A survey by the Australian National University found that a large majority of Australians continue to back constitutional recognition of Australia’s first peoples, and that they also support progress in truth telling and in a process towards treaty.

If this result is true, it answers the accusation that the recent Voice referendum no vote is the result of a rise of racist wave of the Australian population. Rather than this, many of those who voted no believed that this way was not the answer.

The survey found that 87 percent said First Nation peoples should have a voice or say over matter that affect them, and 76 percent saw that they should have a voice on key policies and decisions. This is far more than the Voice proposal offered.

Especially telling is that 61.7 percent said that they would vote yeas in a referendum on recognition.  Bigger proportion, 78.4 percent felt that the federal government should help to improve conciliation, ,80.5 percent that a formal truth telling process should proceed, and 29.1 percent felt proud of First Nations cultures.

The extraordinary and positive result of this survey indicates that the conditions to move forward are good. All the more reason why the division between the yes and no voters should be ended. Both camps mostly want the same the same outcomes in the main. This is time to build unity.

Photo from the Conversation

Progress can be made on the real content of the Uluru statement from the Heart’s call for voice, treaty, and truth. We can join together on this, and as we do this, clarify, and strengthen what we mean.

Voice means that Frist Nations have listened to and have the right to take a central place in decision making on policies and laws that directly affect them and empowers them to be masters of their own destiny.

Treaty is a vehicle through which agreement is reached on which Fist Nations stand as equals to non-indigenous Australia, guarantees their sovereignty and control over their own affairs, and a fair share of resources.

Truth is about recognition of the true history where First Nations people who were here before British colonisation had their land taken, rights abused, faced genocide, and that this has continued in the form of institutionalised racism and deprivation.

Application of the three parts of the Uluru Statement will help to address a long list of wrongs, such as poverty, deaths in custody, the extremely high levels of imprisonment, the appalling state and decline of services. It will help overcome continuing negatives coming from non-indigenous Australia.

Isn’t this worth striving for? Won’t this make Australia a better place for all of us to live in?

The post Australia supports First Nations rights says ANU Survey appeared first on Fair Go For Pensioners.

When the move towards the Voice for first nations peoples began to move in earnest, It seemed like quite a reasonable idea. Australia’s First Nations do have a claim to be heard. If the proposed Voice takes this one step further, there is no question that it should become a reality.

The proposal will be put to a referendum during the second half of this year.

But there is a niggling side to it. Having it written into the constitution is one thing. Limiting it in practice to parliamentary representation, and mandatory consultation with these representatives on matters of special concern to First Nations. isa not enough to provide a genuine voice. If recent developments are a guide, the recruitment of certain high-profile representatives of these communities to both sides of the debate, on campaigns run by the usual political machines, indicates that the representatives emerging might prove to be puppets under the control of these machines, and not be true representatives of the First Nations peoples.

Such a voice will only be tokenistic at best. Whether this still represents a small step forward is open to debate.

First Nations Senator Lydia Thorpe has come out punching, insisting that unless the proposal guaranteed that “First Nations sovereignty is not ceded,” she would go against it. Fair enough. Without this rider, there would be no self-determination and control over First Nation Affairs in the hands of the peoples who are directly affected. There would be no real voice.

It may be true that the Voice proposal came out of the Uluru Statement of the Heart and has been backed by the Indigenous voice Co-Design Group. This gives it considerable weight. But it doesn’t deny the weakness of the proposal. In fact, the Statement from the Heart is about much more than this. Most of all about empowering First Nations peoples.

This is why Thorpe argues that the process towards treaty should take precedence. Her position resonates with many First Nations people.

Treaty means the recognition of sovereignty and the ability of the two parts of Australia to work together for the future as equals.

There is still time to put into writing into law the need to progress towards treaty. This would make support for the Voice far more attractive.

Meanwhile, opponents of progress are manipulating the  issue to hold everything back. One group is the fundamental Christian lobby, which falsely brands any progress as dividing Australia and a threat to Christian civilisation. Others take a more secular approach and are even using a few First Nations personalities as their poster pin ups.

Warren Mundine announced the launching of the no campaign on Skye News Australia, while being interviewed by an enthusiastic Andrew Bolt. Mundine has been joined by First Nation Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price.

They are calling their no campaign group Recognise a Better Way. But the real control is in the hands of Advance Australia, a right-wing lobby group established in 2018, supported by the Coalition government of the time and other groups. They have received millions from some Australian millionaires. Their stated mission is to counter GetUp, which it calls, a left-wing activist group. Left-wing is defined by anyone who opposes their world outlook. They often use the term woke.

Although Advance Australia does not have a stated policy regarding First Nations Affairs, it is ideologically committed to opposing moves towards self-determination.

Their method to create diversions by proposing that the success of the Voice will divide Australia and throwing in the proposal that migrants who have arrived in Australia or descended from arrivals and contributed to building the nation should be included. This is code for insisting that non-Indigenous Australians should be included. This means de facto recognition of a continuing white Australia policy, which would deny the Voice.

Migrant organisations across the country are having nothing to do with this.

That Mundine and Price have joined them says a lot more about themselves and self-centred opportunism than anything else. There is good reason to warn people about them and those who are pulling the strings.

The post Is the Voice proposal all it is cracked up to be? appeared first on Fair Go For Pensioners.

Yesterday (26 January), big Invasion Day marches and other events were held across Australia. They were well organised and maintained needed Covid-19 social distancing and mask wearing.

This year, the invasion Day rallies took place in a changing context, where the wider public opinion is shifting. The scale of the Black Lives Matter movement last year had a major impact. So has the emerging political environment, where the population is increasingly questioning our political leaders.

Thousands gather for Invasion Day rallies across Australia

Video from The Guardian

Opposition to having Australia Day on 26 January is rising and support for the date is declining. A majority want the change. Only two polls have called it differently.

Nine News’ poll, which attracted a mere 1222 respondents and is heavily weighted to towards an audience much more likely to vote in the negative. Channel Nine something like Fox in the United States, and not adverse to using questionable methods. And the Murdoch organisation has been spreading through the rest of its outlets, this poll’s claim that only a small minority want the change.

The other poll championed by Murdock, is that of the right-wing think tank the Institute of Public Affairs (IPS). Its sample was also small at 1659, and it claimed 78 percent of Australians want the date to stay. Like Nine and the rest of the Murdoch stable, the IPS has been consistently partisan on this issue. They have been trying to sell the same story since 2017, even while other polls have consistently shown that the reality is different.

A different poll taken shortly before the 26 January, by the French Yubo. with 5,000 respondents, it found that more than 53 percent want the date to be changed.

Why the huge difference? One reason is that Yubo was not geared to produce the same result. It is a social platform that manly attracts younger people. Its poll is there fore weighted towards younger age groups. The others are weighted towards the 55 and older age groups.

The younger you are, the more likely you are to support the date change. This aside, the this poll is more consistent with other evidence and is more likely to be closer to the mark.

Attitudes are shifting. The call for change is now coming from many places, even from conservative ones. The wind is blowing hard enough to push the Morrison government into conceding there is a problem and that a wrong must be addressed.

The size of the Invasion Day marches and other events, is another strong indicator of a growing mood for change.

This is prompting a shift at the core of the debate, around going past words, and taking up practical actions to address the realities of disadvantage, deaths in custody, and aim towards achieving First Nations sovereignty and self-determination.

The call for treaty is rising. This means a contract between the First Australians and later arrivals, guaranteeing rights, incorporating practical measures and looking towards the future.

The debate is also shifting towards what should be the foundation of Australian nationhood.

The Australian national identity should not be about celebrating the colonial takeover of a land and the subjugation of those who were already on it.

It should be about the collective, even if imperfect, effort to carve out a new society, and bringing all its parts closer together. This is a story about resistance to injustice, the notion of a fair go, and striving towards equality, and looking forward to doing better in the future.

If there is going to be a national day on another date, this is the stuff it should be about.

The post Australians turn out in large numbers for Invasion Day appeared first on Fair Go For Pensioners.