Early in the night at the 2018 Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras party, DJ Gemma dropped the Yothu Yindi classic 'Treaty'. All around me the mostly non-Indigenous crowd responded to the driving beats, the unmistakeable sound of the yidaki, and the call of the late M. Yunipingu's distinctive voice.
The dance floor surged with energy. A friend later commented he'd forgotten how much the track was 'an absolute banger'.
More than a banger though, the 1991 track remains a political anthem, speaking of unceded sovereignty and calling for settler politicians to honour their commitments to treat with Australian First Nations. It is a song of deep political significance to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and, as was evident on the Mardi Gras dancefloor, it also moves something in non-Indigenous Australians — and not just their feet.
The negotiation of a treaty or treaties with the Australian state has long been an aspiration for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. For many progressive Australians too, the lack of any formal political agreements with Indigenous peoples is an injustice and an embarrassment that they would like to see rectified.
Some non-Indigenous supporters of treaty negotiations are only now coming to this position, developing new understanding through the failed campaign to 'recognise' Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Australian Constitution, and through the position on truth-telling and agreement-making advanced in the 2017 Uluru Statement — the one-year anniversary of which we mark on 27 May.
Others, however, have supported the call for treaty/ies since at least the Treaty '88 campaign and the Hawke government's commitment to negotiating a national treaty after receiving the Barunga Statement. Hawke's backdown on this commitment — with the formal reconciliation process offered as compensation — paved the way for John Howard's definitive rejection of treaty in his claim that 'A unified nation cannot make a treaty with itself.' Such political equivocation — and downright colonialism — remains a source of shame for many.
Both longterm supporters and newcomers to the debate want to address this shame. As the 1992 Mabo case established once and for all, the Australian continent was never terra nullius. The legitimacy of the colonial project on this territory was in question from day one, as both James Cook and Arthur Phillip ignored orders from their king that they take possession of the land only 'with the consent of the natives' (Cook), and 'conciliate their affections, enjoining