Why A Referendum Is
Not Appropriate
From Part 1 of 'The High Court In Mabo' (1995)

The supporters of Mabo, the Australian Government and many others have aggressively stated that it is not appropriate to consult the people through a referendum about whether Mabo should be accepted, annulled, or modified.

There are obvious difficulties with framing a referendum question.

On the other hand, it is a decision which affects all Australians, with fundamental implications for the taxpayer and the consumer. Government, compensation and other pay outs will be financed by taxation. Where corporations are forced to incur costs this will be passed on to the consumer. The consumer will bear the costs laid upon corporations.

The people of Australia have a right to be involved and express their opinion on fundamental issues. But the supporters of Mabo, the Commonwealth Government and others are seeking to do all in their power to prevent the people from being involved.

What type of a democracy do we have in Australia? Is it part of democratic theory that certain sensitive issues should be withdrawn from the people? If so, on what basis is a decision to be made that an issue is sensitive and should be so withdrawn? Who makes such a decision? Have the people no say in such a situation?

The crucial question is who makes the decision to withdraw an issue. If governments, journalists and aggressive pressure groups are making the decision to withdraw an issue from the public, it reflects their arrogance, anti-democratic values and totalitarian mentality.

A backlash is inevitable, especially when the people realise the costs and have to pay for the costs.