I was at QandA audience tonight. Here's what I was thinking: Prof Megan Davis is a Member of the Referendum Council and Chair of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. In the Griffith Review, Professor Davis outlined the long road to the Uluru Statement. 1/
-
-
Prof Davis writes: ‘I had spent a year urging those involved in the dialogues to suspend their disbelief that the system could not reform. Law reform, I said, was about imagination and imagining the world can be a better place. The law can oppress and the law can redeem. - 4/
Show this thread -
- 'The participants in the dialogues put their faith in us to deliver a fair and robust reform proposal to government.’ - Prof Davis
#UluruStatement was gifted to the Australian people, not to politicians, but it is politicians who are holding up the process of truth-telling. 5/Show this thread -
With all the history & *good faith* that led to the dialogues, is it moral, just and good governance for non-Indigenous leaders to justify another drawn out process for change; or is public funding and dialogue not better spent on simply implementing Voice, Treaty, Truth? 6/end
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.