History Now, Ep 3 : Aboriginal Political Histories

Send us a text

Reflecting on the enduring spirit of Aboriginal activism, today's episode is an homage to both the ancestors who fought for justice and the scholars like Emeritus Professor Lyndall Ryan who have chronicled their struggles. Coordinated by Jessie Adam-Stein and chaired by Dr. Cara Cross, this panel event from the History Now 2024 series, co-hosted with the History Council of New South Wales and the Australian Centre for Public History at UTS, dives into the depths of Aboriginal political histories. We pay our respects to the traditional landowners and explore how their political contributions have shaped our understanding of Australia's past and present, with a special acknowledgment of Emeritus Professor John Maynard's pioneering work.

The heart of our discussion beats to the rhythm of early 20th-century Aboriginal activism, where a gathering in Kempsey marked a turning point in the fight for equality. The voices of over 700 Aboriginal people and the manifesto of the Australian Aboriginal Progressive Association (AAPA) resonate through time, as we recount their brave stance against oppression and the lasting impact of their actions—even through the Great Depression. Stories of personal sacrifice, like that of my grandfather, intertwine with these historical narratives, painting a rich tapestry of Aboriginal resilience and unyielding quest for justice.

As we close, the focus shifts to the fragmented journey of land restitution and the growth of Indigenous resistance that has radically influenced Australian politics. We remember the warriors like Windradyne and the establishment of the Aboriginal Tent Embassy, leading up to the historic Aboriginal Land Rights Act Northern Territory of 1976, as milestones in the fight for Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination. These stories are not just history; they are the foundation upon which our ongoing struggle for rights and recognition is built, and they continue to inspire action and reflection in our shared journey towards a just future.

Support the show

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:05):
Thank you.
Thank you, look.
As a Warramai man from the PoorStevens region of New South
Wales or north of Newcastle, Ibegin by respectfully
acknowledging the traditionalowners of the land upon which we
gather.
The Gannigal people of the Eoranation Also pay respects to our
elders, both past and present.
I also just want to take theopportunity to respectfully

(00:26):
acknowledge the passing of avery significant historian,
emeritus professor Linda Ryan, agreat supporter of Aboriginal
people over many years and hermany studies of Aboriginal
Tasmania and the work she's doneon the massacre maps as far as
Australia was concerned, andreally you know, stamping that
down Linda will be a great lossand mourned by many.

Speaker 2 (00:49):
As I said, a good colleague and and friend of mine
up in Newcastle for many years,so you know certainly mourn
Lindell's passing before I handover to our chair for today's
event, Dr Cara Cross, I'd justlike to say a few very brief
words about History Now 2024 asa whole series.

(01:13):
History Now is a public talkseries that has always had the
aim to bring what you might callcutting edge historical
practice into public discourse,featuring professional and
academic historians as well ashistory related experts in
various fields.
History Now has had variousiterations and homes over the
years.
It's something that's beenpassed around, and this year

(01:34):
it's been coordinated by me,Jessie Adam-Steen, in my dual
capacity at both the HistoryCouncil of New South Wales and
as a member of the AustralianCentre for Public History at UTS
, and this year we have venuesupport from the State Library
of New South Wales again.
So thank you to them.
I do have a whole list ofpeople to thank, but I'll save
that for the end, don't worry.

(01:56):
History Now this year we havenine sessions.
We started in March and it runsthrough to November.
It's one Wednesday a month.
It isn't always the firstWednesday, I have to say.
Usually, but not always.
Most events will be held inperson here in this peculiar
maps room wonderful, verystrange maps room but the July

(02:17):
event will be held online onlyand I'll tell you more about
that afterwards.
A full event program forHistory Now can be found on the
History Council website and alsojust through a search engine
inquiry.
Just to note, tonight's eventis being audio recorded but the
Q&A section will not be fortechnical reasons.
Also, noting that tonight'sslides may feature images of

(02:39):
people who have died.
I'll be back just before, aroundabout 6.30, we'll see how we go
with time fingers crossed andI'll give you a few previews of
some of the History Now eventscoming up later.
But first I'd like to introduceyou to our chair for tonight's
event, dr Cara Cross.
Cara is a proud Goori, dubaiGalwan woman from Warimi and

(03:01):
Biripi nations.
She's deeply committed toIndigenous education, social
justice and truth telling.
She's Executive Officer, dvcIndigenous, at UNSW and plays a
pivotal role there in advancingthe University's Indigenous
strategy, shaping Indigenouseducation programs, community
engagement and promotingresearch excellence.
Cara is also an Atlantic Fellowfor Social Equity 2024, where

(03:25):
she focuses on the repatriationof cultural knowledges.
I'm pleased to add that she'salso been recently appointed as
the First Nations GeneralCouncillor with the History
Council of New South Wales,which is fantastic for the
History Council.
So thank you.
So let's welcome Kara.
Thank you.

Speaker 4 (03:45):
Thank you, jessie, and thank you all for joining us
tonight for this excitingHistory Now event.
As Jessie mentioned, I'm aproud Worimi Biripi woman First
Nations General Councillor forthe History Council of New South
Wales, which I wear proudly.
I'm also a member of the PuraiGlobal Indigenous History Centre
and the Centre for GlobalIndigenous Futures.
I'd now like to introducetoday's topic and our speakers.

(04:06):
The idea of a History Now themeof Aboriginal political
histories emerged partly as ahistorically informed response
to the diabolical year that was2023.
Last year demonstrated theabsolute, dire need for a
broader public understanding ofthe long history of Aboriginal
political involvement and theoften thwarted attempts at
formal representative bodies,which was very well outlined by

(04:29):
Thomas Mayo in his 2023 AnnualHistory Lecture, which was
hosted by the History Council inSeptember last year.
But also, on a more positivenote, today's topic emerged from
the fact that EmeritusProfessor John Maynard was
awarded the History Council'sAnnual History Citation in 2023.
Congratulations again, john.
Recognising John's outstandingcontribution to history across

(04:52):
so many topics, including, butnot limited to, his work in
understanding the intersectionsbetween Aboriginal political and
social histories, so we thoughtit was appropriate to have him
back.
Thank you, john, for acceptingour invitation to speak again,
and in shaping this topic, theHistory Council has let the
speakers decide what they'd liketo present tonight, but we are
essentially taking a very broadview of the meaning of political

(05:14):
histories here.
This encompasses histories ofFirst Nations activism and
advocacy since invasion, butsuch histories also account for
more direct politicalinvolvement in formal
legislative change.
So, in other words, thisincorporates who have worked
within the systems politicians,advisors and policy makers, etc.
And those who campaignedoutside of those systems.

(05:34):
There is real depth andcomplexity to First Nations
political histories in settlercolonial nation and these
stories have for so long beenmisunderstood and often missing
from mainstream Australianunderstanding of its political
history, and I imagine we'reabout to hear some fantastic
stories from all three speakers,which they will delve into.

(05:55):
First we have Professor JohnMaynard, who is Emeritus
Professor, a Warramai Aboriginalman from Port Stephens region
of New South Wales.
Over the past decade, johnMaynard has established himself
as the foremost Indigenoushistorian in Australia.
He has held major positions andserved on numerous prominent
organisations and committees,including the Deputy Chairperson

(06:16):
of the Australian Institute ofAboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Studies, iatsis, andthe Executive Committee of the
Australian HistoricalAssociation.
In 2014, john was electedmember of the prestigious
Australian Social SciencesAcademy and, in 2020, made a
Fellow of the Australian Academyof the Humanities.
John is the author of 15 books,including Aboriginal Stars of

(06:36):
the Turf, fight for Liberty andFreedom, the Aboriginal Soccer
Tribe and many others, and mostrecently this year, his new book
Fight for Liberty and Freedomthe Origins of Australian
Aboriginal activism okay, thanks, cara, for that kind
introduction and thankseverybody for coming along, and
such a night as we're having atthe moment and so I don't know

(06:58):
if it's still pouring out therecertainly was when I arrived.

Speaker 1 (07:02):
I I'm going to replicate I was speaking here a
couple of weeks ago at a majorforum we held in commemoration
of the Australian AboriginalProgressive Association, which
this year marks 100 years sincethis organisation first rose to
prominence as the first united,all Aboriginal political
organisation to form in thiscountry, if you like, the

(07:24):
beginning of the modernAboriginal political movement.
And you might ask the questionwhy is this so important?
You know it's 100 years sincethis organisation rose up.
Well, the reality is, all thethings that that organisation
put on the table 100 years agoare still the things we are

(07:45):
fighting for today.
They put up a demand for enoughland for each and every
Aboriginal family in the country.
That's a national land rightsagenda.
They demanded that the removalof Aboriginal children from
their families had to be stopped.
They wanted to protect adistinct Aboriginal cultural
identity.
They demandedself-determination, genuine

(08:06):
self-determination, 50 yearsbefore the Whitlam government
accredited with putting upself-determination for
Aboriginal people.
And they demanded thatAboriginal people be placed in
charge of Aboriginal affairs.
So these are the things we arestill fighting for in the 21st
century, 100 years later.

(08:31):
This was the event two weeks agoand Gary Foley and I have been
planning something like this forseveral years and sadly Foley
couldn't come on the day.
I mean he was still demandingthe week before because I was
flying down to Melbourne becauseI know how unwell he's been and
saying look, russ, don't comeup, we can get a Zoom organised.

(08:53):
And he said I'm going to bethere, I'm going to be there and
anyway, on the Thursday Remysaid I can't come, get the
library to organise a Zoom.
So I liken this image, saintFoley bestowing his guidance to
us on the panel.

(09:14):
And we had, as well as Foleyand myself as descendants of
office bearers of the AAP.
Gary Williams' grandmother'sbrother, lambert Waddy, was also
an office bearers of the AAPA.
Gary Williams' grandmother'sbrother, lambert Waddy, was also
an office bearer.
Johnny Mundine's grandfather,johnny Donovan, was an office
bearer.
Pauline Plagg's family fromGrafton were office bearers of

(09:36):
the AAPA and I must acknowledgeJoy Lay, the photographer at the
New South Wales State Library,for the incredible images that
she took and it was anincredible turnout.
I mean I don't know if peoplewere there.
I mean, it was a selloutbasically for the
state-of-the-art theatre.

(09:57):
They've got downstairs.
But the thing that reallystruck me was the number of
young Aboriginal people thereand really were so excited by a
lot of the stuff that was beingspoken about and they were
coming up after it the thing wasended, and also at the pub down
the road with plenty ofquestions.
And this is what we need to do.

(10:17):
We need to mobilise like we'vedone in the past, and it's got
to be young people driving thatmessage forward.
Now the AAPA were led by mygrandfather, fred Maynard, and
pictured here with his sister,emma at the rocks in 1927.
He was a warfie and a tradeunionist and there were
international connections,certainly through my

(10:38):
grandfather's work on the wharfand Jack Johnson and the
Coloured Progressive Association.
In the first decade of the 20thcentury, johnson was the
Muhammad Ali of his day, highlypoliticised, incredibly
articulate, outspoken andconfronting to the white
establishment.
And then, later on, marcusGarvey, who established what is

(11:00):
today recognised as the biggestblack movement ever seen in the
United States and mobilised over2 million followers worldwide,
including here in Australia.
As an office of the UNIA,garvey's organisation was
established here in Sydney withmembers like my grandfather and
Tom Lacey and others.

(11:20):
The thing about Garvey'smessage that struck these early
Aboriginal activists was thewhole sense of belonging to
country.
I mean, garvey's message wasabout Africa but it struck with
Aboriginal people.
We were connected to the groundunder our feet and it was all
about social, political andeconomic change and really that

(11:42):
was the message andself-determination that really
struck a chord with theAboriginal activists and that
really struck what was to followwith the formation of the AAPA.
Because they formed the AAPA in1924 and they'd grounded it and
a lot of Garveyism at thatparticular time.
There's been a historicalmistake, if you like.

(12:04):
I mean a lot of non-Indigenoushistorians going back decades
were saying that the earlyAboriginal political movements
were led by white Christians andhumanitarians.
Nothing can be further from thetruth.
The organisation was influencedby international black
connections and they realised.
My grandfather, coming intocontact with visiting merchant

(12:25):
black sailors from overseasAfrican Americans, west Indians
and Africans, realised that theracism and prejudice and
oppression we were facing herewas not just a localised thing,
it was a global thing and weneeded to confront it in that
space Now.
The AAPA held their firstconference in 1925 at St David's

(12:47):
Church Hall in Surrey Hills andover 200 Aboriginal people
attended that first conferenceand you know they were front
page news.
And, as I said you know before,self-determination there it is
up in black and white.
Aborigines demandself-determination,
self-determination is their aimand that again was grounded in

(13:08):
Garveyism.
My grandfather's inauguraladdress at that conference in
1925, where he said brothers andsisters, we have much business
to transact, so let's get rightdown to it.
We aim at the spiritual, thepolitical, the industrial and
the social.
Again, as I say again, that'sGarveyism.
We want to work out our owndestiny.

(13:31):
Our people have not had thecourage to stand together in the
past but now we are united andare determined to work for all
of the preservation, for all ofthose interests which are near
and dear to us.
The AAPA was a people's movement.
I mean it stretched 13 branches, four sub-branches the South

(13:54):
Coast, the North Coast, westernNew South Wales.
There was branches, foursub-branches as well.
My grandfather stated he wassimply amazed in travelling
across the state to remotecentres of Aboriginal
communities by the response inthe Aboriginal community, the
excitement, the inspiration theywere gaining and getting up and

(14:18):
standing up.
And he said I'm simply amazedby the response of the people to
the AAPA.
One old fellow wrote from a farback settlement, as a newspaper
said, and said we want someoneto come and explain to us about
the Freedom Club.
I mean these are the thingsthat mobilise incredible
inspiration at grassroots levelfor Aboriginal people.
Tom Lacey put it down in thenewspaper that this organisation

(14:42):
, it was a.
There was no money fromgovernment.
The money to run the they hadtheir own offices in Crown
Street, sydney.
These people were paying forthat office out of their own
pockets.
In their travel, in theiraccommodation was paid by
themselves.
And Lacey said there was nomoney coming from anywhere else

(15:02):
but it was a labour of love thatdrove them to fight for change.
These are some of the branchesI mean the Central Branch,
mclean Branch, lismore Branch,bellinger River, clarence River,
nambucca Branch, kempsey Branch, barraville Branch, batemans
Bay, yerunga Branch, yuin Gai,yirgulba, naurna Glen and the

(15:26):
sub-branches Lower Creek,bellbrook, green Hills and Coffs
Harbour.
It was an incrediblemobilisation of Aboriginal
people.
In six months they had over 600members across the state.
In late 1925, they held theirsecond conference at Kempsey up

(15:46):
on the north coast.
The incredible thing about thisconference, which history in
many respects has missed.
It ran for three days.
The Maclay Argus and the MaclayChronicle covered this
incredible event in theirnewspapers and said over 700
Aboriginal people attended thatthree-day conference.
All the papers were written anddelivered by Aboriginal people.

(16:08):
The important thing JimmyLinwood and Johnny Mosley, two
senior Aboriginal men, dunguttiAboriginal men in the newspaper.
They said they delivered theiraddresses in Aboriginal language
.
And this is a time shortly whenthe anthropologists are saying
there is no Aboriginal cultureleft in New South Wales.
There's no language, there's nostories.

(16:29):
Yet here we've got a conferencewith 700 Aboriginal people and
senior men delivering theirpapers in language.
Clearly they could understandlanguage.
My grandfather delivered apowerful resolution at the close
of that conference.
It was sent to the NSW StateGovernment and the Commonwealth
Government and, as he said, asit is the proud boast of

(16:50):
Australia that every person bornbeneath the Southern Cross is
born free, irrespective oforigin, race, colour, creed,
religion or any other impediment, we, the representatives of the
original people in conferenceassembled, demand that we shall
be accorded the same full rightsand privileges of citizenship
as are enjoyed by all othersections of the community.

(17:13):
My grandfather also forcefullystated that we as Aboriginal
people have overriding rightsabove all others in our land.
That is a statement ofAboriginal sovereignty.
Make no mistake about that.
He also said we are fightingfor the good of all Aboriginal

(17:34):
people.
This was a united front and wesaw that through the 60s, the
70s and 80s.
We've been derailed bygovernments ever since.
We spend most of our timefighting amongst ourselves with
factions and divisions.
We've got to get back to aunited mobilisation of
Aboriginal people to fight forchange.
That's where you will getchange in this country and

(17:56):
that's what we needed to go backfor fighting for the good of
all Aboriginal people.
In 1927 the AAPA published amanifesto that was widely
published across the state.
I mean over the years, 20.
Over years I spent a lot oftime in the library downstairs,
the state archives when theywere on the rocks and then

(18:19):
libraries right across thiscountry, and I managed to track
down five microfiche thingsabout this manifesto.
Today, with the aid of Troveand electronic search engines,
every town in New South Wales Iwould say it had a newspaper
published this manifesto back in1927.

(18:41):
Not only in New South Wales.
It was published in Queensland,victoria and South Australia.
And there you go what they'resaying there you know again the
demand for enough land for eachand every Aboriginal family in
the country.
The demand that Aboriginalpeople be placed in charge of
Aboriginal affairs.
The message when it wentthrough to the New South Wales

(19:03):
State Government, the ProtectionBoard stepped in with Premier
Jack Lang and told him theProtection Board was well taking
care of Aboriginal people andthese agitators need to be
dismissed and not to undertake.
Take up Julie, the Premier'stime.
He was to ignore them andlisten to the Protection Board.
My grandfather received adismissal from the state

(19:27):
government in regards to howthey reviewed the manifesto, but
the Protection Board were wellcatering to Aboriginal affairs
in this state and that's the endof the matter.
He wrote a three page letter tothe Jack Lang, the New South
Wales State Premier.
This is only a small section ofthat, but it's one of the most
powerful, I think, ever writtenby an Aboriginal activist.

(19:47):
I wish to make it perfectlyclear on behalf of our people
that we accept no condition ofinferiority as compared with the
European people.
Two distinct civilisations arerepresented by their respective
races.
That the European people by theart of war destroyed our more
ancient civilisation is freelyadmitted, and that by their

(20:09):
vices and diseases our peoplehave been decimated is also
patent.
But neither of these facts areevidence of superiority.
Quite the contrary is the case.
The members of the AAPA havealso noted the strenuous efforts
of the trade union leaders tothe conditions which existed in
our country at the time ofinvasion.

(20:31):
The word invasion being used inthe 1920s, a lot of right-wing
historians argue that it was ledby a lot of white left-wing
ratbags in the 1960s using theword invasion, which is in
itself a gross lie, butAboriginal people here are using

(20:51):
that word.
Then the men only worked whennecessary.
We called no man master and wehad no king.
The AAPA was under constantthreat, intimidation and
harassment by the New SouthWales Police.
Remember that the protectionboard, the chair of the New

(21:12):
South Wales Protection Board,was a police commissioner.
Threats were non-stop cominginto the AAPA.
My grandfather, in an interviewin 1927, he said he'd been
warned on many occasions thatthe doors of Long Bay Jail were
opening for him.
He said he would chiefly go tojail for the remainder of his
life.
He declared if by so doing hecould make the people of

(21:35):
Australia realise the trulyfrightful administration of the
Aborigines Act In many respects.
I mean going back when my bookFight for Liberty and Freedom
first came out in 2007,.
At that particular point in time, you know, it was assumed and I
assumed too that the AAPAdisappeared in 1927.

(21:57):
And that's one of the reasonswhy the expanded, revised,
updated book has just come outagain, because in the last 17
years there's been a lot of newinformation that has come to
light, and one of those thingswas the fact that the AAPA
didn't disappear in 1927.
They were still there in 1928and even into 1929.

(22:18):
And one of the things that cometo the fore was my grandfather
speaking at the Willoughby LaborLeague on Aboriginal matters,
and they said that he was tryingto change the policies of
Aboriginal policy by voice andpen and that he was a great
orator at that particular pointin time.
And this really hammers homethat, as I said, that they were

(22:41):
still there in in 1929.
The impact of the GreatDepression is one thing I mean
because my grandfather and hisbrother Arthur those wolf
labourers Sid Ridgeway workingat Chalora and the railways,
dick Johnson, tom Lacey and manyof the other Aboriginal
activists I mean were the firstto be shown the door.
As far as work, my grandfatheron the docks they said that he

(23:04):
continually turned up for histicket was continuously
overlooked for work.
It was a very, very difficulttime.

Speaker 3 (23:12):
The.

Speaker 1 (23:13):
AAPA went underground as a movement.
Many years ago I interviewedUncle Reuben Kelly, a Dunguddy
man from Bellbrook, and he saidI was working at the University
of Sydney in the 1930s and hesaid it was the last time I
heard your grandfather speak wasin the grounds of the
University of Sydney.
He said mid-1930s.

(23:33):
My father also said to me thathim and a young Aboriginal boy
he said we were only about fiveor six picked up by the police
at Lakemba and taken toCanterbury Police Station.
Picked up by the police atLakemba and taken to Canterbury
Police Station.
And my father in that interviewwith me said that day in that
police station was the mostfrightening day of my life.
And he said remember, we'rejust five and six-year-old kids.

(23:56):
And he said they absolutelyterrorised us and frightened the
living hell out of us.
My father wasn't.
He eventually let go and ranhome.
But he said it's only later Irealised as an adult what that
was all about.
We can get the message throughto his father my grandfather, we
can pick up your kids any timewe like and there's not a damn

(24:17):
thing you can do about it.
So the AAPA disappeared fromview in the mid-1930s and
certainly it's the police,harassment, intimidation.
My grandfather also eventuallyhad what is recalled as an
accident on the wharf.
One leg was broken in sixplaces.

(24:37):
He was in and out of hospitalfor 12 months.
Sugar diabetes set in gangrene.
They took his legs off and hewas completely incapacitated.
The stories our family carrythat that accident was no
accident to what happened to him.
So there's no proof of that butcertainly our family carry that

(24:58):
.
In saying that materialcontinues to come to light.
I mean Ronald Briggs here atthe library only the week before
last said the library hadunearthed some letters from the
AAPA, including my grandfatherand a non-Indigenous supporter.
Elizabeth Mackenzie Hattonwrote to Reverend Gribble in

(25:19):
regards to the Forest Rivermassacre in 1926, where
somewhere between if you look atthe records, either 30 or 300
Aboriginal people wereslaughtered at Forest River and
then their bodies were burned.
There was an investigation andinquiry into the vigilante group
and the police and those peoplegot off scot-free.

(25:40):
The target then was Gribble,the one who really brought to
light what had happened up there, and my grandfather and
Mackenzie Hatton wrote toGribble to lend support and say
that the AAPA in theirfortnightly meetings were
totally 100% behind ReverendGribble and they were astounded

(26:02):
and disgusted that these policeofficials got off scot-free for
the slaughter of Aboriginalpeople.
So, as I said, the materialcontinues to come to light and
for what it's worth.
If anybody wants to chase up agreat book, it's every major
bookshop.
Go and grab a copy.

(26:22):
Okay, and look just to, and asI started, I mean this is 100
years ago, but it is allinterconnected.
I mean, to our people here andour people that support us, you
must stay strong.
The struggle goes on in thiscountry for genuine Aboriginal
rights and justice.
Don't forget it, thank you.

(26:44):
Applause and justice.
Don't forget it, thank you.

Speaker 4 (26:53):
We're also joined by Professor Heidi Norman, who
researches and publishes in theareas of New South Wales
Aboriginal history and politics.
She is currently leading tworesearch projects.
First is an ARC funded historyof New South Wales Aboriginal
Affairs Administration titledGoverning Aboriginal
Self-Determination in New SouthWales, which examines how
self-determination has beenenacted as policy mode of
governance, ideology andnarrative by government from

(27:16):
1980 until today.
The second is a James Martinpolicy challenge grant focused
on enabling New South WalesAboriginal landholders to
participate in climate adaptionand mitigation.
Heidi's research has included ahistory of the New South Wales
annual Aboriginal Rugby Leagueknockout, the influence of
mining on the society andeconomy over Gomeroi lands and

(27:38):
the impact of economic change onurban Aboriginal lives.
In 2015, heidi was awarded theUTS Research Excellence Medal
for collaboration and in 2016,the National Teaching Excellence
Award for her work inIndigenous Studies.
In 2021, she was a finalist forthe UTS Chancellor's Medal for
Research Excellence and in 2017to 2018, she was awarded the

(27:58):
inaugural Gough Whitlam ResearchFellowship.
And also in 2018, she wasannounced as a top five ABC
Humanities researcher.
And also in 2018, she wasannounced as a top five ABC
humanities researcher.

Speaker 3 (28:14):
Heidi Norman is a colleague of mine at UNSW and is
a descendant of the Gomeroipeople from northwestern New
South Wales.
I'm going to talk aboutnational land rights.
So it's a slightly differentpace to what John has talked
about.
Different pace to what John hastalked about and really the
story of national land rightsstarts in 1966 with the first
land rights act passed in SouthAustralia and the question I

(28:37):
have it's a long chapter writtenwith my mate, francis Markham,
and I'm looking at the time tomake sure I stay on track here.
I really have been thinkingabout this crazy national land
rights story that is uneven,fragmented and really wanted to.

(28:58):
What we've done in this work,in this chapter and what I'll
talk to you today is to thinkabout how and why this came
about.
So really, john's talking aboutthe activism and mobilising by
the 1960s.
We get to a point where whatbegins is a collective land

(29:19):
titling process, but it's notquite what it seems and this is
really a story John has given us, a story of activism and
organising and mobilising.
This is a story of the tensionsbetween state and federal
governments and what they failto deliver.
So I'm taking political historyup in the sense of wanting to

(29:43):
scrutinise not just the role ofAboriginal activists and allies,
but the tensions betweenfederalism, so from near
complete dispossession.
Since 1966, a collective landtitling process has been
underway.
Land interests are recognisedover more than half the

(30:05):
Australian continent, nearlyfour million square kilometres,
with more under claim.
It's estimated Indigenouspeoples around the nation hold
exclusive possession, nativetitle and fee simple to around
26% of Australia's landmass,rising to 54% of the country
when non-exclusive native titleis included, and this expanse

(30:28):
includes national parks,conservation areas, vast
expenses of the continent.
I'm going to show you a lot ofmaps in my presentation, so it
seems very appropriate thatwe're in the map room.
However, aboriginal landrestitution, when considered
nationally, is uneven andfragmented, with little
consistency in the rights thatare afforded or amount of land

(30:50):
returned.
This spatial unevenness issometimes elided in a rush to
celebrate land restitution, andthat's what we see in some of
these images that are generatedfrom.
I picked this one up from theNative Title Tribunal.
So, in a rush to celebrate landrestitution, it leaves the

(31:12):
notion of legal rights andinterests unspecified and
bracketed in favour of anabstracting move that obscures
jurisdictional differences.
Here I consider the fragmentednature of the last 60 years of
Aboriginal land rights acrossAustralia and offer an account

(31:32):
as to why this has come about.
So what I argue is that thestandard accounts this isn't
what I the standard accounts ofthe spatial distribution of land
rights stress remoteness as aprimary determinant of the
presence or absence of landrestitution, itself a function

(31:53):
of colonization.
Other accounts focus onAboriginal activism and that
network of allies as factors inland restitution.
In this presentation, hopefully,I'll get through a fair bit of
it.
What is less examined is thehistory of federal Indigenous
public policy making in thepattern of Indigenous rights and
interests in land restitution.

(32:14):
This is a more realisticrepresentation of the land
repossession where the strongesttitle prevails title prevails.
So what sits underneath thepost-1966 land restitution are
varied federal and state-basedlaws and, from 1992, recognition
of native title rights andinterests by the High Court and

(32:35):
subsequent codification andrestriction by Commonwealth
governments.
Accordingly, the national storyof Aboriginal land rights, the
post-1966 story, this landtitling revolution, as it's
sometimes referred, isinevitably a federal one, based
not only on the idiosyncraticnature of Indigenous land rights

(32:56):
and campaigns in each state andthe particularities of state
governments, but also on theinclination of Commonwealth
governments to centralism inpublic policy.
The patchwork of land returnsthat we now see and that I'll
come back to right at the end,results from the intersection of
Indigenous settler politics butalso intergovernmental politics

(33:19):
within the Federation and thetendency, particularly of Labor
governments and the High Courts,towards centralism and the
tendency particularly of Laborgovernments and the high courts
towards centralism.
So here is the schema wedevised to think about over the
last 60-odd years, the movebetween states and state

(33:45):
governments and the territory inthis back and forwards in terms
of land rights laws.
Now, in the 1960s, aboriginalactivism thrust the issue of
Aboriginal land rights onto thenational political agenda.
It was in parallel with globalmovements for decolonization and
land reform and civil rights.
At that time government policytowards indigenous peoples in
Australia was largely left tothe states and it was only in

(34:06):
the territories where theCommonwealth maintained a role
in Indigenous policy andadministration matters, where
the federal government acted asa regional government.
Indigenous land rights in the1960s, just to reiterate this,
was seen as a matter for thestates.
In some parts of the countryindigenous people lived on and

(34:27):
were often confined to, as Johnhas covered in that activism
from the 1920s period, landreserved by state and territory
governments for indigenous use.
But the reserves existed onlyso long as it pleased settler
governments they could be andwere often revoked by state

(34:49):
governments, a denial of landthat often provided the sparks
that ignited land rightsmovements.
It should not be a surprise thatthe first legislative reforms
in response to calls forAboriginal land rights came from
the states and dealt withreserves.
So here are two, just two,examples.
The only examples is in 1966the newly elected South

(35:13):
Australian government passedlaws the Aboriginal Lands Trust
it was aimed at reparativeobjectives created an
organisation controlled byAboriginal people tasked with
holding and managing formerreserves In Victoria.
You can see those two colourfulsigns there.
Victoria became the first stateto grant freehold title to

(35:35):
communities themselves, allowingthem to own their land outright
.
In Victoria the revocation ofAboriginal reserves had long
been a cause for Aboriginalorganising and activism, with
almost all of the 1,000 squarekilometres of reserved lands
revoked over the century priorto 1960.

(35:55):
By the 1960s only twoAboriginal reserves remained
Lake Tyres and Framlingham, bothhomes of small communities and
slated for revocation over thecoming decade.
It was a black power movementemerging in Victoria under the
auspices of the AboriginesAdvancement League that
successfully fought off theseproposals and in 1970 the Bolt

(36:17):
government passed idiosyncraticlegislation transferring these
two areas, these early movestowards distinctive state
responses to land rightscoincided with a major shift in
federal arrangements, and thatof course, was at the start of
the 19th.
That, of course, was the 1967referendum.

(36:40):
So dissatisfaction with thisfederal allocation of
responsibility had beendeveloping from the 1920s and
30s and ultimately changed as aresult of the referendum by the
early 70s.
No land reform had beenattempted by the Commonwealth
Government, despite theexpectations raised by the 1967
referendum, and it seemed thatthe coalition government then

(37:04):
led by McMahon had no intentionof using their new
constitutional rights or actingon the mandate of the referendum
to do so.
Events in the Northern Territoryforced the hand of the
coalition government in itsdying days, and so pressure
mounted the McMahon governmenton Australia Day 1972 was a
long-awaited announcement, andit was a bitter disappointment.

(37:29):
Not only did the McMahons PrimeMinister oppose the Yucala
petition to stop a bauxite minegoing ahead on their country.
Rather than land rights, theyinstead announced a lease
arrangement subject toapplication.
The Australian Labor Party atthe time, propelled by the

(37:49):
Yokala problem in Arnhem Landand the Gurindji walk off from
Wave Hill, had begun from 1963developing a position on
Aboriginal land rights.
The Aboriginal AffairsCommittee recommended what
became the forerunner for landrights.
And so when Prime MinisterMcMahon announced this

(38:10):
much-promised new direction inAboriginal affairs, aboriginal
men then living in and aroundRedford were compelled to drive
overnight to Canberra.
There they erected umbrellasand laid a tent on the manicured
lawns opposite the AustralianParliament.
This protest at 10 Embassydramatically registered the
effects of being made alien inone's own country and announced

(38:30):
a seismic shift in Aboriginaland Australian politics.
So here what emerges is what werefer to here as centralism.
So the Gough Whitlam LaborGovernment announces to the
electrified Blacktown CivicCentre audience a rightful place
in this nation.

(38:51):
By day 11 of his governmentcoming to power in November, he
announces an inquiry known asthe Woodward Royal Commission.
While radical and progressiveWhitlam's position at that time

(39:14):
coming into office alsorepresented a watering down of
the national ambition of the ALPplatform, they were no doubt

(39:36):
capitalising on the nationalattention focused on the
Northern Territory.
And at this time Whitlam'sambitions were narrowed and the
Labor Party promised toestablish land rights in the
Northern Territory and beyondthe Territory.
Whitlam promised much less, andthat was an Aboriginal land
fund to purchase or acquire landfor significant, continuing
Aboriginal communities.
That was in quotes.
So days after the election I, asI mentioned, there was a
Woodward Royal Commission and inthis we can see that the
Commonwealth were leading theway, not by centralist coercion

(40:00):
but by example, and I'm going tomove through some of this just
quickly because there's muchmore to come to.
Suffice to say that there weretwo reports that arose from the
Woodward Royal Commission.
The first led to the draftingof land rights in the Northern

(40:21):
Territory and it was intended,and I quote here, that Whitlam's
had a two-stage strategy.
And what?
What he explains was that he,for legislating land rights
nationally, he explained, wasbecause, and I quote, there can
be under the presentadministrative arrangement no
let or hindrance.

(40:42):
Hence a constitutionallyexpedient stage in a strategy
for national land rights.
He told the Parliament, and Iquote the Commonwealth will
exercise its constitutionalpowers if need be by way of
acquisition of these Aboriginalreserves and other relevant
lands and so on.
The implementation of thissecond stage of Whitlam's

(41:04):
centralist approach to landrights was interrupted by the
dismissal.
Stage of Whitlam's centralistapproach to land rights was
interrupted by the dismissal ofthe Whitlam government in 1975.
Under Fraser the approach wasreferred to as new federalism.
And here what emerges?
In the period 1976, while theFraser government passed the

(41:26):
Northern Territory Land RightsAct largely unaltered.
The federal question in landrights were left to the states.
So it was Fraser's newfederalism emphasised
negotiation as a preferredmethod for managing
intergovernmental relationsrather than coercion.

(41:52):
The main active role foreseen byFraser for the Commonwealth
outside the Northern Territorywas funding of the Aboriginal
Land Fund, although this wasdramatically cut back in the
first austere budget of theFraser government.
In contrast, the GoughWhitlam-led Labor opposition,
they seem to step up theircommitment to centralism and the

(42:14):
Labor Party's approach tofederalism prioritised
uniformity in outcomes acrossstates and thus a centralising
role for the Commonwealth.
While Whitlam, running hisLabor opposition in 1977,
maintained his promise to pursueland rights in the states, even
against the wishes of statepremiers.
To discharge the responsibilitygiven to the Commonwealth after

(42:38):
the referendum, the ALP'splatform from 1977 professed an
Australian Labor Party will seekthe cooperation of state
parliaments to adopt similarlegislation and only where the
states fail to cooperate withthe government-introduced
legislation to implement theseprinciples and recommendations.
During Fraser's term,intransigent state

(43:00):
administrators had ampleopportunity to obstruct the land
rights agenda In SouthAustralia, the pioneer for land
rights nationally, successiveLabor and Liberal governments
proved willing and able toimplement much of the Woodward
Royal vision, new South Walestook a different path in its
legislation of statutory landrights.

(43:25):
I've written about thisextensively and I'll just
briefly cover off on that.
By 1983 the New South Walesgovernment, really in response
to incredible activism for landrights in New South Wales that
had been long in the making, itblossomed with the establishment
of the timber embassy and as aresistance grew to the

(43:45):
revocation of Aboriginalreserves.
By 1978, there was anannouncement of an inquiry into
land rights.
This reported in 1980 andsubsequently watered down
through green papers and cabinetprocesses.
The once radical proposal forland rights in New South Wales
was met with significantresistance from Aboriginal
activists.

(44:05):
For land rights in New SouthWales was met with significant
resistance from Aboriginalactivists when finally enacted.
The New South Wales AboriginalLand Rights Act was an
innovative departure from theWoodward model adapted to the
very different circumstancesfacing Aboriginal people in New
South Wales.
One of those features was thecompensation fund In Victoria.
The compensation fund InVictoria the Labor government

(44:27):
was returned to after 27 years.
In March 1983, the Victoriangovernment introduced the
Aboriginal land claims bill.
It was ultimately unsuccessful.
They didn't have the numbersand there was opposition to the
framing of those laws.
Instead, five highly specificacts were passed that each
transferred parcels of land toAboriginal community control.

(44:50):
A systemic land claims processwas not reconsidered in Victoria
for several decades to come.
By the end of Fraser's thirdterm in 1983, the limits of his
new federalism were evident whenit came to Aboriginal land
rights.
While the Commonwealth hadadvanced land rights in the
Northern Territory, little hadbeen achieved elsewhere.

(45:13):
Tasmania, queensland andWestern Australia obstructed the
Liberal Party's land rightspolicy.
They resisted the work of theAboriginal Land Fund Commission
and showed little interest inlegislating land rights.
Any semblance of a nationalapproach to land rights was in
disarray.
As the Labor Governmentprepared to contest the 1980 and

(45:35):
1983 elections, they respondedto the criticism of the Fraser
government's passivity bystrengthening their policy on
national land rights.
The 1982 policy platformcommitted a future Labor
government to grant lands andcompensation to Aboriginal and
Islanders, using the principlesand recommendations of the

(45:55):
Woodwood Royal Port Report.
What was new was not just thepromise of compensation as
advocated by the representativebody at the time, the NACC, some
years earlier, but also thepromised mechanism for achieving
national land rights whenstates were unmoved.

(46:20):
Hawke said he would useCommonwealth constitutional
powers and legislation toachieve these objectives, just
as Whitlam had promised in 1977.
After winning the 1983 election,the Hawke Labor Government
faced the challenging task ofdelivering on this promise.
A new Minister for AboriginalAffairs, clyde Holding, resolved
to draft any legislation incollaboration with Aboriginal

(46:42):
groups, particularly the NAC,and only to take it to
Parliament with their approval.
Holding intended to pressurestate governments into enacting
similar land rights laws and ifthey failed to legislate, the
Commonwealth would overridetheir authority.
Holding's brinkmanship in landrights policy stood in contrast
to Prime Minister Hawke'sapproach, who was rapidly

(47:04):
backpedalling.
He described this as practicalreconciliation with federalism.
Hawke was now preferring acooperative, consensual federal
model rather than seeing acentralist role for the
Commonwealth primarily as apragmatic strategy.
I'm going to move through thisquickly, but some of the key

(47:25):
points were that, faced withpressure from the Western
Australian mining lobby,conflict among Labor factions
and polling in Western Australiasuggesting that land rights was
now unpopular, hawkeunilaterally decided in October
1984 to remove the Aboriginalveto power over mining from
Labor policy.

(47:45):
He didn't discuss the matterwith Aboriginal interests or
even his Minister for AboriginalAffairs.
With the Labor Party headingtowards an early election in
December, neither Holding norhis Aboriginal advisors were
able to advance the WoodwardLand Rights Agenda by the end of
1984, the Labor Agenda ofReform National Land Rights was
in tatters, not fully abandoned.
It was never abandoned, it justreached a stalemate by February

(48:10):
1986.
The mining lobby were unable tosecure their interests and
Aboriginal groups were unable toadvance the national land
rights legislation.
Crucially, what emerges here isthat the judiciary once again
becomes a focus for activism andland restitution in the absence

(48:30):
of any adequate response on thepart of the federal government.
And their plan in 1981 and 82to issue what were referred to
as doggots over formerIndigenous reserves catalyzed

(48:51):
the preparation of a new legalchallenge to settler
dispossession, known as the Mabocase.
Litigants were successful inoverturning the myth at the time
of colonisation Australia wasterra nullius, or land belonging
to no one.
Nullius, or land belonging tono one.

(49:12):
The High Court's decision actedin its familiar role as
centraliser in the Australianfederal system.
The Keating government wasfinally drawn into legislating a
national response todispossession, to the
dispossession of Aboriginal land, two decades after the election
of Whitlam.
But its response was reformistrather than revolutionary,
falling far short of theprinciples in the Woodward Royal
Commission.

(49:32):
Since Howard, no Commonwealthgovernment has pursued any
substantive agenda on landrights or native title Dreams of
national land rights along thelines of the Woodward principle
are long forgotten andgovernments have shown little
appetite to change the statutoryframework for native title
enacted in the native title Act,despite numerous reviews

(49:53):
suggesting that reform isnecessary.
Indeed, it has been left tostate governments and respect
with respect to native title,the courts to provide solutions
to indigenous land issues, someinnovative and some less so.
In Tasmania, in 1995, landRights Act was passed that saw
the transfer of land, and inVictoria and in WA, different

(50:18):
processes have been negotiatedthat emphasise settlement over
broad geographic, nation-basedmostly footprints.
Over broad geographic,nation-based, mostly footprints.
And this is my last two slidesLand rights at the state level
were contingent of politicaldynamics, demonstrating how the
varying stances of Commonwealthand state governments on land

(50:40):
rights and federal-staterelations have led to a
patchwork of land rights acrossAustralia.
The two maps that I'm showinghere illustrate this patchwork
of outcomes.
This is not just a story of thepolitical machinations, but
what we can see.
These outcomes, using examplesof tenure and veto rights over

(51:03):
mining extraction, demonstratethe hugely varied outcomes of
land rights across the country.
So here you can see land tenure, alienability and native title
recognition.
In this next slide you can seethis organisation by type of
mineral extraction and vetorights enjoyed by landholders by

(51:27):
type of mineral extraction andveto rights enjoyed by
landholders.
That's my last slide, but I'lljust conclude by saying land
rights recognition in Australiathis is what I've argued here.
This is what we developed inthe paper is an outcome of
shifting state Commonwealthrelations within the Australian
Federation.
This has led to a hugely variedand spatially uneven set of
legislative land rights regimesacross Australia and it places

(51:50):
the onus on Indigenous peoplesto work to advance their rights
and interests in the absence ofagreed national standards or
leadership from the CommonwealthGovernment.
This is an area where change isreally needed.
Thank you.

Speaker 4 (52:12):
Finally, we are joined by Linda June Coe, who is
a proud Wiradjuri and TorresStrait Islander woman activist,
academic and PhD candidate atMacquarie University From Rambi
Cowra, New South Wales.
Linda hails from a strongfamily and kinship system of
warriors on both her maternaland paternal bloodlines.
Linda June's grandparents, Lesand Agnes, were Wiradjuri

(52:32):
trailblazers, and her father,aunties and uncles are renowned
activists who have contributedto the defence of Indigenous
land, people, place and futures.
Linda June is a passionateadvocate for justice,
self-determination andrevitalising Indigenous
governance as practice, Havinginitiated and co-created the
Wiradjuri Booyah Law Council in2018 and for over two decades,

(52:55):
Linda has also organised suchnational campaigns as Black
Lives Matter, Water is Life,Climate Action, Stop Aboriginal
Deaths in Custody and Stop theForced Removal of Aboriginal
Children, whilst remainingactive in condemning
institutionalised systemicracism on all fronts in the
settler colonial project knownas Australia.
Linda believes that Indigenousliberation is embodied by the

(53:17):
concept of Indigenoussovereignty and is reaffirmed by
an operationalised and defiantWiradjuri nation-led resurgence.

Speaker 5 (53:27):
Good evening everyone .
Just a quick disclaimer I amwearing gumboots, so if I appear
to be standing awkward it'sbecause I am standing awkwardly.
I am Linda June Coe, a proudWiradjuri and Butta Lug woman
from Orambi, also known as 32Acres, an Aboriginal reserve
situated three kilometres southof the township known as Cow

(53:49):
here in New South Wales.
I'll just quickly mention aswell I'm an ex-student of
Professor John Maynard and it'san honour and a privilege to be
here speaking after him,professor Heidi as well.
They're both very hard acts tofollow.
The theme Aboriginal politicalhistories has a deep and

(54:12):
profound meaning in my life asan Indigenous activist in this
present moment.
Aboriginal political historieshave shaped my identity,
education and growth as anIndigenous woman belonging to a
family and community who havetrailblazed and contributed to
the outright rejection of whitesupremacy, settler colonialism
and the illegal occupation ofour lands.

(54:32):
This year is a significant yearfor the Wiradjuri Nation, as we
commemorate 200 years since theBritish Empire declared martial
law upon our people in what isnow known as the Bathurst Wars.
As a child growing up in mycountry, I was raised with
stories of a mighty Wiradjuriresistance, led by our warrior

(54:53):
Windredoyne, who organised thefirst line of defence against
the invaders into Wiradjuriterritory, windredoyne led
counter-strike attacks againstthe British, deploying guerrilla
warfare and using the bush tooutmanoeuvre the enemy into
highly condensed areas and thenattacking with spears and
boomerangs in close combat.
However, windredine knew thisspear was no match for the white

(55:16):
men's gun.
After four months resisting adeclared and open genocide,
windredine and his warriorswalked to Parramatta to commence
peace talks with GovernorThomas Brisbane on the 28th of
December 1824.
That peace never came and 200years later the Wiradjuri
remember.
Since the time of the frontierwars, indigenous resistance has

(55:39):
prevailed against a ruthlessregime of settler colonial
elimination in an ongoingattempt to retain this continent
of stolen land.
Indigenous resistance today isa fight back story, using
intergenerational methods ofmovement building, deployed by
contemporary forms of activismand protest, to ensure lands,
indigenous lands, lives and lifeways remain intact, remain

(56:01):
present and driven by ourinherent birthright to exist
freely, just as our ancestorshave done since time immemorial.
For this presentation and Iapologise, I haven't pulled
together a PowerPoint, sorry Idiscussed the period of
Aboriginal activism and protestof the 1960s and 70s, and one
particular event being awatershed moment in the

(56:22):
advancement of Indigenous landrights in this country the
Aboriginal Ten Embassy.
I also explored the lastingimpact and influence of this era
from the political position ofan Indigenous sovereign refusal
which has sustained a growingmobilisation to challenge,
reshape and make meaning of thedate of 26th of January,
celebrated nationally asAustralia Day, the date of

(56:44):
invasion.
The era of the 1960s saw asignificant rise in Indigenous
political activism whichcontested the legality of
settler colonial occupation andits institutions.
Inspiration was encouraged byadopting language and approaches
from the plight of otherIndigenous and black people
around the globe, particularlythe United States, the American

(57:05):
Civil Rights Movement, theAmerican Indian Movement and the
Black Power Movement.
The international blackstruggle particularly
represented in core four civiland equal rights and political,
economic and social rights.
The indigenous articulation ofthis in the context of Australia
was the need for uprising andwhat became a unification of the
indigenous cause to agitateagainst oppression, the denial

(57:28):
of culture and rights to land.
Indigenous led campaigns suchas the 1965 Freedom Ride in New
South Wales, the Yirrkala Barkpetition and the Gurindji
Walk-off at Wave Hill in theNorthern Territory, along with
the promise for social change ofthe 1967 referendum.
Political consciousness in theactions which occurred
throughout this period definedthe agenda of Indigenous

(57:49):
sovereignty, land rights andself-determination like no other
time before.
By the time the 1970s arrived,the Black Power Movement had
been established in Redfern,known as the Black Caucus.
This group was made up of youngIndigenous activists at the
time, including Lynne and PeterThompson, billy Craigie, gary
Williams, gary Foley, tonyCurrie and my dad's older

(58:12):
siblings, uncle Paul and AuntyIsabel Coe.
On the night of January 25th1972, four Aboriginal men in
Redfern Tony Currie, billyCraigie, bertie Williams and
Michael Anderson travelled toCanberra to protest against the
Prime Minister William McMahon'sAustralia Day statement.
Mcmahon in his address statedthat there would be no
Aboriginal land rights andinstead introduced 50-year

(58:33):
general purpose leases in theNorthern Territory to favour
mining companies.
The Nabalco mine in the gove,which the Yokala people had been
opposing, was given approval,citing national interest.
The following day the nationwoke up to the news that four
Aboriginal men were sitting onthe lawns of Parliament House
underneath a beach umbrellaholding a placard reading

(58:53):
Aboriginal Embassy Arguably theten embassy was established to
protest the very meaning andconstruct of Australia and
became a creative vehicle forpolitical dissent on the premise
that Indigenous people hadnever acquiesced their rights to
land in the first place.
A young Uncle Paul, who was anincredibly astute lawyer at the
time and a fiery and passionateAunty Isabel were amongst these

(59:18):
radicals who became instrumentalin launching the unfinished
business of an unseatedIndigenous occupation into the
national and global politicalarena.
On the 7th of February 1972, aninvitation was sent to the
opposition leader Gough Whitlamby Indigenous activists of the

(59:40):
Ten Embassy.
Whitlam accepted the invitationquickly and attended the
encampment the following day.
Uncle Paul had previouslychallenged Whitlam, who
expressed a profound lack ofconfidence in the Aboriginal
Affairs Policy of the AustralianLabor Party, and a meeting
occurred between the two partiesand, as Gary Foley recalls,
whitlam walked out of thatmeeting and promised land rights
to the protesters.
And, as they say, the rest ishistory.
By December that year theWhitlam Government came into

(01:00:03):
power and the Aboriginal LandRights Act Northern Territory
was passed in the AustralianParliament in December 1976.
However, the surge of Indigenousagency had achieved greater
advancement in the pursuit ofself-determination long before
Whitlam promised land rights.
In inner city Sydney, in thesuburb of Redfern, between the
collaboration of Indigenousintelligence, white

(01:00:24):
professionals and student allygroups, the first Aboriginal
community controlledorganisations were established
in the country, such as theAboriginal Legal and Medical
Service and the breakfastprogram which later became
Murrawena Preschool, a lastingtestimony of the defiance and
strength of Indigenous activismand non-Indigenous solidarity at
that time but, more importantly, the sheer determination and

(01:00:45):
willpower of these youngblackfellas to gain Aboriginal
control over Aboriginal affairs.
Fifty years on since the launchof the Aboriginal Ten Embassy
protests in Canberra, thelessons of the generations
before us, dating right back tothe 1938 Day of Mourning
protests, have been well taughtto our young people of today and
have willingly stepped up tothe cause of anti-colonial

(01:01:07):
disruption.
The 26th of January remains aheavily contested site and
provides an analysis of colonialdomination and the quest for
indigenous liberation.
And what is a commemoration oftwo very opposing positions.
The celebration of the birth ofa settler colonial nation or
the condemnation of indigenousdispossession and calls for

(01:01:27):
justice remains a confrontingdiscourse that circulates every
year in the lead up to the day.
How the national landscapenamed as Australia became a
white possession lands at thefeet of Indigenous activists,
allies and supporters whogalvanise the power of
solidarity to accrue a nationalday of protest, reaching what is
becoming an unparallelednational mobilisation for

(01:01:49):
Indigenous rights, withattendance numbers increasing
every year.
Indigenous blockades to thesystem of white supremacy, which
has contained our displacementand entanglement within Western
colonial paradigms, continues tobe fought against by people in
Penn, using various technologies, creativities and agency to
challenge the status quo.
Indigenous sovereign refusalinsists on withdrawing from

(01:02:12):
destructive politics ofreconciliation and recognition,
without meaningful pathways forestablishing shared power, the
repossession of land andaccountability frameworks into
the Australian polity.
Indigenous resurgence andsovereign refusal instead shifts
our focus to dismantling powerand disrupting the industries

(01:02:32):
which profit from Indigenoussuffering, while simultaneously
renewing Indigenousrelationality and Indigenous
nationhood between people andland and their regeneration of
cultural land-based practices.
To reimagine Indigenous lifeworlds without the boot of the
coloniser in our throats, but tobe free to belong and free to

(01:02:54):
roam these ancient lands whilstparticipating in a society that
no longer feasts on our demiseIn 2024,.
Indigenous protests on 26January continues to challenge
how and why Australia celebratesits day of birth, but
fundamentally challenges settlerclaims to sovereignty, a claim
produced by military force, notby conquest or by consent.

(01:03:18):
Australia's public standoffwith its national day continues
to present a surging need forchange, with prominent actions
occurring at the localgovernment level.
As political discourse on astate and national scale
maintains a tight grip on theconservative views and narrative
of patriotism, the meaning andpurpose of Australia Day is
received with further scrutinyas local government areas

(01:03:40):
throughout the country addweight to the debate.
They have done so by seekingalternative ways to observe the
date with an approach that isinclusive and sensitive to what
26 January represents toIndigenous people living within
those areas, with many nowquestioning is Australia Day a

(01:04:03):
day to celebrate at all?
For instance, in 2016, the Cityof Fremantle in Western
Australia decided to change itsdate of national celebration to
28th of January and receivedheavy public backlash and were
condemned by political leadersat the time.
More recently, in 2023, here onGadigal land, sydney's Inner
West Council voted to moveannual Australia Day

(01:04:25):
celebrations to 25th of January,becoming the first NSW Council
to acknowledge the controversysurrounding the date, a move
which has sparked hope in theminds of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander people postreferendum, as the quest for
justice is retained by thepolitical will of localised,

(01:04:46):
place-based movements to addressthe looming divide which the
day represents.
And I draw on a quote fromNayuka Gori, who reminds us that
every day is Invasion Day inthe colony it is not the date,
it is the sentiment.
It is not the date, it is theblack genocide that birthed the
white nation.
Another recent move by giantretailers, kmart and Woolworths

(01:05:06):
to no longer stock.
Australia Day merchandiseprovides the possibilities of
Indigenous solidarity movementsby withdrawing their
participation.
A stark indicator of the timesand the trajectory of Indigenous
activism's impact on societaland political change in the 21st
century.
Over the course of the past 50years, from the TEN Embassy to
now, indigenous protests havelit fires right across this

(01:05:32):
continent.
The 26th of January serves as areminder of our people's
resilience and an enduring lovefor our culture, community and
country.
The emergence of the logics ofan Indigenous sovereign refusal
remains true to who we are as apeople, consistent with our own
political identities andautonomies over our minds,
bodies, spirits and lands, forthey are interwoven.
We are this land.

(01:05:53):
We are the first people and thefirst law.
Two centuries of history makingthe colonial logic to eradicate
the indigenous out of ourbeings has failed drastically,
with the plight for justice andindigenous reckoning made
stronger with each black babyborn.
The fire will keep burning.
My final comments as I wrap up.
I must give acknowledgement tothe power and presence of the

(01:06:17):
Indigenous matriarchy, for it isthe Indigenous matriarchy who
laid the foundations for themovements of today, the
matriarchs who birthed warriorsand activists in our communities
and are the backbone to eachand every single one of those
communities.
Right across this country, itis the Indigenous matriarchy who
continues to activate thewarrior spirit inside of all of
us.
From Burlew to Nam, to Mianjinto Gadigal, indigenous women

(01:06:41):
remain the vanguard ofIndigenous futures, a future
where our children are not justsurviving but thriving in
indigenous identities, languagesand cultures.
A future where the land isreturned and revitalised to
optimal health, a future that isbeing written at this very
moment for the history books oftomorrow.
And I end this evening bysending my solidarity to the

(01:07:02):
people of Palestine and that oneday my all indigenous and
oppressed people be free fromviolence, tyranny and structures
of power until liberation fromGadigal to Gaza.
Free Palestine, thank you,thank you.

Speaker 4 (01:07:23):
Wow, what a night.
Thank you to all our amazingspeakers.
We have heard from EmeritusProfessor John Maynard about
Fred Maynard and Tom Lacey'sleadership in a united call for
land rights.
We have heard from ProfessorHeidi Norman about the
government's response to thecall for land rights and
activism that birthed theAboriginal Tent Embassy, which

(01:07:45):
is, I believe, the world'slongest running continual
protest, which is a fabulousthing to be known for.
We've also heard from Heidi andLinda June about this activism,
which in part motivated theRedfern community and their
establishment of the AboriginalLegal Service and the Aboriginal
Medical Service, which Paul Coeplayed a huge role.

(01:08:07):
So it's really exciting to havethis line-up of speakers that
have flowed so well andbeautifully into one another,
and for now we will go toquestion time and the audio
recording will be stopped ifanybody would like to formulate
a question while our panel comesto the front.

Speaker 2 (01:08:26):
As always, history Council would like to
acknowledge our culturalpartners which allow us to exist
, including our major funder,new South Wales Government, via
Create New South Wales.
And finally, a very, very quicksneak peek to the next three
History Now events.
They will all be crackers.
Yes, you're welcome to take aseat.

(01:08:47):
So, june 5, in this space, hereat 5pm.
Histories of Mental Health.
This is held in conjunctionwith the University of
Newcastle's Future of MadnessNetwork, with Catherine Colbourn
and Jamie Dunk.
On the 31st of July, we have anunusual event it's online only
because all three of our fourspeakers are overseas.

(01:09:11):
So Lorena Allum, dirk Moses andUmut Kurt on truth telling and
histories of genocide onlineonly Now because I was combining
four time zones.
It's on an unusual time.
You can attend in pyjamas withhot chocolate at 9pm Eastern
Standard Time on the 31st ofJuly 2024.

(01:09:34):
But it'll be amazing, so pleasedo attend.
And then, on the 7th of August,transnational Design Histories
with Livia Rezende and IsabelRousset.
Thank you so much for being awonderful audience and thank you
for your patience with thedelayed start.
I think we made the time verywell, and happy May Day
no-transcript.