Indigenous voice crucial to treaty, Uluru statement co-author Megan Davis says | Indigenous voice to parliament

One of the architects of the Uluru statement from the heart has said constitutionally enshrined recognition is crucial to the success of all other treaties and called the voice a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to give Indigenous voices legal and social legitimacy.

At a speech in Townsville commemorating the late Eddie Koiki Mabo’s high court victory, which legally recognised Indigenous people’s special relationship to the land, constitutional lawyer and UNSW professor Dr Megan Davis urged Australians to consider the legal and moral importance of constitutional reform.

“If you don’t have the commonwealth at the table, you’re not going to have a robust treaty,” Davis said. “The history of representative bodies since the 70s shows that a legislative voice can be abolished … [Constitutional recognition] is the only way to confer legitimacy.”

“It ensures that the voice can speak fearlessly.”

“It will endow the voice with the legitimacy of the support of the Australian people.”

It was the first time since it was first held in 2005 that the Mabo Oration, organised by the Queensland Human Rights commission to continue the legacy of Mabo’s legal activism, had been held in Townsville, despite Mabo himself having spent much of his life in the city working as a gardener at James Cook University.

“He is a local,” his daughter Gail Mabo told reporters before the event. “For this platform to be here tonight … It’s a chance to actually share information, and to actually talk about issues that are relevant to now.”

There were indications that the choice of location had been purposeful, with anxiousness growing that the traditionally conservative voting state could reject the upcoming referendum.

“There are a range of views in all communities about the voice,” said Queensland Human Rights Commissioner, Scott McDougall. “I’ll certainly be doing everything that I can to ensure that Queensland gets over the line.”

Davis used her hour-long oration to explain the tangible differences that the voice would bring to Indigenous people’s lives and discredit arguments from the opposition that the body would be a largely bureaucratic and ineffective.

She said the voice would give Indigenous people an avenue of justice that was not dependent on the media and activists and ritualistic government mechanisms that allowed governments to appear engaged without needing to implement any real reform.

“I see misinformation and disinformation taking hold in this campaign. The federal opposition has said it will destroy Australian democracy,” she said.

“Nothing could be further from the truth.”

Davis said the voice’s strength would lie in its ability to raise subjects that were of high concern to Indigenous communities such incarceration rates, child protection and more niche subjects like earlier superannuation payouts that considered the shorter life expectancy of Aboriginal people.

“Our people have been fighting to have legislation for a very long time that allows them to access their super early on. People are always surprised that we raised this but it’s a common topic of conversation in many communities,” she said.

“This is the kind of thing the voice can proactively make representations on. Some say it’s going to make claims on all legislation. No it won’t.”

In a panel discussion following Davis speech, Australian historian Prof Henry Reynolds said the voice would raise Australia’s status internationally as the Mabo decision had done.

“The one thing that people judged Australia by was the way we dealt with our Aboriginal people,” said Reynolds recalling the difficulties faced by the Sydney Olympic delegation in convincing African countries to back the proposal to host the games. “ I was able to tell them about the Mabo case, that’s when things starting changing.”