the Opposition has at times sounded incredibly negative on this?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think that the fact that basic questions haven't been answered has been a legitimate point. I mean, you don't go to a referendum without a view about how you're wanting to use a new power in the Constitution.

Patricia Karvelas

But I ask you, do you think the Opposition has sounded overly negative?

Senator Bragg

I think Julian has been very constructive. I mean, anyone who watched that Press Club Address yesterday would say that was a constructive proposition. I mean, he put forward the primacy and the importance of Local and Regional Voices. He put forward strong views about how the wording should be proposed. I mean, I think that was a constructive proposition.

Patricia Karvelas

If we look at the weekend's by-election Senator Andrew Bragg, the public clearly aren't buying what your party is selling. Is the Voice an opportunity to actually reposition as well on the Liberal Party's outlook about the future of Australia?

Senator Bragg

Well, I think some things are more important than politics. And setting up these new institutions is beyond the day-to-day political discussion. Clearly, that is needed. But on the politics, we obviously have a lot of work to do. I think in his first year, I think Peter has done a good job of bringing the Party together. That might not be particularly sexy, but that is a prerequisite for the next stages, which is to set out alternative policies in the second year and then try and win the support of the people in the second and third year. So I think he has made a good start. We have a lot of work to do.

Patricia Karvelas

I spoke to Tony Barry, who's obviously a former Liberal strategist, but also now with the Redbridge Group. And he said that the Liberal Party is often in focus groups described as nasty. There's a nastiness to the politics that have been raised. Do you agree?

Senator Bragg

Yeah, I think that's right. I mean, there can be elements which are drawn to division, and there has been a tendency on the fringes to try and Americanise some of these culture wars here in Australia, which I think has been very regrettable and has damaged particularly vulnerable communities. And I think that has been nasty at times. And that's why we need to maintain our position as a mainstream political movement that is focused on the major issues facing people and not drawn into the margins on crazy culture war issues.

Patricia Karvelas

You call them crazy culture war issues, but do you accept that a lot of your membership cares a lot about those things, probably more than some of the things that you care about?

Senator Bragg

No, I think that they are amplified by sections of the media and....

Patricia Karvelas

Well be specific. What sections?

Senator Bragg

Well, no, I think the point here is that the issues around the LGBTQI community and on climate change and these sort if things, often generate lots of media coverage because they're highlighting points of difference to the mainstream. And that's why they get coverage. They get coverage here, they get coverage on every outlet. This is not about any particular outlet. But I think that is not the way to go. We need to be focused on economic policies which improve people's lives. So that's why we need to be looking at housing and emissions reduction, for example. That should be our focus.

Patricia Karvelas

And so returning to the Voice to Parliament, of course, tomorrow is the Party Room meeting. And you say this is bigger than politics, and you're right, this is not a fundamental question about the future of our nation and reconciliation project and journey we've been on for a long time. But of course, the way political parties position on these key questions does matter to your future and to your appeal. Do you worry about the way that this is playing out for the way the Liberal Party looks on these questions?

Senator Bragg

Well, we've always been a supporter of freedom. We've always been a supporter of trying to put in place new structures. And so my sense is that we will get to a credible position. I think yesterday's address by Julian Leeser was significant. I think he's pointed out very important issues that if they're addressed can lead to a successful referenda. And I'm sure that's where the bulk of the Australian people want to get to. People don't want to see this referendum defeated.

Patricia Karvelas

No, but would you die in a ditch because the words weren't exactly as you wanted them, if you agree with the concept?

Senator Bragg

Well, that's the question now. That's really the question before everyone. The Committee now needs to assess the claims and counterclaims that have been made about these words. And that's its job. I see that as its core job. I look forward to trying my best and working in a collegiate way with my colleagues in the Parliament on that matter.

Patricia Karvelas

I see that you will want to do that. But personally, would you personally die in a ditch if the words weren't exactly as you wanted them? Or is the concept so important to you that you campaign, 'yes', regardless?

Senator Bragg

Well, we need to do the work. I'll make my decision as part of this process, and that's why I think this Committee is so important. That's going to be my focus over the next six weeks.

Patricia Karvelas

Andrew Bragg, always lovely to talk to you. Thanks for coming on the show.

Senator Bragg

Thanks a lot.

[Ends]

‍