Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

On Monday night, when the Minister for Indigenous Australians made his contribution on this ministerial statement, there were four other coalition members here in the chamber. Two of them were on duty. Everyone can draw their own conclusions and pass their own judgement on the significance of that observation, but it is reminiscent of the walkout from this chamber in 2008 when the national apology was given. It says much about the underlying difficulties for Indigenous Australians. Having said that, I listened carefully to the contribution of the member for Gippsland, and I commend him on his comments.

On 28 August 1963 Martin Luther King Jr, standing in front of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, delivered his now famous 'I have a dream' speech to 250,000 people who had joined him in support of a civil rights march. I'll quote from his speech and in particular his opening comments. If I use words that are not parliamentary or appropriate in today's society, I make it clear they are not my words, but they are the words specifically used by Martin Luther King Jr. He said:

Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. …

But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination.

Here in Australia, in the same era as that of Martin Luther King Jr., Australians were campaigning for equality for Indigenous Australians. The 1967 referendum overwhelmingly supported that, with a 90 per cent vote in favour of constitutional change and recognition of Indigenous Australians. Just as in the USA, the 1960s here in Australia were an era of hope that discrimination and injustice would end.

More than half a century later, millions of people in the USA turned out in support of Black Lives Matter marches—again shining a spotlight on racial injustice and discrimination against African-Americans. Here in Australia, Adam Goodes, a proud Adnyamathanha and Narungga man, was chosen as Australian of the Year. Adam Goodes was a champion Australian rules footballer. He was one of the sport's very best: a dual Brownlow medallist, a dual premiership player, a four-time all-Australian player and much, much more. In 2015 his AFL career came to an end. After 372 games, Adam Goodes was hounded into retirement by relentless and widespread bullying and racist vitriol. Adam Goodes was proud of his heritage and proud of his Indigenous culture, and he openly displayed that pride. But not everyone was pleased about that.

Over recent weeks, further examples of racial vilification of sportspeople here in Australia have been reported widely. The member for Gippsland referred to some quotes from Eddie Betts about this very matter. I want to add a further quote to what Eddie said:

We as Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islander people are sick of fighting because it just keeps happening.

The point I make when referring to both the 1967 referendum and the Martin Luther King Jr. speech is that 50 years after there was hope that things would change, but the reality is that nothing much has changed. The reality is that, despite eloquent and motivating speeches by civic leaders, despite publicly endorsed changes to the Australian Constitution and the introduction of anti-racial vilification laws, despite five decades of targeted programs to bridge the gap and to end disadvantage and despite the national apology, racial, sexual, cultural, religious and social discrimination here in Australia and throughout the world continue.

Discrimination and persecution have existed since time immemorial. They have been constant human traits. Anyone who is in any way different is often shunned and sidelined, or mocked. Whilst laws may control behaviour and restrain people's feelings, they will never change what's in a person's heart and in a person's mind. Only understanding will do that. And only a person who has felt the humiliation of discrimination, who has faced rejection because of their colour or who has walked in the shoes of the oppressed will ever truly understand that.

Only when decisions about Indigenous Australians are made by those who understand will the gaps be closed, which is why a voice to parliament, truth telling and treaty form the foundation of the Uluru statement. But let me also make it clear that truth telling and treaty are a two-way process. To date, bridging the gap has focused on the responsibilities of government; on the expenditures and initiatives of government. Bridging the gap is best achieved when both sides come together in shared responsibility, which is why it is disappointing that the Morrison government has not embraced the Uluru statement in the spirit in which it was given and from the effort and consultation that went into preparing the statement. It was well-considered and it proposed a way forward—a way that would bring all parties together, a way that would overcome disadvantage and a way forward that may one day bring all Australians together. But, instead, this government, the Morrison government, turns to a cashless welfare card as one of its solutions. I ask the government and government members to think about the message that that sends to Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders, the first Indigenous peoples of this land, about how this government thinks of them if that is its solution to the disadvantage that we talk about here in this chamber on a regular basis. That sends the wrong message to those people, and, understandably, their hurt and pain continues.

I urge government members to think about the way forward, to think about the Uluru statement. Yes, it may not be perfect, but at least get involved in the discussions with the people who went to great lengths to put it together and make it work.

See this speech in context