First Nations Voices: Eliza Salvatori

Eliza Salvatori is a Saltwater Yuin woman who spent much of her childhood on Bundjalung Country in the Northern Rivers region. She’s also got a particular interest in rivers and how First Nations people can be more involved in their custodianship of water. As well as working for ABSTARR consulting, Eliza is an Uluru Youth Ambassador and has co-founded her own initiative called ‘The Voice Project’ which you can check out here.

RTNR: Hi Eliza, thanks for having a chat! To kick off, what’s your favourite line from the Uluru Statement?

Eliza: “When we have power over our destiny our children will flourish. We will walk in two worlds and their culture will be a gift to their country.” 

RTNR: Do you support the referendum for a Voice to Parliament? Why/why not?

Eliza: Yes, I support the Voice to Parliament and will be voting yes in the referendum because I’m voting on a principle that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Elders and communities have advocated for and pushed for so many years. The Voice is not a new idea or concept. Aboriginal leaders, such as Charlie Perkins and Yunupingu and so many others, have been calling for an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice to government and Parliament since at least the 70s, after the 1967 referendum. There have been various iterations of the Voice (like ATSIC) but all of them have been removed and abolished at the hands of a new government or a minor failure. That’s why we need a voice that is constitutionally enshrined - so that it cannot be removed (unless it is through another referendum voted by the people).

Legislation will be made after a YES referendum to design what the voice will look like, and this is important as it allows the Voice to change over time so that it works. At the moment, we don’t have any direct say or representation from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and leaders into government in Canberra. The voices of the people on the ground, especially in rural and remote areas, are rarely heard when designing policies and programs affecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples lives. So how can we ever get policies and programs right? We’re wasting tax dollar money on policies and initiatives that do not align with the needs and priorities of local mob. Something needs to change immediately, and I truly believe the Voice will be the first step towards significant change for mob around the country.

Oh and also - I am voting yes because I am voting on the principle of recognition and coming together, to walk together as the Australian people for a better future. 

RTNR: Is the Voice a positive step towards treaty-making and meaningful truth telling in Australia?

Eliza: The Voice is the first of three reforms called for in the Uluru Statement from the Heart: VOICE, TREATY and TRUTH. The sequencing of these three reforms were deliberate. Elders and leaders at the Uluru Convention in 2017 discussed the sequencing extensively, and came to the conclusion that the Voice to Parliament would enable more effective treaty-making and truth-telling. Treaty and truth have been long-term aspirations for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, but negotiating these with the government is difficult and has not been successful for most communities. 

The Voice to Parliament would create a Makarrata Commission that will support First Nations treaty negotiation with the government, and it will create an institutional relationship between the government and First Nations communities, which will increase the likelihood that treaty negotiations will be peaceful and successful. It is also important to note that treaty negotiations are already happening in some communities. Look at Victoria and the First Peoples Assembly of Victoria for example. Different communities are at different stages of the treaty process, and it may take a long time for some communities to successfully negotiate treaty, but the Voice will help enable and empower communities to begin that process. 

As for truth - truth means understanding and listening to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives of history. Professor Megan Davis and George Williams explain in their book “Everything you need to know about the Voice” that during the regional dialogues, every community emphasised the need for truth telling in Australia. Many made the point that a nation cannot recognise people they do not truly understand. So, to properly recognise First Nations people, we need truth telling. The most common method of truth telling suggested by the people during the dialogues is through the education system. A Voice in Parliament would enable more  conversations and negotiations with the government about how to facilitate truth telling through public systems. 

RTNR: Last time we spoke you said that “If we want to achieve real change and safeguard the health and vitality of our rivers, Indigenous People need to be able to exercise custodianship over rivers and Country.” Do you think the Voice is a mechanism that could help First Nations communities to be more involved in decision making around rivers?

Eliza: This is a good question. I think the Voice will be a step towards more inclusive decision-making around our natural resources. However, it will not solve everything and will not necessarily mean that communities will be listened to all the time. Unfortunately, there is a lot of money and power around Australia’s natural resources, and it is difficult for local communities to engage in fair and meaningful negotiations with extractive corporations and governments due to significant power imbalances.

We are already seeing some changes globally, where international and national regulations, such as heritage protection laws, require large extractive companies to meaningfully negotiate with and engage in agreement making with traditional custodians before they can use land or extract from it. This kind of agreement making between community and extractive resources (i.e. mining giants) has already started in some parts of Australia, such as in the Pilbara in WA. The Voice could be an extension and a further enabler of what is already happening in terms of agreement making and decision-making around our natural resources. 

At the end of the day, I truly believe the Voice is a gift to the Australian people and to the politicians in Canberra. The government will benefit from the generations of knowledge of Indigenous peoples about land management and caring for Country. 

RTNR: What would you like to say to people who say there’s not enough detail in what’s being put to the Australian people?

Eliza: We don’t have all the detail in the Constitution because we need to keep it broad so that the government has the power to dictate what it looks like and how it can change to evolve. This will ensure that no matter what, the Voice will work. It is important to remember that we are voting on a principle, rather than a piece of legislation that requires detail. It is the Parliament’s job to legislate about the operation of the Voice after the referendum. So when you hear: “if you don’t know, vote no” - keep in mind that we don’t need to know all the details. We are voting on whether we think Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people should have a say in Parliament over matters that affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. 

What we do have are Voice design principles created by the First Nations Referendum Working Group to give guidance on what the Voice will look like after the referendum. These design principles have been supported and endorsed by the government. For example, the Voice will give independent advice, it will be chosen by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, it will have specific remote and mainland representation. The more granular details - such as how representatives are elected - will be decided after the referendum. There will be a consultation process with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, the Parliament and the broader public to settle the Voice design. Legislation to establish the Voice will then go through standard parliamentary processes to ensure adequate scrutiny by elected representatives in both houses of Parliament. 

RTNR: Do you think that in the discussions about the practical side of the Voice to parliament, which are obviously important to have, people have forgotten about the symbol of unity that this referendum represents?

Eliza: When the Uluru Youth Ambassadors got together to launch the youth ambassadors for the Voice, we talked in detail about what the Voice represents and what has been called for in the Uluru Statement from the Heart. At its core is an invitation to come together, to walk together as Australian people for a better future that includes and centres Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices. This idea to walk towards a more unified country has been somewhat lost in the misinformation and disinformation that’s out there and the no campaign’s “if you don’t know vote no” agenda. 

Allira and Bridget, the co-chairs for youth dialogues, with the support of Aunty Pat and Prof Megan Davis, reminded us that we need to bring it back to the ground, to our own communities and to the Elders and leaders that created the Uluru Statement from the Heart. In my conversations with people who are concerned about the details and the practical side of the Voice, I prompt them to read the Uluru Statement from the Heart and then read the proposed addition to the Constitution, and remember that we are voting on a principle, rather than a piece of legislation that requires practical detail. And I think this helps ground people in what is being asked for: a unified Australia. 

RTNR: Regardless of how people choose to vote, what’s one thing everyone should do ahead of the referendum?

Read the Uluru Statement from the Heart. 

 –––––––––––––––––––

Eliza: To finish I’d like to share a story that I heard from Aunty Pat Anderson because I think it shows the relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal Australians and why we need a Voice:

An Aboriginal man was sitting on his out station out bush in his community out Kakadu way. A local worker who was visiting the town asked the old man if he needed anything from town while he was gone. He asked the local worker to bring a packet of tomato seeds so that they could grow tomatoes. The local worker says “no worries, next time I come to town, I’ll bring tomato seeds”. A week or so later, a bunch of visitors pull up to the station. There were soil scientists, agronomists and others there to test how to best grow crops and how many acres of land needed to grow a market garden. The old man just sat there watching these visitors until a person came to him and asked if there is anything the man wants. The old man says “oh yes, I’m still waiting for some tomato seeds so we can grow some tomato bushes out here”. 

Aunty Pat told this true story as part of a speech she gave at the National Press Club 22 years ago. The man didn’t ask for a plantation or a market garden. He asked for one packet of tomato seeds. The people didn’t listen to what he asked for. Aunty Pat says this in a nutshell tells the story of the relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in Australia. We have never had a proper say or any control over the issues and decisions that affect us. Money is being spent on us for initiatives, programs and policies that we have not asked for or given input into, and therefore do not work for our communities.