Victoria's Treaty Act: A Political Catastrophe in the Making, By James Reed
Janet Albrechtsen has delivered a surgical dissection of Victoria's Statewide Treaty Act, exposing it as a radical overhaul of democratic governance that was rushed through under the guise of feel-good reconciliation. She's absolutely right: this isn't just another symbolic gesture, it's a political disaster that fractures the state into parallel systems of power, erodes accountability, and diminishes the rights of non-Indigenous Victorians. Far from advancing self-determination in a fair or functional way, the Act creates a quasi-sovereign entity ripe for abuse, all while imposing burdensome obligations on the rest of society. Victorians, and indeed all Australians, should be alarmed.
Parallel Sovereignties: Separatism by Design
The Act's core achievement is the creation of Gellung Warl, an Indigenous governing body with its own "substantive rules," executive authority, and independence from state oversight. As Albrechtsen notes, self-determination, heralded in the preamble, Section 2, and throughout the legislation, was always code for separatism. Gellung Warl isn't a consultative advisory group; it's a parallel government for Indigenous Victorians, complete with laws that can differ from those applying to everyone else.
Section 31 empowers Gellung Warl to craft rules that "confer powers or discretions or impose duties" on individuals or bodies. These need only avoid direct inconsistency with Victorian statutes (Section 34), leaving vast room for novel, additional regulations. Tie this to the Act's alignment with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, a document so extreme that even federal Labor balked at incorporating it in 2023, and the potential scope explodes. We're talking about a separate legal realm, not mere cultural accommodations.
Safeguards like parliamentary disallowance exist on paper, but as Albrechtsen astutely observes, invoking them would ignite a political inferno. This isn't oversight; it's window-dressing for intentional partition. Victoria now operates under "one state, two systems," where Indigenous governance runs supreme in its sphere, free from the Westminster traditions that bind the rest of us.
Accountability Vacuum: A Racket in Waiting
If separatism is the Act's first sin, its second is the deliberate gutting of accountability for Gellung Warl. The body is explicitly "independent from the State Government" and accountable only to First Peoples, per the explanatory memorandum. No ministerial direction, no standard democratic controls.
Worse, "cultural safety guidelines" (Sections 51 and Schedule 3) allow Gellung Warl, via the First Peoples' Assembly, to define and enforce what counts as culturally safe interaction with oversight bodies like IBAC, the Ombudsman, and the Auditor-General. These integrity institutions must now consult the very entities they police, compromising their independence. Imagine a corporation dictating the terms under which anticorruption watchdogs can investigate it, the outrage would be deafening. Yet here, it's baked in.
Freedom of Information amendments (Part 11) create a two-tier information system: normal transparency for standard matters, but "culturally sensitive or secret" data shielded at Gellung Warl's (or a third party's) discretion. Echoes of the Hindmarsh Island affair abound, where claims of secrecy derailed development and scrutiny.
Albrechtsen invokes Noel Pearson's "soft bigotry of low expectations," and she's spot-on. This isn't empowerment; it's a license for unaccountable power. Gellung Warl risks becoming ATSIC 2.0 on steroids, an under-regulated behemoth where mismanagement thrives, ultimately failing the disadvantaged Indigenous people it claims to serve. True self-determination demands responsibility, not exemption.
Diminishing Non-Indigenous Rights: Voice 2.0 on Steroids
The Act doesn't just elevate one group; it actively curtails the sovereignty of everyone else. Every bill in Parliament requires a "treaty compatibility" statement (Section 66), and Gellung Warl gains sweeping rights to intervene on matters "of interest to First Peoples" (Section 83), not just those directly impacting Indigenous Victorians.
Parts 7 and 8 mandate consultations, submissions, and reviews that could bog down government for years. Non-compliance might not invalidate actions, but the lawfare potential is enormous: endless delays, legal challenges, and ransom demands. This is the Voice referendum's rejected model, resurrected and amplified at the state level. Non-Indigenous Victorians become second-class citizens, their democratic input diluted by preferential access for Gellung Warl.
The ripple effects extend beyond Victoria. Funding agreements with the Commonwealth could fall under Gellung Warl's influence, and plans to extinguish place names signal cultural erasure under the banner of progress.
Truth-Telling: "My Truth" Over Facts
Then there's Nyerna Yoorrook Telkuna, the "truth-telling" arm. Section 120 declares it "self-determined by First Peoples" and "non-judicial," code for subjective narratives, not verifiable history. Embedding this in school curriculums risks indoctrinating children with partisan "my truth" rather than balanced facts. Democracy thrives on shared reality, not siloed versions.
Undemocratic Representation: Lore Over Equality
Finally, Gellung Warl's electoral model (Part 6, Section 54) prioritises "Aboriginal Lore, Law and Cultural Authority" over universal suffrage. This isn't "one person, one vote"; it's a nod to traditional structures that could entrench elites, ignoring modern issues like gender-based violence in some communities. Equality of citizenship? Evidently not a priority for the Act's architects.
A Recipe for Division and Dysfunction
Victoria's Treaty Act is a political catastrophe: it engineers separatism, evades accountability, burdens the majority, and undermines democracy, all while masquerading as reconciliation. Albrechtsen warned that close reading repays in spades, and the text confirms her fears. This isn't progress; it's a whirlwind of unintended (or perhaps fully intended) consequences that will haunt the state for generations. If self-determination is the goal, it must come with equal rigor, transparency, and unity, not this divisive, amateurish partition. Victorians deserve better; Australia demands repeal before the damage becomes irreversible.
Comments