Tania Lawrence (Hasluck, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker Claydon:

We, gathered at the 2017 National Constitutional Convention, coming from all points of the southern sky, make this statement from the heart.

I wish to address a few points made in the Uluru Statement from the Heart, which, as the Prime Minister rightly says, is an invitation to all Australians to walk forward together. It is an auspicious time for the Uluru statement and the Voice to Parliament, for now we see a crystallisation of many months and years of effort—not a flawed effort, as the member for Maranoa suggested just now.

It was deeply concerning to hear a number of the points the member for Maranoa spoke to. I hope that, on reflection, hearing the speeches that those on this side and those on the crossbench and those within his own community make may well enable his entire National Party to reflect as well, and, at the time and the day of voting, to think of voting yes. There are moments of truth in every parliamentary process, and they are generally twofold. The first is when the bill is laid before the parliament for the first time, and the second is when it is passed by the parliament. For a referendum bill, there are three.

Growing up in the small country town of York, I used to work at the local courthouse as a volunteer. I was deeply alarmed and shocked taking in tourists and looking at the holding cell only for Indigenous Australians, where the ball and chain was still present on the floor. In this courthouse there were a number of different, rather horrific stories, but none I could forget more so than those that were experienced by Indigenous Australians in that cell. It was just a small cell, the equivalent of four seats in this chamber, with a sand floor where, we know, from the history records, they endeavoured to escape by scraping away at the sand. The reasons they were taken to those cells were so appalling and shocking, and so simple in essence: they were just trying to be able to stay on their land and feed their family. Up until quite late, around the 1970s, Indigenous Australians still had to hold a pass to be able to come into the town centre of York. This is not ancient history; this is recent history which we know so little about. We have such little understanding of exactly what our First Australians have had to endure since colonisation.

The people that convened to progress the Uluru statement asked for, first, a voice to parliament; second, a truth-telling to understand those stories and understand the impact on the intergenerational trauma that has endured since; and, thirdly, the makarrata. I believe we are in an amazing, privileged position, as this parliament of 2023, to progress the very first step in full reconciliation by enabling a voice to parliament. As one of the larger urban communities of Indigenous peoples, I have heard different questions raised within my community. One of them was about ensuring that sovereignty is upheld. The Uluru statement addresses sovereignty: that there have been sovereign nations here for tens of thousands of years, that the sovereignty is spiritual and finds its incarnation in ancestral ties to the land and that the sovereignty has not been ceded and co-exists with that of the Australian government. So, whilst many people have been concerned about sovereignty in this debate, it stands there within the statement upon which the referendum for a voice to parliament finds its firm foundation.

The statement goes on to say that the ancient sovereignty can shine through as a full expression of Australia's nationhood. And here is the gift that is offered from Uluru to Australia, from the heart of the nation to the nation at large. Here are the first peoples recognising that for Australia to move forward together, reconciling the tragedy and dispossession, the racism, the hurt and the violence, the stolen, the unseen, and the unheard, the whole country must be offered the gift that only the first peoples can offer—the gift of themselves. Gifts require a giver and a receiver to be perfected, and this is the gift of culture. The Prime Minister has spoken of a hand outstretched from Uluru. The statement says:

When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. They will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.

Australia has created in its first peoples intergenerational dispossession, intergenerational poverty, intergenerational dislocation and intergenerational trauma. Over two centuries and more, we have failed to value the gift of culture that is now being offered. The opportunity that I have had throughout my life of being able to travel to different countries around the world and experience different cultures firsthand and see how much they're valued and loved helps me to really see the contrast of where we are as our own nation and how we regard our own First Nations culture. I treasure and value that culture. I look forward to seeing it elevated and continuing to grow and be understood across schools in our nation and for multicultural groups to participate and witness Indigenous culture. It is truly a gift. But there are still people who think that the Voice will be a gift from Australia to Indigenous people.

The referendum may even pass simply on the number of goodhearted Australians who believe that when they vote yes, they will be doing someone else a favour, and it won't cost them anything. In truth, when we vote yes and support this change to the Constitution, we will all be doing ourselves a favour and will be changing the very nature of our nation. We will at last be receiving the gift and embracing the gift of culture into the very heart of our government—from that is where the Constitution lies. It is not possible to hear the statement, 'This is the torment of our powerlessness', and believe it without then also realising that the remedy to powerlessness is always power.

Once the referendum has passed, then there shall be a body to be called the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Once the referendum has passed, then the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the parliament and the executive government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. This is the way we create power in our system of government, with laws, and when laws are not enough, we go further. From the heart of the country, we respond to the challenge to bring real and lasting change to the very heart of our power, the Constitution. The Uluru statement closes with:

We invite you to walk with us in a movement of the Australian people for a better future.

When I visit schools and have the opportunity to present three Australian flags, our Australian flag, our Torres Strait Islander flag and our Aboriginal flag, the children are proud of all three in equal measure. They are proud to speak to what the colours mean. They are proud to speak to what the symbols mean. They are proud to speak to what the lines mean. Where I live, they embrace the opportunity to sing the national anthem in Noongar language. I trouble and I worry about what the curriculum will say on the Monday following the referendum. What will the teachers say to the children if it is anything other but a resounding yes?

I call upon those opposite to reflect on the statement you are actually making about yourselves and about your party. This is an opportunity to rise above the politics and think about what we can say as a nation. I accept the invitation. I will walk on that path to the future of this country. I ask and implore that you reach deep into your hearts, speak to our First Nations people and ask yourself, 'Will not a Voice to Parliament mean that they are able to have an opportunity to speak directly to the parliament, to the executive, to the government, about laws that relate to them; to ensure that they have an opportunity to say what the impact would be, what the change will be; and an opportunity to be able to fully direct their own future?' I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context