Subjects: Australia votes ‘no’ to the Prime Minister’s divisive Voice, Treaty, Truth proposal; the Prime Minister’s lack of leadership.
E&OE
AMELIA ADAMS:
For the architect of the ‘no’ vote, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton, it’s an awkward political victory. How did you feel when you woke up this morning?
PETER DUTTON:
I feel a sense of relief for the country because I think that we would have changed as a country, and not for the better. Most importantly, I don’t think we would have got the practical outcomes for Indigenous Australians that we all want.
AMELIA ADAMS:
Your campaign is being labelled today as ‘disgusting’ and ‘shameful’, how does that sit with you?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I just ask people to be respectful of the democratic process. This wasn’t a 51-49 outcome, one in two Labor voters who have voted no, they haven’t been influenced by the campaign that I’ve run. They’ve been influenced by the fact that the detail just wasn’t there.
AMELIA ADAMS:
Well, they certainly were influenced by your campaign. This concept of a Voice to Parliament was pretty straightforward, and it’s been killed by politics.
PETER DUTTON:
Well Amelia, it wasn’t a simple proposition or Australians would have voted for it. The fact is that the Prime Minister acted against advice. He was warned not to take the country down a divisive path and he made a deliberate decision to keep the design of the Voice from the Australian people.
AMELIA ADAMS:
Okay, but with respect, I think Australians are baffled by the fact that two accomplished politicians, an Opposition leader and a PM, couldn’t thrash out something to put the public together and get some good outcomes.
PETER DUTTON:
Well Amelia, I think the public has spoken its mind and delivered its verdict on the Prime Minister’s model and his leadership on the Voice. I think this is very significant. There wasn’t any compromise. There was no suggestion by the Prime Minister’s side…
AMELIA ADAMS:
From his side or from your side?
PETER DUTTON:
Absolutely not from his side. We offered: turn the question into one of recognition. I met with Anthony Albanese half a dozen times, but most of them, if I’m being honest, were when the Prime Minister was on his way into a press conference – so it was a courtesy – and I think he wanted the opportunity to say ‘I’ve spoken with’ or ‘I’ve consulted with Peter Dutton’, but it was cursory and it was a pleasantry, if you like, but there was no substantive discussion about what changes could be made because the Prime Minister wasn’t of that mind.
AMELIA ADAMS:
Couldn’t you also have budged and compromised more?
PETER DUTTON:
Well again, we did. What we said was ‘we’ll meet you halfway’ and halfway is recognition of Indigenous Australians in our Constitution, supported I think by 80 per cent of Australians. But for his own reasons, for his own motivations, for his own self-interest, the Prime Minister thought that he could have his Redfern moment and I don’t think that’s the leadership that Australians want in their Prime Minister, when it’s all about them. It should be about our country, about Indigenous Australians, about a moment of unification and he squandered that opportunity.
AMELIA ADAMS:
You want to lead this country. How do you think this result impacts our international reputation, how we’ll be viewed around the world?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I think the Prime Minister’s overplayed that card and I think the large majority of our friends will say, ‘well, that was a democracy, it was a democratic process in action’, and ‘we respect the fact’ – as we would a vote in New Zealand or the United States or Canada – and I think they would be accepting of that outcome.
AMELIA ADAMS:
The fact remains, we’re the only Commonwealth nation who doesn’t officially recognise its Indigenous people. Isn’t this idea that Australia’s racist and discriminatory, it’s exactly the type of disinformation that China has been spreading online. I mean, you’re a China hawk, isn’t this result a gift to the CCP?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, we shouldn’t allow it to be, and the Prime Minister was the one that introduced that language, and I think it’s again, not in our national interest.
AMELIA ADAMS:
Okay. So where to from here? How do we address the disparity in life expectancy? Health care? Incarceration rates? Given that our Parliament is not willing to hear from Indigenous Australians on issues that affect them?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I just don’t think that’s the case. I think the narrative around an Aboriginal voice not being heard, it’s just not the reality.
AMELIA ADAMS:
The fact remains we’ve spent close to half a billion dollars on this Referendum…
PETER DUTTON:
An outrage, a complete outrage.
AMELIA ADAMS:
…And today nothing changes for Indigenous Australians. Is there anything positive that Indigenous people, in fact all Australians, can take away from this?
PETER DUTTON:
Of course, of course there is. We live in the greatest country in the world. We should celebrate the success that we’ve got within Indigenous communities now.
AMELIA ADAMS:
And there are very significant disparities as well.
PETER DUTTON:
Of course, and had we enshrined the Voice, I think we would have put at risk some of the success and that’s the judgement that the Australian public has made. So we have to listen to their verdict, in a democratic process, and I think if we can do that, there is opportunity and there is a bright future. Forget the Canberra bureaucrats, forget those who are living off Indigenous disadvantage and listen to those people who are in practical need. If we do that, we’ll do a great service for our country and we’ll improve the future for the next generation of Indigenous Australians.
AMELIA ADAMS:
Alright. Mr Dutton, thank you so much for your time today.
PETER DUTTON:
My pleasure. Thanks Amelia. Thank you.
[ends]