Reconciliation: a worthy and achievable cause or a political idea before its time?

The National Apology to the Stolen Generations and associated reparation payments is often considered an important step in reconciliation. There is no doubt that the vast majority of Australians feel sorry for the experiences of those affected by removals. On the other hand, the narrative concerning whether those who were removed were genuinely "stolen", is strongly disputed by many researchers, and has become central to the so-called "history wars". Some historians strongly believe that nearly all were either given-up or removed because they were "in danger", so that reparations for being "stolen" are inappropriate. Thus, in reality, the role of the Apology and its aftermath in promoting reconciliation has been double edged.

The latest "fix" is the proposed "Voice". The Indigenous Voice to Parliament is the proposed advisory body of elected Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, to be enshrined in the Australian Constitution. There are now ten Indigenous representatives in the new Parliament so that, if anything, Indigenous Australians are now slightly over-represented. The proposed "voice" therefore appears unnecessary, and the proposed referendum is likely to be divisive and not conducive to reconciliation.

There are also two major "elephants-in-the-room" concerning both Indigenous economic development and reconciliation.

The first is the issue of poor parenting, which has become a generational and self-perpetuating issue holding back affected communities. Neglect on the part of (some) Indigenous parents, especially in regional and remote areas, is a key contributor to issues such as poor school attendance, youth crime, substance abuse, and domestic violence. Such behaviours negatively impact perceptions of Indigenous people by the general community.

Poor parenting is an issue that has been largely ignored, and many Indigenous leaders find it difficult to deal with. A side effect of the Apology is that removal of abused and neglected Indigenous children has become much more difficult, thus perpetuating the problem.

The second largely undiscussed issue is Indigenous out-marriage .

For many decades, especially in non-remote areas, a majority of Indigenous people have chosen a non-Indigenous marriage partner, with about 90 per cent of the children of such mixed-race families being identified as Indigenous. In other words, in non-remote areas the Indigenous population is rapidly integrating into our multi-cultural population and is growing in measured size. This has been associated with the "Gap" closing more quickly in non-remote areas.

Over time people defined as "Indigenous", especially in non-remote areas, are likely to become increasingly difficult to distinguish from the general population, and issues of disadvantage will become even more concentrated in remote areas and some regional centres. The proposal for a Treaty between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians seems to have been overtaken by time, given the extent of out-marriage. Such a Treaty, in the case of families with Indigenous members, would in the majority of cases place husbands and wives on opposite sides of the Treaty.

Overall, full reconciliation is unlikely to be achieved for some very considerable time because of deep seated problems, especially in regional and remote areas. Also, as far as public protests are concerned, nobody really expects the radicals within the broader Indigenous community to become appeased anytime soon.