New online channel echoes old misinformation

^{By Quynh-Ly Duong and Renee Davidson}

Ahead of the Indigenous Voice to Parliament referendum, supporters of the No campaign are rehashing misinformation about the proposed Voice being a “third” chamber of parliament, this time falsely claiming it amounts to a “special” chamber. 

But experts say the Voice will not be a chamber at all.

In the video, which was produced by a digital media company and viewed on Facebook more than 1,000 times, commentator Damian Coory misleadingly claims the proposed Voice constitutes a “special chamber”.

He claims that in the upcoming referendum “they are asking you to vote yes to a special chamber with special access and rights of consideration and input over laws that affect everyone, not just them, it's all laws because all laws affect Aboriginal people.”

A chamber of parliament is a body of elected representatives that exercises legislative power and can hold the executive to account. Australia’s Federal Parliament has two chambers (also known as houses) – the House of Representatives and the Senate. Under Section 1 of the constitution, each chamber has the power to initiate, pass and veto legislation.

Professor George Williams, a constitutional law expert at the University of New South Wales, told RMIT FactLab that there was no suggestion that the Voice would have any of the powers or responsibilities of the existing two chambers in Australia’s parliament. 

“The Voice will not be a special chamber of Parliament,” Professor Williams said in an email. “In fact, it will not be a ‘special chamber’ at all.” 

The Voice would be an advisory body of Indigenous Australians able to make representations on laws and policies to parliament and government, he said. 

“Parliament and government can still make decisions about laws and policies as they see fit,” he said. “The Voice does not have a veto, nor any power akin to being a chamber of Parliament.”

Professor Williams also rejected that the proposed Voice would provide advice on all laws, not just those that affect Indigenous Australians.

“The constitutional amendment makes clear that the Voice can make representations ‘on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’,” he said. “The constitution would not empower the Voice to make representations on other matters, such as laws and policies that do not affect Indigenous Australians.”

The Voice referendum proposes to amend the Australian Constitution to recognise Indigenous Australians as the First Peoples of Australia and to create an advisory body called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to provide advice to the government on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

The digital media company that broadcast the video, ADH TV, was launched by former Sky News host Alan Jones in December 2021, after his exit from Sky News the previous month. 

In August 2022, Mr Jones claimed in an ADH TV segment that the proposed Voice would effectively be a third chamber of parliament. FactLab examined the claim and found it to be false. 

Five constitutional experts consulted by FactLab at the time unanimously rejected the claim, saying the Voice would not have the authority to legislate or act as a third chamber. 

Anne Twomey, Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Sydney, told RMIT FactLab in September that the Voice would not alter the composition of parliament. 

“A ‘third chamber’ is intended to mean an additional body, the approval of which would be required to pass legislation, and which could exercise the same powers as the other Houses of Parliament,” she said. 

“A Voice to Parliament would not be a third chamber because it would not be a part of parliament,” she said. “It could not initiate, debate, pass or defeat bills and would not have any of the powers or privileges of the existing houses.” 

And Constitutional law expert Cheryl Saunders, a Laureate Professor Emeritus at the University of Melbourne, told FactLab that in order for the Voice to qualify as a third chamber, much of Chapter 1 of the constitution, dealing with the legislature, would need to be reconceived and rewritten. 

“Unlike the Voice, which is presently proposed to be added to the constitution by a single new section,” she said. 

The notion of a “third chamber” was initially promoted by leaders of the Coalition in 2017, after the Uluru Statement of the Heart was presented to the federal government.

Then deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce dismissed the Voice as an “Indigenous Chamber” and Malcom Turnbull’s Coalition government in 2017 ultimately rejected the Uluru Statement, saying it was “not capable of winning acceptance in a referendum” and that “it would inevitably become seen as a third chamber of parliament”. 

Mr Joyce has since admitted he was wrong to label the Voice a third chamber, and following Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s address to the Garma Festival in north-east Arnhem Land on July 30, 2022, Mr Turnbull said he would vote yes to establish a Voice and that “the Voice as proposed by Anthony Albanese won’t be a third chamber”. 

In early July 2023, the Australian Financial Review reported that Australian businessman James Packer had made a multimillion dollar investment into ADH TV and was a key backer of the company.