This above all: to thine own
self be true,
And it must follow, as the night the day,
Thou can’st not then be false to any man.
Hamlet, Act one, Scene three.
The Victorian Treaty process has had a long gestation and
is slowly coming into being. For background on the years’ long process, see the
document titled Journey to Gellung Warl (link
here) published by the First Peoples' Assembly of Victoria in 2025. Here is
the summary of the Report:
Since 2019, the First Peoples’
Assembly of Victoria has been yarning with Community across the state. This
report outlines how these ideas were brought to the negotiating table and
ensured progress for communities by having self-determination at the heart of
Australia’s first ever Treaty. The report presents the building of the First
Peoples' Assembly of Victoria, the treatymaking ecosystem, working with
community to identify priorities for the first statewide treaty, negotiating
treaty and getting treaty done. It concludes with an outline of what is in the
statewide Treaty.
Following the unsuccessful national referendum proposing
the establishment of a Voice to Parliament, it is unsurprising that the issue
of a Victorian Treaty and the recent election to establish the First Peoples’
Assembly and its two subsidiary bodies is both contentious in some quarters and
the subject of political debate and conflict. This political debate and tensions
are likely to become more prominent in the lead up to the November Victorian
election.
Wikipedia (link
here) suggests that the two-party preferred vote between the Labor and
Liberal parties is currently vacillating around 50%, making predictions of the
ultimate winner of the November election difficult. For a deeper dive, Roy
Morgan polling at the end of April (link
here) provides a four-way split but also suggests that on current polling
results a hung parliament is likely. Ominously for Labor, the Liberal
Opposition Leader Jess Wilson has a higher approval rating than Premier Allan
by a sizeable margin. Not being a psephologist, I don’t propose to chance my
arm on predicting the ultimate result but mention these figures to make the
point that a change of Government is possible, and that underlying shifts in
sentiment across the wider electorate may mean there could be significant
shifts in policy going forward whichever party emerges as the government after
the November election.
This recent ABC news article (link
here) provides a good assessment of the state of play and the current
positioning of both the Victorian Labor Government and the Opposition in
relation to the future of the Treaty.
My blog post from July 2025 on the Yoorrook Commission (link
here) explores some of the strategic issues confronting both the Victorian
and Commonwealth Governments as well as First Nations interests in Victoria. I
recommend readers refer to it for an analysis of the deeper context in relation
to the road ahead in Victoria.
With six months to the state election, the performance of
the First Peoples’ Assembly and its two subsidiary bodies, Nyerna Yoorrook
Telkuna and Nginma Ngainga Wara will be both closely scrutinised and
may well shape future policy choices of the incoming government.
Nyerna Yoorrook Telkuna is
designed to facilitate ongoing truth telling and healing regarding the history
of Victoria’s First Peoples. Nginma Ngainga Wara is an accountability
and oversight body which will be able to hold hearings and conduct inquiries in
relation to the performance of government programs’ It will also have a role in
monitoring Victoria's performance in relation to Closing the Gap.
What then are the prospects for the Victorian Treaty
arrangements going forward?
My assessment is that whichever Government emerges in
Victoria post the November election, the challenges and risks for First Nations
interests are considerable.
If Labor wins, the risk is that the
First Peoples Assembly and its subsidiary bodies get bogged down in process and
micromanagement. The Closing the Gap process is fundamentally problematic from
a range of perspectives (link
here and link
here). The reality that mainstream programs are key determinants of
Indigenous well-being and interact with Indigenous specific institutions and
policies in complex ways suggests that access to professional expertise and a
focus on a wide range of mainstream programs will be crucial in ensuring that
interactions with government and its bureaucracy are effective in driving
positive outcomes for First Nations interests.
If a Liberal Government emerges, the
risk is that the institutional framework negotiated meticulously over an
extended period will be either dismantled or progressively degraded so as to
take First Nations interests back to their starting point seven years ago.
What then is the appropriate strategy for First Nations
interests?
In my view, the flaw in the strategy adopted to date by
both the Victorian Labor Government and First Nations interests has been to emulate
the strategies adopted by most mainstream interest groups which see governments
as the source of virtually all power and authority. Consequently, the aim has (ostensibly
on the part of the government) been to build a strategy around creating institutional
mechanisms which facilitate the transfer or delegation of power, influence and
control from government to First Peoples.
While there is always a place for a focus on persuading
government to meet their commitments and act consistently with their rhetoric, for
First Peoples, a more hardheaded approach is more likely to be effective in the
long term. The approach I would suggest involves at a minimum (a) building
internal capability and cohesion; (b) accessing non-government sources of financial
and other assistance including internal resources; (c) building alliances with
like-minded mainstream community interests; and (d) getting on with building a
mosaic of overlapping and inter-woven Indigenous institutions focussed on
providing community benefits and operating outside the direct reach of
government influence.
In other words, building institutions and organisations
that are based on community control, or self-determination, independently of
governments, and the insidious influence they can exert through control of
funding and policy. The stronger and more self-sufficient community controlled
and self-determining organizations can become, the more effective they will be
in advocating for and protecting First Peoples interests, and as a side-effect,
the more capacity they will have to bend governments to their will rather than
the reverse as is the case at present.
Autonomy and real self-determination are not to be found in
the benevolence and generosity of governments however well-intentioned they
appear to be. Real influence and freedom of action require internal cohesion
and the capability to engage over a sustained period with all and sundry
(including governments) from a position of strength.
To be clear, I am not arguing that First Peoples in
Victoria should walk away from the significant political and institutional
gains they have made to date, but there is a very high risk that they will need
a fallback strategy within a very few years, and perhaps sooner. In todays
world, only a naïve optimist can adopt the Panglossian assumption that governments
will invariably pursue the public interest and deliver on their rhetoric and commitments.
The strategy I am suggesting would, in a best-case scenario,
strengthen the influence of Indigenous interests within the current treaty
framework, and in the worst case, where the current framework is dismantled,
provide a means to maximise their medium- and long-term interests even so.
My argument can perhaps be summarised as follows.
In discussions regarding self-determination, one often hears
the slogan ‘Nothing about us without us’. The slogan’s internal echo is rhetorically
and intuitively effective. However, in most cases its use implicitly assumes
that governments are in the driver’s seat and are shaping and determining
outcomes. Such an assumption is a concession that undermines real autonomy.
In my humble opinion, a better formulation of an appropriate
slogan — to repurpose a classical Chinese saying on leadership (after Laozi, Tao
Te Ching, Chapter 17) — would be:
Of a great achievement, people
say, we did this ourselves.
The corollary of course is that if you wish to be certain of
achieving self-determination, there is no point in relying on governments.
14 May 2026
No comments:
Post a Comment