[Theme Music Starts]

RUBY:

From Schwartz Media I’m Ruby Jones, this is 7am.

Criticism of the Voice to Parliament from the conservative side of politics has escalated… ever since Peter Dutton’s decision to oppose the referendum.

The main accusations are: the proposal for the Voice is coming from elites – and that it won’t achieve practical change.

Today, union organiser and member of the referendum working group, Thomas Mayo, on the loudest criticisms of the Voice… and his hope for the referendum.

It’s Thursday, April 27.

[Theme Music Ends]

RUBY:

So Thomas, the journey of becoming involved in the Voice to Parliament, where does it begin for you?

THOMAS:

Yeah, it all began really, I think on the wharves. I became a wharfie in 1994, when I was 17 years old, I was a quiet fella, didn't say much. Though on the wharf I found my voice. Soon after the 1998 Patricks dispute, which taught me a lot about the value of unity and sticking together the importance of, you know, supporting other social justice struggles. Because I saw how that came back to the union in support on the picket lines. Soon after 1998, I became a delegate on the wharf and began to negotiate enterprise agreements on behalf of my fellow workers taking up disputes. And that got me more involved in, with the skills that I learnt, in my own people's struggles, organising actions around the community closures, you know, the treatment of youth in detention at Don Dale various things like, you know, deaths in custody and, that then led me to one of the dialogues that the Referendum Council ran to identify what both Indigenous people and broader Australia could accept as a form of constitutional recognition. I was elected then to go to Uluru.

Archival tape -- NITV:

“As the sun set over Uluru, all of the delegates who have been drawn from right across the country, gathered at the community of Mutitjulu for a really spectacular…”

Archival tape -- Delegate 1:

“I’ve come here today to get a constitutional reform. Get us in that constitution.”

Archival tape -- Delegate 2:

“Nungas, no matter who we are, Kooris, Gooris, Murris, we all won and that’s how we gotta get back to.”

THOMAS:

And, you know, I had a bit to say. I gave the speech about unity and about the strategy just before the Uluru Statement was read for the first time on the final morning, and then have been on that journey since advocating for what the collective decision of Indigenous people was, which was firstly to seek a constitutionally enshrined voice.

Archival tape -- Megan Davis:

“We seek constitutional reforms to empower our people and take a rightful place in our own country. When we have power over our destiny, our children will flourish. They will walk into office and their culture will be a gift to their country. We call for the establishment of a First Nations voice enshrined in the Constitution.”

THOMAS:

This was a genuine grassroots, collective consensus building process. And, you know, you need only look at the signatures around the statement to see that this isn't city elites. I'm sure some are prominent people in Indigenous rights and recognition work, but a lot of them are unknown. And I would say a majority of them are from rural towns and remote areas, not from the biggest cities.

Archival tape -- Thomas Mayo:

“We are going to go on a fight for it and say we’re gonna say what we build, must be protected in the rule book of the nation, the constitution, and our voice must always be heard on decision making about us. So please support …”

RUBY:

Could you take me to the moment of the wording of the referendum being announced, particularly after there was setbacks like Malcolm Turnbull not supporting the Uluru statement, as you were up on stage a couple of weeks ago, what was it like to reach that point and be surrounded by these people that you'd worked with for years speaking about that question?

THOMAS:

I can tell you, Ruby, there's been many emotional moments since the Labor Party won the election just because for five years before that it's been a massive amount of hard work. I have hardly rested in that five years, just taking this message to the people and trying to create greater momentum so that we could reach that moment, you know, just to convince not just the Labor Party but other political parties themselves to support it or individual politicians, because obviously we haven't got the Nationals and the Coalition across the line, but we do have some of their members of Parliament as supporters. You know, all of that took hard work too, taking the Uluru Statement to those politicians, it's been a massive amount of hard work, but also it was a lonely thing to do as well, especially in the first couple of years. It was very lonely because a lot of people didn't know about the Uluru statement and a lot of people had been misinformed about it, both by people that you'd say are extreme left or extreme right. When Albanese committed to it momentum picked up incredibly fast, you know, a whole lot more.

Archival tape -- Anthony Albanese:

“Bringing people together starts here on this stage literally… we right to go? The Uluru statement from the heart invites all Australians to walk together to a better future. Today we take a very important step forward on that journey.”

THOMAS:

And then being up on the stage with a set of words that we negotiated and come to an agreement on, which was difficult in itself,

Archival tape -- Megan Davis:

“So this is the culmination of many, many decades of hard work. It's the culmination of the Referendum Council's work and the Uluru Statement from the Heart and the many men and women who contributed to that dialogue, some of who are in this room today. We implore all Australians to unite behind us and walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.”

THOMAS:

all very emotional moments. And just just a you know, just a wonderful thing when you see so much work, reach moments of fruition. And we're not there yet. The Australian people are yet to vote. And that's the most important moment, getting that across the line, the referendum.

Archival tape -- Pat Dodson:

“The words that ring in my head from the Uluru statement is the tyranny of our dispossession. And today is a clear example where the government and the Aboriginal leadership here have laid the foundation to actually give hope. To give hope to the reversing of that tyranny.”

THOMAS:

I can only imagine how wonderful it will be to succeed, to change this country for the better, to recognise my people's existence and to do it in a way that gives us the ability to make practical change, you know, in a more effective way.

RUBY:

Yeah, as you say, that moment, it's the culmination of years of work, but it's also just the beginning in another way, because the wording is out there, there is a long road ahead to get to the point of a referendum. So in the weeks since the wording was announced, the Opposition has formalised its position on the voice, Peter Dutton and the new spokesperson of Indigenous Australians, Jacinta Nampijinpa Price. They have sat in behind the No campaign. Tell me how you would characterise the Opposition's strategy.

THOMAS:

Well, I would characterise it as political games. It's full of lies, for example, to say that this is going to govern a particular people. As we've heard Senator Price say a number of times, that this is going to fundamentally change the way our democracy works and hold up the processes of government and hold the government to blackmail. Those sorts of comments are alarmist and completely false. This is an advisory body to the parliament and to the government. It cannot force, either the parliament or government to do things, it only will have the right to be heard. And that is something that strengthens our democracy. It doesn't hinder it, you know, to say also that it's a Canberra voice, that this is elitist, you know, is a massive contradiction when you know you've got the Shadow Minister for Indigenous Affairs now telling people that this is a Canberra voice, when what we are trying to establish here is a representative body. And you know, in the nature of national representative bodies, you need the grassroots layer of that feeding into the national layer of it. And if you only have regional and local voices and not a layer at the national level, then you are continue to be working in silos as Indigenous people and continue to be ineffective in our advocacy, especially about those things that are in common, such as housing and justice, health and education, things that can be done federally to move our people forward together in a way that isn't always, you know, one step forward and two steps back, as it tends to be.

[Advertisement]

Archival tape -- Peter Dutton:

“If we're going to change the constitution, we need to understand what it's about and the government just can't explain it. I don't think it's going to deliver the practical outcomes that we want for Indigenous people on the ground in places like Alice Springs. And it's really going to change the system of government as we know it.”

Archival tape -- Jacinta Nampijinpa Price:

“It's been tainted with this voice, I cannot support it, unfortunately, because that is a transfer of power to individuals who have been at the seat, who have had a voice in government for decades and have failed.”

Archival tape -- Peta Credlin:

“The voice is not just about being polite and respectful to Aboriginal people. Far from it. It's about whether Australia belongs to all of us or just some of us.”

RUBY:

And Thomas, one of the main criticisms that’s been levelled at the Voice has been this question of whether or not it will create practical change. So I thought we could dig into that idea. What do you think the voice could actually achieve?

THOMAS:

Well, there's another contradiction. You've got people in the opposition party that don't have control of the government right now. You know, voices in the parliament saying that having a voice isn't going to make a difference. Of course a voice is going to make a difference in a democracy like ours. A voice is something that is direly needed. Our people in our communities have been crying out for a very long time saying politicians don't listen to us. And a great example of what we're always up against is Peter Dutton flying into Alice Springs, doing an interview with a non-Indigenous businessman and making all these sorts of wild accusations that he had to back-pedal from because he had no evidence. But basically with Jacinta, you know, Senator Price by his side, a an Indigenous person that he has chosen to speak for Indigenous people, not the traditional owners that he didn't visit, not the Indigenous frontline service workers that are doing good work on trying to, you know, heal the pain in the community and to address all those things every day. It just shows why we need to be able to choose our own representation and hold our own representation to account and have transparency about what they say to the Australian people and to the Parliament. Transparency not just for the Australian people to see, but for Indigenous people to see what our representatives are saying. It is something that will be hugely effective when it comes to the policies and the laws that affect us every day in our community. Policies on housing, policies on justice, policies on how you heal the damage done from all the failed policies that proceed today. It's a very, very practical reform.

RUBY:

And just staying with the idea of policies on justice and the idea of practical change, one issue that persistently impacts Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people is overrepresentation in custody. So how could a voice to parliament make real change on that?

THOMAS:

Well, you know, I think a really important part of the Uluru Statement is where it says proportionately we are the most incarcerated people on the planet. We're not an innately criminal people. The numbers of children in detention just incredible in the Northern Territory, almost all of the time it's 100% of the children in detention are Indigenous and it's not because Indigenous children don't understand the difference between right or wrong or can't understand it. I mean, we're talking about the effects of the poor policies before it and the discrimination and the traumas from genocide and forced assimilation. These children have foetal alcohol syndrome. They don't feel like they belong in schools. All of these sorts of things. And every time a program, a good program is set up to bring those children back on the straight line and to give them the love and the care that they need to address their issues before they reach an age where, you know, it becomes too late to have early intervention and early care. Those programs are stopped by a government that comes along after the one that sets it up. And you see that over and over again. That's just one thing that a voice could do. Among many things. It could ensure a consistency of good programs, it could promote the good programs and bring accountability to the ones that aren't working.

RUBY:

And so, Thomas for the next few months, you’re going out and making the case for the yes vote. You've already been doing that, but that’s going to ramp up as we get closer to a referendum. Can you tell me a bit about what that is like finding yourself before a room full of people telling them about how Australian history could be altered depending on the result that comes later this year.

THOMAS:

Well, I still get nervous before I speak to a crowd. I've been doing it for six years. You wouldn't think so. But when I'm there, I just want to move people, you know? I just want to help them understand. And my experience is that when people have the truth before them and the logic and good sense of this, they tend to support it.

And I'll continue to do that right up until the referendum, which I'm thinking will be mid-October. That’s what i’ll continue to do but also to build up other leaders and we’ve got some great advocates out there doing this work not just myself, but so many of us are stepping up and grabbing a hold of this opportunity to make some permanent change.

The polling is continue to show. I think the last one was 56% support in the Australian people. So they’re doing their best. But um, it seems the Australian people are still interested in supporting this. We just got to do the work to help them understand that it's the right thing to do.

RUBY:

Well, Thomas, thank you so much for speaking with me today.

THOMAS:

And thank you, Ruby.

[Advertisement]

[Theme Music Starts]

RUBY:

Also in the news today…

US President Joe Biden will visit Australia for the first time in a few weeks, attending a meeting of Indo-Pacific leaders, which will be held at the Sydney Opera House on May 24.

The meeting between the leaders of Japan, India, Australia and the United States is likely to focus on potential security co-operation between the countries.

And Treasurer Jim Chalmers was asked yesterday whether he could live on JobSeeker payments, conceding it would be tough.

Asked if he could survive on the current rate of $49.60 a day, he responded, quote: “I acknowledge and I recognise that it is tough to live on the JobSeeker payment and that’s why we want to move as many people as we can off that payment and into good, secure, well-paid jobs.”

I’m Ruby Jones, this is 7am. See you tomorrow.

[Theme Music Ends]