5 Debunked Claims from Jacinta Price’s National Press Club Address

The Controversial Claims of Jacinta Nampijinpa Price

In a recent address to the National Press Club, Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, the shadow Indigenous Australians minister, made several controversial claims regarding the voice to parliament and the ongoing impact of British colonization on Indigenous Australians. These statements have sparked a heated debate and drawn criticism from various quarters. Let’s unpack some of the key claims made by Nampijinpa Price and examine their validity.

The Power of the Voice

Nampijinpa Price expressed concerns about the power of the proposed Indigenous voice, suggesting that it would act primarily as a lobby group for the interests of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, rather than serving the interests of the government or the nation as a whole. However, the legal advice of federal solicitor general Stephen Donaghue contradicts this assertion. According to Donaghue, the voice’s representations to the parliament would have to be on matters with a sufficient connection to Indigenous people. The voice would not have the power to impose obligations on the executive or veto parliamentary decisions. The influence of the voice’s representations would be determined by political considerations, not legal ones.

Donaghue’s legal opinion also emphasizes that the voice would enhance Australia’s system of government by overcoming historical barriers to effective participation by Indigenous peoples. It would rectify existing distortions and promote greater equity. These conclusions challenge Nampijinpa Price’s claim that the voice would primarily serve narrow interests.

The Composition of the Voice

Nampijinpa Price raised concerns about the composition of the voice, suggesting that the government is uncertain about how it would be constituted and that promises regarding gender and youth representation are not guaranteed. However, the proposed constitutional amendment clearly provides the parliament with the power to make laws regarding the voice’s composition, functions, powers, and procedures. This means that the current parliament, including Nampijinpa Price herself and other politicians, would be responsible for setting the rules for the first iteration of the voice. Future governments would also have the ability to update these rules as they see fit. Nampijinpa Price’s claim that the government is unsure or unable to fulfill its promises regarding the voice’s composition is misleading.

Colonization and its Impacts

Nampijinpa Price’s most controversial claim was that British colonization had no ongoing negative impacts on Indigenous Australians. This assertion flies in the face of overwhelming evidence and the lived experiences of Indigenous communities. Numerous reports, including one by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, have documented the devastating impact of colonization on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and culture. Colonization brought violence, disease, forced removals, and the occupation of Indigenous lands. It has resulted in ongoing disparities and inter-generational trauma for Indigenous peoples.

Price’s claim that colonization had a positive impact and that Indigenous people now have access to running water and readily available food ignores the complex realities faced by these communities. It fails to acknowledge the ongoing challenges and systemic disadvantages that persist as a result of colonization.

The Way Forward

The controversy surrounding Nampijinpa Price’s claims highlights the need for a nuanced and respectful dialogue on Indigenous issues. It is essential to listen to and amplify the voices of Indigenous communities, including those who hold different perspectives. However, it is also crucial to critically examine and challenge assertions that contradict well-established facts and lived experiences.

As Australia grapples with the prospect of a referendum on the voice to parliament, it is crucial to approach the issue with an open mind and engage in honest and informed discussions. Understanding the power, composition, and impact of the voice is vital to ensure that any constitutional changes accurately reflect the aspirations and needs of Indigenous Australians.

While disagreements and controversies around Indigenous affairs will undoubtedly continue, it is crucial that we prioritize respectful dialogue, acknowledge historical injustices, and work towards creating a more equitable and inclusive future for all Australians.