In May, with the support of the opposition and the left-wing Greens, the Queensland state Parliament adopted the Path to Treaty Act 2023.
Although media outlets and opinion pages have been saturated with stories about “The Voice” and Indigenous claims to sovereignty, there has been little discussion of this potentially divisive Queensland legislation.
Unsurprisingly, the long-serving Labor premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, used her party’s majority to steamroll this legislation through Parliament. But what is surprising, even disturbing, is that the opposition would sheepishly support it, effectively championing Labor’s social engineering agenda.
The inability of the opposition to stand up for the principle of equality for all was on display on May 10.
Opposition leader, David Crisafulli, has insisted he will “absolutely not” roll back the treaty legislation if he becomes premier, despite intense pressure from within his party to overturn it.
The new law will establish a First Nations Treaty Institute to develop a framework to support Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities to participate in Treaty negotiations with the state government.
It will also establish a Truth-telling and Healing Inquiry to investigate and report on “the impacts of colonisation on Aboriginal peoples.” This is expected to take three years.
While history can be useful, there is little hope that this Inquiry will examine the state’s history objectively.
History as a specific subject has not been taught in Queensland’s primary schools since 1972 when a new social studies syllabus was introduced—contributing to a lack of historical research and leaving it open to being replaced by whatever government narrative suits.
If past practices are a guide, the chances are that the Inquiry will rewrite history by castigating white people as “vile colonialists and racists” and provide the Aboriginal community with reasons to accept the government’s victim narrative.
“All Queenslanders will benefit from a reconciled Queensland, and we are committed to working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples towards reconciliation, truth-telling and healing, and reframing the relationship,” the premier said.
Dividing Society Along Racial Lines Is Fraught With Risks
Meanwhile, the Treaty Institute will be yet another Aboriginal 10-person quango.It is a bit of a mystery how these new state institutions will interact with the federal Indigenous Voice to Parliament if a referendum is successful later this year.
Only Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander people will be allowed to become members of the Treaty Institute Council. Although there are further requirements to ensure gender balance and diversity, the law does not explain how Aboriginality will be determined.
It is obvious that another layer of rules would be required to determine who is a member of the Aboriginal race and, therefore, eligible to sit on the Institute’s Council.
However, even common sense suggests any attempt to segment people along racial lines is fraught with danger.
Not only would it create a two-tiered society where political equality or equal citizenship are distinct remnants of a saner past, but the legislation harkens back to the purity laws introduced in Nazi Germany to determine who was Jewish.
An attempt by the One Nation Party to have a private members’ bill on Aboriginal identity failed in the Senate because a debate wasn’t even allowed to take place.
As a result, more people can be expected to identify as Aboriginal even through the most tenuous links.
Indeed, in 1971 there were only 106,000 Aboriginals, but that number increased to over 800,000 in the 2021 census. Some frustrated people I’ve spoken to have entertained the idea of ticking the First Nations box at the next Census survey as a type of silent protest.
Back to the opposition, the question to be asked is: “What can be gained going along with this legislation?”
It is also instructive that Crisafulli has not joined his federal colleagues in their “No” campaign but, instead, has encouraged people to be open-minded about the reasons put forward to support changing the Constitution.
The opposition’s support is a recipe for disaster that will keep the Liberal-National Party on the opposition benches for a long time, and another example of the country’s centre-right party trying to out-Labor Labor.
