Voice to Parliament No campaign pamphlet: A single sentence angers Conservative constitutional lawyer Greg Craven
- A constitutional expert criticized the No Voice campaign
- Professor Greg Craven was quoted in the campaign brochure.
- He said he will file a complaint with the electoral commission
A conservative constitutional lawyer who supports Voice in Parliament was furious after a quote he gave was used in a campaign pamphlet for No.
Professor Greg Craven, a legal scholar and one of the experts behind the original proposal for an Indigenous Voice, said he would file a complaint over the incident with the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC).
The AEC had published this Tuesday the official brochures of the Indigenous Voice to the Yes and No campaigns of Parliament.
A quote Professor Craven gave during an interview with radio station 2GB in March about his problem with the Albanian government’s amendment bill was published in the essay No as a reason why the public should vote against Voice.
“I think it is fatally flawed because what it does is retain the full range of review of executive action,” Professor Craven said at the time.
Conservative constitutional lawyer Professor Greg Craven (pictured) criticized the No campaign for quoting him in its official brochure and said he will complain to the AEC.
“This means that Voice can comment on everything from submarines to parking tickets. We will have regular judicial interventions.
The brochure incorrectly attributed the quote to Daily Mail Australia.
While Professor Craven initially disagreed with the plan to give Voice scope to advise government and parliament, he has since supported the proposal since the redaction was finalized.
I am beside myself with rage. I have never found myself in worse company,’ he said of the No to the aussie.
“Putting those words out effectively without any acknowledgment that I have consistently said I will support and campaign for voice is just misleading.
“It is perfectly obvious to anyone in this debate, including the No case and indeed the opposition, that I am relentlessly committed to the Voice and will campaign for it.”
He also said he was “absolutely furious” and criticized the No campaign for “deeply misleading” the public and writing a “shameful” pamphlet, in an interview with the The Guardian.
Professor Craven contacted the office of Opposition Leader Peter Dutton last week with concerns that his words would be published by the No.
He received no reply.
The campaign brochure did not use a quote Professor Craven gave during an interview with 2GB in March as a reason why the public should vote against the proposal.
Shadow Minister for Indigenous Australia, Jacinta Nampijinpa Price (pictured), defended the professor’s use of words in the essay, saying her concerns early in the debate were relevant.
Indigenous Australians’ shadow minister Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, who chaired the No campaign leaflet, defended the use of the professor’s words in the essay.
He referred to how he had raised relevant concerns about the proposal early in the debate, saying the No side “should be able to promote those concerns.”
Senator Price noted that the pamphlet claims that Professor Craven is a supporter of the Voice.
Uluru Dialogue co-chairs, Professor Megan Davis and Pat Anderson, criticized the No essay as “cooked”.
“Sadly, the pamphlet does NOT trot out the same tired and misleading arguments from a campaign determined to uphold a failed status quo that has always sold Australians under,” the pair said in a joint statement.
“The pamphlet has not used taxpayer money to distribute misleading information intended to slow down our people.”
The electoral commission explained that they could not edit or verify the leaflets before they were published for legislative reasons.
The AEC said there was little that could be done if a complaint was filed.
Professor Craven has recognized this and has pledged to campaign more intensively on the Yes side.
