Former Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott has told a parliamentary inquiry into the Voice that it would leave Australians "embittered and divided" no matter the result of the referendum.
Describing the Voice as "wrong in principle" and potentially "dangerous," Abbott expressed concerns about the implications of the constitutional change and called for the proposal to be pulled. If not, he insisted that the amendment should ensure the Voice's actions are not justiciable, as the High Court might find otherwise in practice.
Abbott appeared before a parliamentary committee in Canberra to express his views, having earlier in the day called it a "scandal" that he was denied the chance to appear at a public hearing.
He compared the proposed Voice to the UK's House of Lords, suggesting it would be a representative body based on heredity.
"I can appreciate that not everyone likes the comparison. But in this important respect, it's correct. The House of Lords at least prior to reforms in the late 1950s was entirely hereditary. And this voice will be hereditary in the sense that to be a member of the voice, you have to have Indigenous ancestry," the former PM said.
"So to that extent, it is an entirely accurate comparison. Now, I absolutely agree that we do want to do much better by people who were doing it badly. I should make a distinction, not all Indigenous people are in the same boat."
While he supports recognizing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as the first Australians, Abbott argued that everyone should have the same voice through the national parliament. He praised the increase in parliamentary representation of Indigenous Australians to 11 over the last decade, emphasizing that this was achieved without quotas or affirmative action.
"Everyone should have the same voice. And the voice of all of us is the national parliament," he said, adding the "single, best thing" that had happened for Indigenous people over the last decade was the increase in parliamentary representation to 11.
"Not because of quotas, not because of affirmative action, but because political parties and the people of Australia, in their wisdom, thought that Indigenous people had the qualities to represent all of us."
Abbott said there was no evidence that the Voice would improve the situation for disadvantaged Indigenous communities, particularly in remote areas.
Abbott proposed that, instead of the Voice, the focus should be on increasing police presence in Indigenous communities, ensuring children attend school and adults work, and boosting the number of Indigenous parliamentarians.
"There is absolutely no doubt that large swathes of remote Australia are very substantially under policed and this, to be honest, is why there are so many issues of dysfunction in some of these communities."
He also suggested amending the preamble of the Constitution to include symbolic recognition of Indigenous Australians.
"I don’t want to change the way we governed, I just want to acknowledge the fact that Indigenous people were here first and should be respected as the first Australians."
"This is a very, very significant change to our Constitution, and it needs more attention and more scrutiny than it’s currently getting. I think this process has been altogether too abbreviated".
"Now, as you know, I think that this Voice is wrong in principle, and I think it’s potentially quite dangerous in practice. I think it’s wrong to divide our country on the basis of ancestry.
"I think that giving this Voice a right to make representations effectively to everyone on everything is going to make government much more difficult than it already is."
According to him, the amendment should be symbolic in nature and ensure "nothing that the voice does should be justiciable".
"Because if that is not specific in the actual Constitution itself, you can be absolutely certain that the High Court will find that it is in practice."
