Mansell fully supportive of Aboriginal leadership on recognition: next task to look at all options

Michael Mansell has strongly supported efforts to date by Pat Dodson, Noel Pearson, Kirsty Parker and Megan Davis. He said, “The delegation to se Prime Minister Abbott have proudly represented Aboriginal people and should be applauded. The next step is to ensure the processes for Aboriginal meetings is transparent and credible.

A panel to move things forward should be more broadly representative. Membership should include dissenters, such as those who protested against the meeting at Kirribilli House.

There is no guarantee that the Prime Minister will put recognition to a referendum no matter what the words. Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard promise a referendum that was always delayed but never held. For that reason alone, the Aboriginal meetings should produce a list of preferences, not a list of demands.

There are three constitutional recognition proposals on the table at present: words in the preamble, Noel Pearson’s body to comment on legislation and Pat Dodson’s anti-discrimination measure. There are flaws in each proposal.

Words of a preamble are effectively meaningless. The Australian parliament passed the Act of Recognition in 2013. Nothing came of that. The States of Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia have all given ‘recognition’ to Aborigines in their constitutions. Not a single benefit flowed from it. Western Australia is also following suit, despite former Liberal Minister for Aboriginal Affairs and Reconciliation Chairman Fred Chaney making the case against it on the grounds that it is a distraction from the real issues.

Noel’s idea duplicates the existing statutory function of the Social Justice Commissioner, a role that has not proved very effective. An anti-discrimination prohibition placed in the constitution would not prevent another NT intervention or prevent a Queensland law criminalising Aboriginal behaviour on Palm Island under liquor restrictions. At least a fourth proposal for constitutional recognition should be added to the list, perhaps self-determination. None of these proposals would be binding on government but they would provide options.

Then there is the alternative altogether to constitutional reform- legislation. Parliament legislate every parliamentary session. It is cheaper, less time consuming and more certain in that we are not left guessing about the outcome of a referendum.

Legislation could provide for a treaty or designated seats in the parliament at the highest level. A lowering of sights might provide for compensation for those who have lost their native title similar to the WA agreement recently. Or a national body be given full responsibility for distributing the $25b Aboriginal affairs budget, or for autonomy and self-government similar to the Aboriginal shire councils in Queensland.

The principle should be which proposal confers a benefit on Aboriginal people. If it does not, it raises the question of for whose benefit is this exercise being undertaken? Is it to make non-Aboriginal people feel good without actually benefiting Aboriginals.”
Michael Mansell Secretary, Aboriginal Provisional Government