White Australia has choice to make on calls for treaty

AFTER Stan Grant’s emotional statements about the meaning of Australia Day on Radio National recently, it will be interesting to see the reactions of various parties during the election campaign.

Stan Grant called for a treaty between white Australia and the indigenous inhabitants.

The easy, predictable thing for One Nation, the National Party, the likes of John Howard, Tony Abbott and so on, is to shout the whole thing down. You know, like what happened to the Makarrata idea in the lead-up to the 1988 bicentenary. Or the idea of a treaty could be embraced because it would be a once-and-for-all solution to the problems of land rights and everything else. It would not only set a level below which Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders could no longer be pushed, it would also bring an end to the special claims which they can make.

After all, the sinking of the Makarrata was closely followed by the Mabo and Wik cases, and a lot of white Australians are dead keen to avoid any more surprises of that kind.

But having such a treaty would bring white Australia face to face with its most deep-seated fear – having to make a decision about itself, about the nature of our country and about our place in the world. So, are we going to keep on refusing to be ourselves and to grow up? Will our politicians encourage us yet again to get hysterical at the idea of making a commitment?

Or will they take the longer, more considered and more ruthless view? It’s just possible that even Pauline Hanson has felt the absolute determination of indigenous peoples to establish a position for themselves one way or the other. Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders will take their chances with a treaty, or they will keep winning cases in the High Court. White Australia, the choice is yours.

GRANT AGNEW. Coopers Plains