Public Misconceptions: Australia's Failure Of An Indigenous Treaty

Failed Definitions and Public Misconceptions: Australia’s failure of an Indigenous Treaty.

This essay argues that controversial opinions concerning conflicting definitions and public misinformation among the Australian community hinder progress in Indigenous treaty-making. The Uluru Statement from the Heart 2017 called for Voice, Treaty, and Truth, and with the recent failure of the yes referendum, there must be a shift in the treaty process. This is because a treaty will recognise Indigenous sovereignty and allow for negotiation in their best interest, like improvements to healthcare. Unfortunately, controversial opinions are a barrier that prevents progression and healthy discussion due to conflicting definitions and public misinformation.

A group comprised of Aboriginal representatives were appointed to lead consultations in treaty negotiations. With the State government’s support, there was a rapid progression as Australia’s first Bill passed: The Advancing the Treaty Process with Aboriginal Victorians Act 2018. This act meant the government must recognise a First People’s Assembly self-determination fund to support treaty negotiations. As Hobbs highlights, the implementation of an Indigenous representative body opens healthy discussion and development, which is a positive process because this can address controversies and

Following the controversial definition of sovereignty, a popular argument emerged claiming ‘a nation cannot make a treaty with itself’ from former prime minister John Howard. With Howard’s highly influential status, this was quickly adopted by many Australians who insisted that Indigenous people are also Australians and therefore a treaty would divide the nation. However, Howard’s definition is based on an extremely narrow understanding of the terms ‘treaty’ and sovereignty. This misconception negatively affects the process of treaty-making as it creates unprecedented fear when in reality Indigenous people do not seek recognition of statehood. Therefore, as the controversial debate over the implications of sovereignty continues, the underlying issue must first be addressed: an embedded and outdated definition weaponised by the HCA to prevent progression in treaty-making. Australia must stand as a united front to uproot this definition and gain traction in the process of treaty-making. However, to garner support and agreement, public misconceptions need to be addressed, leading to the next issue: controversial public misinformation. Misconceptions that damage relationships. Since the release of the Uluru Statement, copious discussions and debates have flooded the community. This has led to controversial opinions and embedded narratives that misconstrue Indigenous history, consequently harming the progression of treaty-making. Such