Patrick Dodson (WA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Reconciliation) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of the report of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Reference Committee, titled Nationhood, national identity and democracy. As a participating member of the committee, I didn't haven't to do the hard work; I came along and listened sometimes and obviously had the privilege of assisting the chair with aspects of this report. I wish to reflect on the unique nature of the inquiry. As the chair has already pointed out and noted in his foreword, this is not a typical report for a Senate inquiry. It makes relatively few policy recommendations but engages in a deeper examination of our democratic processes and foundations.

The release of the report comes at a time when we have seen a troubling decline of trust in public institutions. As noted in the report itself, this decline is measurable. The Democracy 2025 research project, based in Old Parliament House in Canberra, has tracked a fall in public satisfaction with democracy, from 78 per cent of survey respondents in 1996 down to 41 per cent in 2018, and the chairman has already referred to that. The release of this report also comes merely weeks after we witnessed with horror the violent assault on democracy at the Capitol in the USA capital—a violent assault that grew from the manipulation of truth and from the deliberate fanning of hatred, built on generations of unresolved racial oppression. Nothing could make clearer the precious nature of our democracy; nothing could make clearer the need to nurture and protect it; nothing could make clearer the need to build unity, respect and common cause across our diverse populations; and nothing could make clearer the need for truth-telling, to heal and build trust and peace for the future.

As this report acknowledges, the concept of Australia's nationhood and national identity is deeply vexing for First Nations peoples. The true history of this country has, in the words of anthropologist Bill Stanner, been shrouded in a great Australian silence. The report notes that, for many decades, official versions of Australian history have been told as if it starts from the arrival of Captain Cook and the First Fleet. The report also quotes Justice Jayne Jagot of the Federal Court:

By the doctrine of terra nullius, the common law of Australia could not and did not recognise the laws and customs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. … until 1992 and the Mabo decision, to acknowledge that land is the land of Aboriginal people would have conflicted with legal doctrine. That legal doctrine … did great harm to our society, and its consequences continue today …

What we have fortified through these harmful narratives, and what this report suggests—and this is important—is that we can reclaim our history and that it is an opportunity to develop a deeper and more honest foundation for our national pride. And we have much to be proud of in the long history of the First Nations peoples: at least 60,000 years of occupation by the oldest continuing culture on earth; over 500 different Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander nations; around 270 different language groups; peoples and cultures with deep spiritual connections to land and waters; stories, songs, dance and art that are rich and unique and precious. What is often not told is the unique capacity of the First Nations peoples to live in this diverse land and develop their beliefs and philosophies, accommodating the wisdom of its lessons. This is a legacy that all Australians can identify with through our common humanity, our common occupation of these lands, as the outcry over the Juukan disaster has demonstrated.

I welcome and commend the committee on its recommendations calling for an active approach to the teaching of history which embraces First Nations history, civics and citizenship. Importantly, this recommendation urges a model that includes resources developed by First Nations peoples. It's a basic concept, but, for far too long, our history has been written, interpreted and misinterpreted by others. The report's second recommendation recommends awards for excellence in teaching, including for the teaching of First Nations history and civics. Teachers who can bring alive our history, particularly those who can balance two-way learning across cultures and even languages, are worthy of celebration. I wholeheartedly agree with the statement made by the chair in his foreword:

… a higher level of civics engagement … is the best defence of democracy, and the best means of building a more just and equal society.

This starts but doesn't end with what we teach the next generation in schools. Those of us in this parliament have a role to play. Strengthening our democracy includes strengthening our work in this place. It means valuing our system of parliamentary committees, as the chairman has pointed out, which are a critical way for this parliament to reach the Australian people and for those Australian people to participate in the work of this parliament. It means safeguarding the role of the parliament and passing legislation, not merely resorting to delegated legislation as has recently been the case during the pandemic—and the chairman has pointed that out. It means allowing and ensuring adequate scrutiny of government and parliamentarians, including through our process of budget estimates and our National Integrity Commission. It means having a broader vision about what our country can become. As the report states:

Contemporary conversations about nationhood and national identity are about writing the next chapter in Australia's story …

First Nations peoples have expressed their formula for nationhood, for national identity and democracy, and it's called the Uluru Statement from the Heart. I commend the committee for recommending that the Australian government prioritise 'engaging fully and respectfully' with the Uluru Statement from the Heart.

In only three months time, it will have been four years since First Nations peoples gathered in Central Australia and composed the Uluru statement. Four long years, all of them under a coalition government, and what have we achieved?

Much has been promised; little has happened. Uluru was no really revolutionary document. It sought constitutional reform to empower First Nations peoples to take their rightful place in this country. It called for a First Nations voice to be enshrined in the Constitution. It sought a makarrata commission to supervise a process of agreement making between governments and First Nations and truth telling about our history. It talked about voice, treaty and truth. As modest as this agenda is, its implementation would go a long way to bringing a new peace to this nation, a new enrichment of our identity. As I said in this place yesterday, may those opposite open their hearts and embrace the Uluru statement. This is the gap that has to be closed. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.