Vision I failed to value

THE Coalition’s indigenous policy has a logic that I was too quick to dismiss.

Former Independent Federal MP Rob Oakeshott with his family in Port Macquarie.

THE reason I disagreed with Noel Pearson was that Julia Gillard had agreed in writing to pursue con­stitutional recognition in a referendum by 2013, and I had believed her.

Both major parties had campaigned at the election on pursuing the issue, so I felt bipartisanship already existed. I also admit to being wary of Pearson’s attacks on welfare, and was concerned the Coalition was using him more than he was using it. I also didn’t (and still don’t) agree with the wholesale privatisation of indigenous lands, instead preferring to believe in place-based strategies that respect the wants and needs of the local custodians of the land. Where their desire was for more private title, then fine. But where it wasn’t, then this should also be respected. “Local horses for local courses” was my view.

This, however, wasn’t to deny the importance of private title. Noel was aware that the history of the Yow Yehs, the family I have married into, is built around hard work and money earned in the Jimmy Sharman boxing tents of Rockhampton, Keppel Sands, Mackay and Gladstone. My wife Sara-Jane’s family take great pride in being among the first Aboriginal and South-Sea Islander private title owners in Queensland, using those hard-earned boxing dollars for long-term family good.

On languages and a rebirth of culture, I strongly share Pearson’s view. Where I was less convinced than him was in his conviction that a Coalition government would deliver more than Labor would.

And above all else, I have never been one to swallow all this Left versus Right, progressives versus conservatives, world view. I consider it a spectrum disorder that awkwardly puts people with a range of views on a range of topics in predictable boxes. It is a false division that only provides a platform of convenience for certain views. Herald Sun columnist Andrew Bolt wouldn’t have anything to write about unless he was attacking “the Left”. He needs this spectrum of political division to frame an opinion. Without it, his arguments struggle on their public policy merits alone. Bolt is just one of many who live this “Left-Right” crusade, and I have forever found their certainty of approach to the grey and complex world of public policy lazy and boorish.

Having said this, over the next three years of working closely with the Labor Party on indigenous policy, I would raise Noel’s views every so often. “You are proving Noel Pearson right, and me wrong, by not progressing further on indigenous policy,” I would say to Jenny Macklin, Julia Gillard, Simon Crean, Wayne Swan, or whoever would listen. I would receive a lot of soothing noises but, in the end, I had to admit Noel was looking to be right.

I thought Labor had the means and courage to deliver a range of difficult, but vital, reforms for indigenous Australia.

In all honesty, I was left bitterly disappointed and exasperated by its lack of courage, and its inability to deliver in a strategic and substantial way.

I don’t blame Julia Gillard for this. I don’t think her connection with indigenous policy was strong or detailed, but at no stage did she pretend it was. I do think she backed me as far as she could in trying to uphold her agreement on constitutional recognition. I think she was let down by the ­people around her, by key ministers with carriage of this matter, and by a party that had lost its way on indigenous policy. Labor was either too politically timid to fight or so devoid of connection to Aboriginal communities and their unfinished business to know ­exactly what it should be fighting for. I believe it was mainly the latter.

As an urban, union-focused party, without strong connections within Aboriginal communities, modern Labor is now showing itself to be as guilty of the earlier ­paternalism of the Coalition. As a consequence, neither party is promoting empowerment or place-based strategies, and neither believes in “self-determination’’ anymore. Today, this makes Australia rare when most international agreements have these principles as foundation stones.

What therefore makes Pearson’s argument increasingly convincing is that at least the Coalition under Abbott has direction. Labor has failed to articulate what it is trying to achieve in indigenous policy, because it doesn’t seem to know itself anymore, particularly in service delivery.

In February 2010, a 467-page cabinet document entitled “strategic review of indigenous expenditure” was leaked. It showed that millions and millions of dollars were being wasted as a consequence of inconsistent and patchy policy and decision-making.

As nice and well-meaning as she is, I did end up thinking Jenny Macklin herself was part of the problem, choosing to be a “softly, softly” minister achieving no substantial reforms at all. Like the Labor Party, she seemed lost for direction and was becoming exposed by an increasingly boisterous Coalition with new ways of thinking. Labor seemed defensive, or at best neutralised, while the Coalition was becoming increasing incursive, and not just federally, but in the state governments and territories as well.

Apart from two important steps — the “Sorry speech”, and agreeing to sign the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People in 2009 (which the Howard government had earlier refused to do) — the ALP has squibbed it on indigenous policy. Its desire for bipartisanship between 2010 and 2013 became an excuse for doing nothing, time and time again. Crying into its cup about the lack of bipartisanship moved from being the reason for not doing anything to a tired ­excuse.

When Labor chose to effectively reintroduce laws on the Northern Territory Intervention, under its own Orwellian branding of “Stronger Futures”, I simply couldn’t attend the vote, out of sadness over the paternalism of both major parties. I had to concede that Noel Pearson’s logic, that at this moment in time indigenous policy is best served in Australia from the Right side of politics, was proving to be correct.

On indigenous outcomes and results, I am sad to admit that I tried, but ultimately squandered three years.

My vision was reliant on working towards a better Australia. Pearson’s vision was working with what we’ve got. I wanted us all to aspire to be more and was hopeful that this generation would be in for it, and up for change. To my folly, and Pearson’s credit, he was more understanding of our political landscape.

For these reasons, I now believe a prime minister such as Tony Abbott needs to be given room on indigenous policy. I hope he recognises the enormous opportunity this moment presents for him and the Coalition. For so quickly dismissing them on indigenous policy on September 5, 2010, I now apologise to Noel Pearson and Tony Abbott. I wish I had been right. I wasn’t.

For Australia, I sincerely hope they can deliver.

This is an edited extract from The Independent Member for Lyne by Rob Oakeshott. Published tomorrow by Allen & Unwin.