I imagine with the Olympics upon us there will be very few slow news days before October.
Interest in, and support for the games, is strong within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
The ATSIC board is mindful of this. As a result we have a clear and publicly articulated policy on the games.
Advertisement
The board has publicly wished all of the Australian athletes the very best in their quest for honours. Our fervent hope, not surprisingly, is for black gold.
The ATSIC board is also unanimous in its view that, in this instance, sports and politics do mix.
The games provide an invaluable opportunity for our people to lay the facts before the assembled international and domestic media about the appalling economic and social conditions in which many of them live.
When I come to Sydney I do so in the knowledge that it was the place of our first dispossessions, the first punitive raids, and the first child removals. By 1789 half of Sydney’s Indigenous population had succumbed to disease.
But here too was the first resistance … the first demonstration of our will to survive. We live with that legacy today. It inspires our continuing fight for recognition. That is why the board of ATSIC has called on our people to seize the
Olympic moment.
Proper recognition is yet to be given to the legitimate aspirations of our people and their unique place in Australian history and society.
Advertisement
Fundamental reforms are necessary to secure and underpin those rights and to ensure they can be exercised and enjoyed by Aboriginal peoples and Torres Strait Islanders. We will highlight these matters during the games.
That is why the board recently re-affirmed its support for the right of people to protest during the games should they wish to do so. It has called on organisers and those planning to participate to take great care to ensure the protests are
peaceful and orderly. The rights of others to engage in the Olympic spirit, as they might wish, should be fully respected.
We are conscious of the need to keep the media spotlight on the issues and to ensure that spotlight is kept on the federal government. As you are aware, another UN human rights treaty body has just announced its concern over the Howard
government’s treatment of our people.
The committee on economic, social and cultural rights has criticised the handling of our rights to self-determination, property and cultural survival. This is the third time this year that a UN committee has condemned the Howard government and
called for changes in policies and legislation.
The government ‘s response was predictable. It has been unable to prosecute its case before the United Nations so it now condemns the UN under the guise of a cabinet review of its committee system.
Clearly, it is moving away from accountability to the human rights treaties, all of which have been progressively and painstakingly negotiated and ratified following the Second World War.
The Prime Minister says these matters ought to be resolved Australian to Australian. It appears we are moving from being a principal supports of the United Nations to a position first adopted by One Nation. This may play well in the Australia’s
political hinterland but it will not win support in the international community.
The government has hinted that its position is condoned within the C.A.N.Z.U.S. ‘block’ – Canada, Australia, New Zealand and United States - but in reality these ‘partner’ countries are increasingly disturbed by the hostile
strategies of the Australian government to Aboriginal issues.
Only the United States, which favours its constitution and bill of rights over the UN human rights treaties, holds similar reservations in the UN human rights system, but it is not likely that the United States would align with Australia’s
position or strategy.
The Howard government has had some success winding back national sympathy for Aboriginal issues, simply by blaming the victims for their plights, creating an image of a greedy, insidious, and costly aboriginal welfare industry, and enticing
public self-interest with promises of increases in personal wealth.
The effects of the past five years of government policies have been catastrophic for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people with a lowering in household incomes and a crippling of community infrastructure.
These environmental factors increase the incidence of violence and injury, imprisonment, and social and family breakdown.
These effects are going largely unnoticed in the wider community because of the inabilities of government and disinterest, and the absence of national structures and systems to monitor, detect and measure changes in aboriginal disadvantage.
All three treaty bodies made these observations during their considerations of Australia’s reports.
However the Howard government may be overplaying its hand by attacking the UN treaty body system and threatening withdrawal from the processes.
Governments have tried without success in the past to prevent individuals and organisations from going overseas and lobbying international agencies and world leaders.
Oppressing such activity becomes a controversy in itself and attracts more international interest than would otherwise occur.
That approach will increase calls for Aboriginal sovereignty and bring greater attention to the issues of self-determination for the Aboriginal people.
If the government is seen to be oppressive, hostile and incommunicative, it may be that concern will be raised to such a level that the international community looks towards developing an ‘international solution’ to the plight of
Aboriginal people.
There are already some possibilities for international solutions, such as early completion of the international declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples, and the development of international jurisprudence on the rights of
self-determination for Indigenous peoples.
Rather than unintentionally promoting international lobbying, the Australian government should be using the advantages of a strong democracy to deal with Aboriginal concerns and calls for more active changes.
The strengths of democracy can be identified in the description of democracy as ‘government of the people, by the people, for the people’.
Is Australia’s democracy capable of interpretation as ‘of the Aboriginal people, by the Aboriginal people, for the Aboriginal people’?
‘By the people’ might suggest having Aboriginal members in government, but it actually means participation in decision-making in matters of government. Aboriginal people do not enjoy that right.
The Native Title legislation, for example, is a primary case showing how important decisions which affect Aboriginal property rights are made in isolation from the Aboriginal people, without our participation and without our consent. This is
not a feature of a democracy.
The message is clear.
The Australian government must establish a workable relationship with the Aboriginal people, and must be prepared to implement real restitution, non-discrimination and equality.
This article was originally presented as a speech to the Foreign Correspondents Association in Sydney on September 7, 2000.