A national declaration of dignity

In different parts of the world and in different ways, life, to quote Thomas Hobbes, is proving ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short’. It is as if society and its ethical foundations have turned to dust. We need only think of Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, or Myanmar to conjure something of the catastrophic suffering that is the lot of tens of millions.

We see entire communities, nations and even whole regions stricken by famine, acute malnutrition, mass displacement, the spread of disease and epidemics and health emergencies. These are all too often the effects of grinding poverty, exacerbated by the ravages of war and climate change. The causes are numerous, diverse and often interlinked. Oppressive rule and the indifference or incompetence of the powerful and the wealthy are the most obvious.

Simply put, each of these societal ills bears the imprint of human neglect and malfeasance, and is therefore subject to ethical scrutiny. In each case it is important to ask: are these ills the foreseeable consequence of human decisions? Could action have been taken to avert, mitigate or otherwise alleviate the wholesale suffering inflicted on human communities and other sentient beings?

Australia may at first sight seem far removed from such unspeakable human degradation. Most Australians, it is true, lead relatively comfortable lives. But this is not true of everyone. Some 3.2 million Australians live in poverty, including 761,000 children, that is one in six Australian children. These households are struggling with debt, cannot afford to pay their rent or mortgage, or cover their electricity, water and phone bills.

Nor is this all. Today’s Australia is facing a mental health crisis of frightening proportions. One in five 5 Australians suffers from some sort of mental illness every year. Some 45 per cent of Australian adults are affected at some point in their life by anxiety, depression, substance use, or other mental disorders.

Not unrelated is the prevalence of violence. Some 8 million Australians are estimated to experience physical and/or sexual violence after the age of 15. The levels of incarceration are also revealing. As of March 2024, over 43,000 persons were in custody, while 81,081 persons were serving community-based corrections (CBC) orders.

If we turn our gaze to the First Nations, the situation is bleak. More than two hundred years after colonial settlement, the First Nations continue to experience violence and oppression. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people make up 3.8 per cent of Australia’s total population, but account for 32 per cent of its prison population. Other areas of disadvantage include health, education, employment, life expectancy, infant mortality and suicide rates. To this should be added the enduring trauma that is the legacy of invasion, dispossession, assimilation, and the enduring damage to country done by nuclear testing, mining, and agricultural practices.

To complete this brief overview, a word about Australia longstanding addiction to imperial power and military solutions. Australia has been almost continuously at war since 1989. The long line of military engagements include the Boer War, the Boxer Rebellion, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Malayan Emergency, Confrontation with Indonesia, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the Afghanistan War, the Iraq War, and the “war on terror”. And almost every military expedition has been in support of the imperial power, once Britain, now the United States.

'One year after the debacle of the Voice referendum, it may be time for the nation to consider the drafting of a charter or declaration of principles to be arrived at after extensive community consultation.'

This trend has continued unablated under the Albanese government. Relations with China may have stabilised somewhat, but alignment with US strategic interests and priorities has widened and deepened. Containing China has become the subtext for much of Australia’s defence and foreign policy.

Under Labor, we have seen increasingly high levels of interoperability with the US military, a  sprawling US military footprint across northern Australia, rapidly expanding joint military exercises, notably in the South China Sea, and frenetic efforts to ensure the Pacific Islands remain firmly within the US/Australian strategic orbit.

The militarisation of our external relations has inevitably meant an ever larger security apparatus endowed with vastly expanded powers and resources. The budget allocation for defence has ballooned to $55.7 billion, up from $21.7 billion in 2009-2010. ASIO’s budget has risen to $594 million, while the Australian Secret Intelligence Service now has a budget of $701 million.

These trends point to a social and political landscape whose ethical foundations are at best fragile and at worst on the verge of collapse. Decisions on war and peace, climate change, economy, the rights of Indigenous peoples, or the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers are increasingly made by powerful interests and institutions, usually behind closed doors. Less and less are they made in the public square where moral imagination can be freely exercised.

There is no single or simple remedy to this regrettable state of affairs. But one far-reaching first step is worth considering. One year after the debacle of the Voice referendum, it may be time for the nation to consider the drafting of a charter or declaration of principles to be arrived at after extensive community consultation. If subsequently supported in a national plebiscite, the declaration, though not formally part of the constitution, would nevertheless have political and moral force, and could be formally adopted by Parliament.

Such a declaration would begin by acknowledging the colonisation and dispossession of Indigenous people in Australia and the urgent need to establish a new social contract that restores equality and dignity to the relationship.

It would commit to a substantial and ongoing reduction of the gross inequalities of wealth, income and influence that have become a feature of the Australian landscape. It would also  enshrine the principle that one of the highest priorities of government is to satisfy the basic needs of all who reside in this land. Similarly, it would commit to the introduction of a national Human Rights Act that would protect the rights of all people, all of the time.

The proposed statement of principles would place the emphasis not on military alliances or militarised notions of security but on human and ecological security. The overriding commitment would be to protect persons, communities and nature and respect the diverse histories, cultures, and faiths that make up Australia.

This political and cultural reorientation would pave the way for several long overdue initiatives. The first step would be to detach Australia from US strategic interests and priorities. Slavish military alignment has merely served to exacerbate conflicts, deepen sectarian hatreds, and further destabilise already vulnerable societies. A non-aligned Australia would be better placed to support nuclear disarmament, and become a signatory of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

A closely related step would be to apply the principle of international good citizenship to a large and complex set of relationships that have been dangerously neglected. A high priority would be to reengage with and financially support all arms of the UN system, and in concert with like-minded members, actively seek to renew and reform the institution.

The Declaration would also point to the need to recalibrate our relations with Asian neighbours. It is only through active collaboration that we can hope to create a regional framework conducive to conflict prevention, the peaceful settlement of disputes, and humane management of refugee flows.

The Declaration would assert the need for concerted action to repair the damage that poorly regulated economic growth and urbanisation have inflicted on the natural environment, not just climate change but also the loss of biodiversity and degraded ecosystems. On all these fronts, the principle would be firmly established that government performance has to be subjected to regular and wide-ranging parliamentary and public scrutiny.

Even if supported by a substantial majority, a declaration of the kind envisaged here would not be a panacea for all ills. But it could set us on journey to heal the wounds of Indigenous dispossession and colonial violence, and, informed by Indigenous wisdom, overcome the destructive separation of nature and culture. Importantly, it could place the dignity of the human person at the heart of public and professional life and establish an ethical framework that integrates economic needs, environmental values, educational aspirations, and the rich possibilities offered by the dialogue of cultures, religions and civilisations.

Joseph Anthony Camilleri OAM is Professor Emeritus at La Trobe University, Melbourne, where he held the Chair in International Relations and was founding Director of the Centre for Dialogue. He is a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Social Sciences, author of over thirty books, Convener of Conversation at the Crossroads, and Co-Convener of SHAPE (Saving Humanity and Planet Earth).