Noel Pearson's Gough Whitlam oration 2013 His views have changed. Why ? 11 October 2023

 

Whitlam Institute, University of Western Sydney  13 November 2013.

Here is an excerpt from Noel Pearson’s oration in 2013 which I think is highly relevant to his passionate advocacy for the Voice proposal to be put to a referendum of the people of Australia on 14 October 2023.

I have no problem with people changing their minds about matters of public importance.

However in the context of debate about the Voice proposal, I have not seen in the public domain any acknowledgement by Mr Pearson that his position on a range of matters appears to have changed in the 10 years since 2013. These include racial discrimination in the Constitution, the failure of race-based solutions to aboriginal disadvantage, the negative effects of well intended policies and the failure of policy to hold indigenous people to the same standards as other Australians.

In 2013 Mr Pearson said “ A person should be rewarded on their merits and assisted in their needs. Race and indigeneity should be irrelevant to matters of public welfare and government assistance.”

Yet in 2023 in the lead-up to the Voice vote he has frequently insisted that indigeneity is the all-important issue.

He said in 2013 “ We need to move from a position of racial discrimination in law and public policy to one of individual equality before the law”.

The words spoken by Mr Pearson in 2013 have been repeated, almost word-for-word by advocates of the No case in 2023.

Here follows the excerpt:

The emphases are mine. I have viewed the video of the address on the website of the Institute and the transcript appears to be an accurate record of Mr Pearson’s words.

“For the most part, our Constitution is fine. It has set up the legal framework for a stable, prosperous democracy in Australia. It is – mostly – written in neutral democratic language. It contains no gender bias. It makes no mention of preferred sexuality. It contains no religious bias. It is primarily a fair and just document, and creates a fair and just democratic system. Except in two respects.

There are two problems in our Constitution. The first is the non-recognition of Indigenous peoples. The second is racial discrimination: our Constitution still contains provisions which allow governments to discriminate on the basis of race. Prior to the 1967 referendum, Indigenous peoples were explicitly excluded from the Constitution. Section 127 prevented Indigenous people from being counted in the Census. Indigenous people were also excluded from the scope of s 51(xxvi), the Race Power. The 1967 referendum reversed this exclusion by deleting s 127 and deleting the exclusion in s 51(xxvi).

Ironically, however, the Constitution now makes no mention of Indigenous peoples whatsoever. As a founding, historical document, our Constitution is inadequate. Mabo overturned the doctrine of terra nullius in Australian domestic law. But our Constitution fails to recognize that this land was not empty when the British arrived. There is no mention of the Indigenous contribution to Australia’s heritage and history.

The second problem is that the Constitution contains racially discriminatory provisions which enable governments to treat Australian citizens differently on the basis of race. Section 25 contemplates barring races from voting. S 51(xxvi) gives the Commonwealth the power to pass race-based laws – whether positive or adverse.

This allowance and promotion of racial discrimination is at odds with fundamental tenets of democracy: individual equality before the law, the rule of law (in that the same rules should apply to each individual regardless of colour or ethnicity), and the idea that each person’s vote should be equal. The racial discrimination in our Constitution is an undemocratic error. On the issue of race, our founding fathers erred.

Their error was based on outdated factual and moral beliefs, now known to be incorrect. Racial categorizations between human beings, we now know, have no scientific basis. Race should no longer, therefore, have any legal or policy application. We now understand that there is only one race: the human race. Most would now agree that treating citizens differently on the basis of race is unfair. This is why removal of racial discrimination from the Constitution has strong public support.

The race-based approach has also been unsuccessful in addressing the problems we face in Indigenous affairs. This practical failure has had its roots in the philosophical understandings that underpin the race-based approach. Race is a colonial concept. Inherent in the idea of race is the notion that some races are superior and some are inferior. The incorrect notion that Indigenous people belong to an inferior or incapable race has arguably had a poisonous effect on Indigenous policy, law and, consequently, Indigenous people.

While in the past there was much adverse discrimination against Indigenous people on the basis of race, now there is positive discrimination – well intentioned – but often with adverse results. Cape York Institute’s work in welfare reform has shown us this all too clearly. The race-based approach has perpetuated low expectations and undermined personal responsibility.

Consequently, as many Indigenous leaders have argued, the law and public policy often fails to hold Indigenous Australians to the same responsibilities and expectations as other Australians. This attitude does Indigenous people a great disservice.

We must unequivocally reject the idea that Indigenous people are innately or biologically disadvantaged. Indigenous people are not an inferior race. Yes, Indigenous people are for the most part socially and economically disadvantaged due to past discrimination, dispossession and other contemporary factors. And yes, we should do everything we can to assist disadvantaged people, black or white. But we should do so on the basis of individual need – not race. A person is not automatically disadvantaged just because he or she is Indigenous. A person should be rewarded on their merits, and assisted in their needs. Race, and Indigeneity, should be irrelevant to matters of public welfare and government assistance.

We need to move from Indigenous non-recognition to recognition. And we need to move from a position of racial discrimination in law and public policy, to one of individual equality before the law.”

 

I think that many Australians would agree with most of what Mr Pearson has to say here, especially about all of us being equal in law regardless of race or indigeneity.

The only matter on which I hold a contrary view is about constitutional recognition of any ethnic group. The Constitution does not mention any racial or ethnic or religious or any other particular group of people. In my view there is no good reason for it to do so.

I am well aware that many prominent Australians are saying in in 2023 that they would support the insertion into the Constitution of some form of words giving “recognition” to aborigines  (if anybody can figure out who is an aborigine)  or indigenous people (if anybody can define what indigenous means) or firstnationspeoples (if anybody knows what that means) but the old adage “be careful what you wish for” applies. At the very least our leaders should  subject this wobbly notion to a long term process of constitutional review before promising anything.

End