The final official reconciliation marches this week in Perth and Melbourne will give more impetus to the call by Aboriginal activists for a treaty recognising the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people as the original inhabitants of Australia. It is ironic that the formal reconciliation process has inadvertently given rise to this demand as it was largely initiated by the Australian government in order to avoid it. 91×ÔÅÄÂÛ̳ Weekly's SIMON BUTLER spoke to four prominent Aboriginal activists about what kind of treaty is needed and the prospects for winning it.
SAM WATSON, former president of the Brisbane Aboriginal Legal Service, is a well-known Aboriginal activist, writer and film-maker. He has campaigned for many years against Aboriginal deaths in custody, mandatory sentencing laws in the Northern Territory and Western Australia, and for Aboriginal people's native title rights.
LETTY SCOTT is the widow of Douglas Scott, who was murdered in Berrima jail, Darwin, on July 5, 1985. She has fought to bring those responsible for Scott's death to justice and has campaigned against the Australian government's refusal to take responsibility for Aboriginal deaths in custody and its promotion of the "black suicide theory".
DOREEN KARTINYERI is a prominent activist in the South Australian Kumarangk Coalition, a group of Ngarrindjeri women who fought a decade-long battle against the construction on Aboriginal land of the controversial Hindmarsh Island bridge.
KIM BULLIMORE is a founding member of the Indigenous Student Network and a member of the Democratic Socialist Party. She has been involved in organising protests against the proposed uranium mine at Jabiluka and the handover of the Document of Reconciliation at the Sydney Opera House on May 27.
What are the key social and political issues for Australia's indigenous people that need to be resolved?
Watson: The key political issues are native title, the need for a treaty, political empowerment through formation of a political party that will contest state and federal seats, the stolen generations issue and the implementation of the 339 recommendations of the deaths in custody royal commission. The major social issues are health, housing, education and employment.
Since the Howard government was elected in 1996, Aboriginal living standards and wages have fallen markedly. This has been worsened by the effects of the goods and services tax, which has hit black communities worst of all.
Scott: If Aboriginal people don't have the right to life in Australia, are being murdered and hung by white officers in police or prison cells across Australia and the government authorities cover for the murders, what are we to do? My husband was unlawfully incarcerated 60 days on remand for allegedly swearing, then murdered and hanged.
Kartinyeri: Where do you start? The prime minister refusing to say sorry, the GST, reconciliation, the stolen generations.
Bullimore: Aboriginal rights supporters will need to keep fighting to overturn mandatory sentencing, to win a treaty, to secure an apology and compensation for the stolen generations and to win back real land rights. Other major struggles are to reverse the massive funding cuts to Abstudy, to force governments to implement all the recommendations of the 1988 Royal Commission into Deaths in Custody and to seriously address indigenous people's unemployment levels and Third World health standards.
The capitalist ruling class and the federal government need to manufacture and maintain scapegoats for public anger about its GST, welfare spending cuts, privatisation programs and attacks on job security. They need to promote racism against Aboriginal people. So the most pressing political issue for Aboriginal radicals is to build a mass anti-racist movement to win real social advances and actively fight racism.
What criticisms do you have of the Howard government's approach to Aboriginal rights?
Watson: John Howard is a racist. There is no way to present it any other way. He has surrounded himself in cabinet with similar individuals who look at the world in terms of colour and who look at the landscape without a sense of identity. They are small-minded, mean-spirited people, who sacrifice everything for immediate political and economic needs.
Scott: Howard has failed all Australians as far as I'm concerned. He can give freedom, and the right to life and liberty carte blanche to white South Africans, who want to come to Australia, but he has personally refused to give the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to Aborigines. For example, he says that my husband's unlawful imprisonment and murder and the coverup by the Australian law enforcement agencies, was in his words, not an important policy issue.
Kartinyeri: The government says it wants reconciliation, but they're not doing it. Its ministers have avoided a lot of issues politically. The prime minister has a lot to answer for. He doesn't handle things the way a prime minister should. The government is not willing to take on issues.
Bullimore: Howard is a complete racist. The Coalition government is a wholly racist government. Howard wants, at all costs, to avoid any recognition that Aborigines are still an oppressed group, that they deserve compensation, land rights and large-scale programs of affirmative action in education, jobs and social services.
He has to avoid absolutely anything that might interfere with Australian big business' profits or his chances of winning back the One Nation vote at the next election. Without a strong resistance, Howard will continue to abuse the rights of Aborigines.
What is your opinion about the official "reconciliation process"? Has it helped change the disadvantage and discrimination that indigenous people face?
Watson: The reconciliation process did achieve an enormous amount in terms of Australian people being able to make a statement against racism. But the path to true reconciliation is a long one, which must be embraced by both sides of the political fence.
Real, practical reconciliation, as claimed by Howard, is further away than ever. In Brisbane suburbs like Inala, black unemployment runs at over 50%. Genuine reconciliation must deliver jobs, education and housing to the Aboriginal people.
Scott: Reconciliation may as well go down the toilet. Reconciliation on unequal terms, where white officers hang Aborigines by a noose, is no reconciliation at all. You can't have reconciliation without truth and justice. We must have a truth commission.
Kartinyeri: Reconciliation won't come in my life, maybe later. There has been too much damage. I have many friends from many backgrounds. We don't need to reconcile with friends. We know where they're coming from.
It's important for the children, for the next generation coming up. The formal reconciliation process could be positive. The Aboriginal people want it. The government says it wants it, but does it? They can talk, but actions speak louder than words. The government has to act.
Bullimore: When Howard refused to sign the reconciliation document and formally apologise to Aboriginal people for past injustices, the official reconciliation process revealed itself for what it always was: a shallow attempt by government to dampen Aborigines' anger and demands for justice with empty symbolism.
Reconciliation has to mean justice for Aboriginal people if it is to mean anything at all. Under the cloak of reconciliation rhetoric, successive Coalition and Labor governments have continued to keep Aborigines down by attacking our rights and wellbeing.
Has the government-controlled reconciliation process lessened Aboriginal disadvantage? No. In the same period, native title rights has been virtually extinguished, mandatory sentencing has been introduced and Aboriginal deaths in custody have risen dramatically.
Massive marches in support of reconciliation have been held around the country over the past year, including a walk in Sydney of a least 250,000 people. How significant were these marches? How can this ant-racist sentiment be broadened further?
Watson: The outpouring of emotion on those days shattered the myth of the "White Australia" of the '50s and '60s. It brought Australia to the doorstep of a multinational society. However, to step over that doorstep, Australians must embrace the true history of this land and embrace their neighbours. They must play their part in supporting those who have been marginalised in society, including Aborigines, disadvantaged women, gays and lesbians, and migrants.
Australians must confront racists and lunatic fanatics like One Nation wherever they arise.
Scott: A march is one thing, but what will it do to change the real situation of unlawful imprisonments, mandatory sentencing for minor offences, the murders, and to dismantle the evil "black suicide" theory pushed in a massive conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and cover-up mass murder?
Kartinyeri: [The Sydney walk] was great, absolutely wonderful to see. I was in the Adelaide march at the front. I was amazed how many people came o shake Aboriginal people's hands.
Much can be done. There is still a lack of understanding of issues of what happened to Aboriginal people. Land was taken, people were dispossessed and pushed into missions.
Bullimore: I've been heartened by the tremendous size of the marches and the strong sentiment in favour of justice for Aborigines, even if reconciliation still means different things to different people.
Yet racist discrimination against Aborigines is still occurring. I think there are now many in the non-indigenous population who believe that real reconciliation is not possible without justice. The reconciliation marches have given us the opportunity to build on the anti-racist sentiment and make it powerful.
For far too long, the agenda of the indigenous rights movement has not been based on the political needs of indigenous people. The Aboriginal rights movement must regain its perspective of becoming a strong, politically independent movement. As Aboriginal people struggling for liberation we have to ally ourselves with all those who support indigenous rights and all those who face oppression to build a coherent alternative to the policies of those in power.
Latest polls show that a majority of non-indigenous people support a treaty between indigenous and non-indigenous peoples. How significant is a treaty and what should it include?
Watson: A treaty is critical towards Australia's development as a nation. Until a treaty is signed, there can be no true reconciliation. Australia was founded when a foreign invading power, Britain, usurped the position of the indigenous people. It is based on stolen land.
Without a treaty, the rights of Aboriginal people can never be recognised properly. Two legal systems, the British and Aboriginal, can never be joined. The British system is based on private property, whereas Aboriginal law is based on communal ownership.
There has to be an atmosphere of mutual respect. Without a treaty, Australia can never ever stand as a legitimate country in international forums: it will remain a bastard nation with a history of bloodshed.
Kartinyeri: If accepted, a treaty would give Aboriginal people the right to negotiate with developers and mining companies. It would give Aboriginal people the right to be compensated. Returning crown land, and there's still a lot of it, to the indigenous people would be important.
It can do a lot of things for the Aboriginal people, but it could do a lot of harm. Some could use it for their own selfish reasons. Some people [who could be involved] can only see dollar signs. [A treaty] has to be for the people. The government has to find time to sit down and talk to the people. We have to avoid politicians and ministers, and vested interests being involved.
Bullimore: A treaty will be an essential part of winning justice and equality for Aborigines. But we can't accept just another meaningless document that changes nothing.
Our people die younger than other Australians, our children have a mortality rate three times that of other Australian children and our people have the highest rate of unemployment, the lowest rate of education and are locked up at ever increasing rates.
A treaty has to secure real social justice, land rights and equality for indigenous Australians. A treaty needs to have teeth. It must be an anti-racist bill of rights.
Noel Pearson has received approval from the Howard government for his call to end "passive welfare dependency" in Aboriginal communities. Why do you think his views are being received so warmly? Does Pearson offer any kind of solution to the problems Aboriginal people face?
Watson: Noel Pearson is symptomatic of the so-called black leadership of the 1980s and 1990s: well-educated, well-dressed and accepted by white society.
They deliver essentially the same political message as Howard and [Aboriginal affairs minister] John Herron. They never marched, never staffed the barricades, never got arrested for the Aboriginal cause. They were never put to the challenge, never suffered for the struggle. Aboriginal revolutionaries in the Murri community, who came through the hard way, look sceptically at the current leadership.
Pearson's solution is no solution. It is punishing the victims. The essential solution for the communities is land rights. Giving land back to the communities will create empowerment. The whole thrust of the current black political leadership is not to support giving real power to the Aboriginal communities. Their whole approach should be treated with a great deal of caution.
Scott: No, Noel Pearson does not offer the right kind of solutions to the problems Aboriginal people face, because Pearson has a big fat bank balance and he does not live like his people live. Noel has forgotten what it is like to struggle.
It is one thing for Pearson to call for the end of welfare dependency, but the government will have to provide work and educate and train people to have the skills necessary to look after themselves and earn a living to support their families.
Bullimore: It's not too hard to see why Pearson is so popular with the capitalist politicians and mainstream media columnists. His "solutions" are practically the same as the policy of the Coalition government.
Pearson's criticisms of Aboriginal welfare are not intended for a black audience. He's mainly interested in angling for a seat in parliament. He's selling out Aboriginal people.
Pearson offers no solutions for Aboriginal people. He has argued that welfare payments should be cut to Aborigines but places no responsibility on the government to provide employment. His so-called solutions would make the already dire situation in many Aboriginal communities even worse.
What will real reconciliation include?
Watson: Real reconciliation starts with a treaty. That means equality in housing, education, employment and opportunity across the Australian nation. So that a black kid in the camps of the Simpson Desert can have the same opportunity as John Howard's son in the wealthy suburbs of Sydney. Until this is delivered, true reconciliation is impossible.
To this end, a number of key Aboriginal leaders in Queensland are discussing the formation of a new party, called Treaty Now!, in preparation for the next federal election. The party's one essential policy is for a treaty to be signed between the Aboriginal traditional owners and the Australian government.
Kartinyeri: Howard has to apologise. He needs to consider that Aboriginal people want a treaty. There needs to be a change of government. Aboriginal issues are at the bottom of the list with this government. Indigenous people need to be on the list of priorities for this country.
Bullimore: A treaty between indigenous and non-indigenous people, a treaty including concrete and far-reaching gains, would be a tremendous step forward towards real reconciliation.
The only way we'll get to this is to fight for it. A truly mass movement of people, demanding not only formal but practical measures to eradicate injustice, will be the sole way to make sure Howard pays for his abuses of human rights. That really would be justice.
There can be no reconciliation without justice. That is the bottom line.