Uluru Statement voice must be in Constitution
Indigenous leaders have attacked suggestions the main proposal from the Uluru Statement not be enshrined in the Constitution.
Lawyers and academics who crafted the Uluru Statement have rounded on suggestions its proposed indigenous “voice” to parliament need not be enshrined in the Constitution, warning it is the best practical approach for reforming the foundering Closing the Gap strategy.
Indigenous Health Minister Ken Wyatt and prime ministerial indigenous affairs adviser Chris Sarra each said that while the proposed body was still being considered, it would be done through legislation only, not by a referendum.
But Referendum Council co-chair Mark Leibler warned that indigenous Australia would “not countenance the substitution of what was a unanimous outpouring at Uluru”.
The indigenous constitutional convention at Uluru last year gathered about 250 delegates from across the nation, who concluded the “voice” would be a way of having input into government decision-making by way of non-binding advice and was the best form of indigenous constitutional recognition.
Constitutionally enshrining the body, they concluded, would require the government of the day to make its case should it decide to disband it and it would be unlikely to do so unilaterally, as John Howard did with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission in 2005.
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten is expected to announce further plans for backing the constitutionally enshrined proposal when he delivers his reply to Malcolm Turnbull’s Closing the Gap speech in parliament later today.
Referendum Council co-chair Pat Anderson and members Noel Pearson and Megan Davis said that “whatever the merits of a legislated body, it would not amount to indigenous constitutional recognition”.
“We live in a country that gives 500,000 Tasmanians 12 senators inside the commonwealth parliament according to a Federation deal struck in the Australian Constitution in 1901,” the trio said.
“And yet 117 years later do we seriously think the Australian people would reject the proposition that 600,000 indigenous Australians should not have a constitutionally recognised body outside of the commonwealth parliament? If they did then the country would not be serious about recognition.”
Aboriginal lawyer Teela Reid, a participant at the Uluru convention who took Mr Turnbull to task late year on the ABC’s Q&A program for his abrupt dismissal of the recommendation, was fiery in her response to yesterday’s suggestion.
Ms Reid said it indicated a “lack of good faith, low expectations and continual contempt of the Turnbull government towards indigenous peoples”.
“The government’s failure to Close the Gap demonstrates the urgency for substantial law reform (and) the Uluru Statement provided a realistic and modest road map to achieve this,” she said.
Mr Wyatt confirmed the government was, however, enthusiastic about the other recommendation from the Uluru process, which was a Makarrata commission to oversee treaty-making and a truth-telling process.
“I think the opportunity is still there for things to be on the table for us to talk about, I get no sense that anything else is locked out other than just the enshrined voice,” he told Sky News at the weekend.
CLOSING THE GAP PROGRESS REPORT
* Close the gap in life expectancy by 2031: On track with overall mortality rate down 15 per cent (from 1998 to 2015).
* Halve the gap in child mortality by 2018: Down 33 per cent (between 1998 and 2015).
* Have 95 per cent of all indigenous four-year-olds enrolled in early childhood education by 2025: On track.
* Close the gap in school attendance by the end of 2018: Little progress.
* Halve the gap in reading and numeracy for indigenous students by 2018: On track in the ACT and Tasmania.
* Halve the gap in Year 12 attainment by 2020: On track.
* Halve the gap in employment by 2018: On track in NSW.