Anthony Albanese has NOT read the Uluru Statement in Full

When you purchase a car or a house, you will often do some due diligence into it. You will assess what that purchase means for your bank account down the track. You will consider whether there might be any large unplanned expenses, or whether the item is fit for purpose.

You will also assess whether the “expert” you hire is genuine, knows what they are talking about, and is unbiased. You will consider whether they have a vested interest in the deal occurring. If the mechanic doing the PPI is friends with the seller, you might be slightly wary, for example.

So it is with The Voice. You would think you would do some due diligence and a pre purchase inspection. Many of us have and have read the documents underlying the voice, including the short Uluru statement of 439 words and its background documents.

Anthony Albanese has not. In an interview he gave with 3AW he claimed he had not read past the one A4 page summary. He had not read the background documents, despite knowing they exist. He rhetorically asked, “Why would I?”. It seems he simply has not read past the glossy brochure and has not stopped to ask what a “makarrata” is or what it entails.

Anthony Albanese’s comments are a problem however you read them.

This is odd. You would think that with any thing you promote with your own reputation, you would do some research. We call out influencers all the time when they promote shonky products. You would think Albanese would inform himself to make sure he was not pushing a lemon.

If Albanese genuinely has not read the background documents, he is derelict. He has failed to do his research. He is not fully informed. He is promoting something he simply does not understand. This is bad. At best he would then be relying on what other “experts” tell him about the voice. It appears he has surrounded himself with people who have a vested interest in it succeeding, however. So, he hardly has unbiased advice. This is especially with respect to people in his own party: in the ALP – unlike the Liberal party – you cannot disagree with your leader. Loyalty is enforced. So, any advice is clearly prone to promote Albanese’s own views.

What about all the lawyers in the media, you might ask? Well, as we have seen time and time again, “experts” personal views often cloud their own statements. There is no reason to believe that “experts” are unbiased. It is not clear that lawyers or academics are united in their support. Many “no” voting “experts” remain silent because their employers or higher-ups have strongly campaigned for the voice. This gives a lopsided nature to the debate. When the “no” side remains quiet, it makes it look like everyone supports “yes” even if they do not.

If Albanese has read the background documents, he is lying about whether he has read them. He is trying to obfuscate and pretend they are not relevant. But, as with any purchase, you need to understand what you are buying. The background documents tell you. They tell you that Voice means treaty and reparations for which everyone else will pay. But, Albanese seems to think people do not deserve to know about that.

Whichever way you cut it, Albanese is out of his depth. He is incompetent, reckless, lying, or possibly all of the above. His own self-admitted willful ignorance does not fill people with confidence about the voice.