
The key to ending racism? It's right here in these PMs' speeches
Time is the marker of everything.
In a civic context, we use time to understand what policies, actions, and even words have changed our lives - for the better or worse, or not at all.
This helps us find ways to make our futures safer, healthier, and more just.
I want to find a way to a future free of racism. And, at this point in time, I can't help but think of the words of two prime ministers - in speeches delivered half a century apart.
First, let's go back to this week in June 1975, when Australia enacted the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA). With the White Australia Policy only recently abolished, this was a landmark moment in our history.
It was the first Commonwealth law that focused on human rights and discrimination, setting a new vision for Australian society that sought to shake off the racial segregation that had defined it.
In a speech at the RDA's proclamation, then prime minister Gough Whitlam said our nation must "spell out in enduring form ... the principle that all Australians, whatever their colour, race or creed, are equal before the law and have the same basic rights and opportunities."
But has Whitlam's aspiration to "entrench new attitudes ... in people's hearts and minds" been realised?
The answer is yes and no.
A legislative framework around racial equality has helped shine a spotlight on employers in workplace discrimination cases, provided remedy pathways for people who've experienced racial hatred, even invalidate laws that discriminated against First Nations peoples, such as the famous case of Mabo v Queensland. It also set a precedent for similar anti-discrimination laws around age, sex, and disability that were passed in the years that followed.
Over the past 50 years, we have seen monumental progress in our society, and its shape has changed significantly.
These are achievements to remember, to celebrate.
But, sadly, racism remains entrenched in many parts of our society.
Systems and institutions designed to serve us all are still infected by racist attitudes and practices in place well before the RDA's inception.
Racism continues to affect everyday life. People are confronted with it through verbal attacks or left isolated by policies or practices that disadvantage them.
This includes people with "foreign sounding" names being less likely to be selected for a job interview or having their work more scrutinised than colleagues; over-policing in some communities; and cultural biases within the medical system that can prevent people of colour receiving the same standards of care as everyone else.
First Nations people still suffer the fundamental racism of a denial of self-determination. This has consistently been confirmed by consultation, research, and work led by advocacy groups.
The work of the Australian Human Rights Commission confirms it too.
There is no doubt that urgent reform is needed. And, half a century since Whitlam's address, a speech by another Prime Minister - our current one - touched on what I believe will help drive the solution.
In his election victory speech last month, Anthony Albanese spoke of what he believed were the Australian values the majority of people had voted for.
"For the strength," he said, "to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need".
Courage and kindness.
For me, this has always been at the heart of who are - or who we should aspire to be.
Reform takes courage. It takes kindness. Changing systems and institutions to eliminate racism requires our leaders to take courage.
In November last year, I released the National Anti-Racism Framework, a roadmap for widespread government-led reform to defeat racism in 10 years.
Its 63 recommendations take a whole-of-society approach to eliminating racism, across our legal, justice, health, education, media and arts sectors as well as for businesses.
Courage and kindness could manifest in action by the government supporting these recommendations. This would see the principles of the RDA truly realised.
But after 50 years, the RDA also needs an update. One of the framework's proposed changes is introducing a legal responsibility on employers to proactively prevent racism in the workplace.
Similar to the positive duty under the Sex Discrimination Act, it means taking reasonable steps to eliminate racism, rather than only reacting once a complaint is made.
Kindness is recognising privilege and the advantages bestowed by race.
It means having difficult but respectful conversations, listening to uncomfortable truths without defensiveness, and finding ways to move forward together.
Kindness is one of the greatest examples of strength one could show.
In 50 years' time, when people look back at this moment, I hope it's seen as another landmark moment when we made an active commitment to implementing the framework to eliminate racism.
The moment our leaders and community had the courage to choose dignity, respect and fairness - to ensure we are all truly equal with the same rights and opportunities.
Time is the marker of everything.
In a civic context, we use time to understand what policies, actions, and even words have changed our lives - for the better or worse, or not at all.
This helps us find ways to make our futures safer, healthier, and more just.
I want to find a way to a future free of racism. And, at this point in time, I can't help but think of the words of two prime ministers - in speeches delivered half a century apart.
First, let's go back to this week in June 1975, when Australia enacted the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA). With the White Australia Policy only recently abolished, this was a landmark moment in our history.
It was the first Commonwealth law that focused on human rights and discrimination, setting a new vision for Australian society that sought to shake off the racial segregation that had defined it.
In a speech at the RDA's proclamation, then prime minister Gough Whitlam said our nation must "spell out in enduring form ... the principle that all Australians, whatever their colour, race or creed, are equal before the law and have the same basic rights and opportunities."
But has Whitlam's aspiration to "entrench new attitudes ... in people's hearts and minds" been realised?
The answer is yes and no.
A legislative framework around racial equality has helped shine a spotlight on employers in workplace discrimination cases, provided remedy pathways for people who've experienced racial hatred, even invalidate laws that discriminated against First Nations peoples, such as the famous case of Mabo v Queensland. It also set a precedent for similar anti-discrimination laws around age, sex, and disability that were passed in the years that followed.
Over the past 50 years, we have seen monumental progress in our society, and its shape has changed significantly.
These are achievements to remember, to celebrate.
But, sadly, racism remains entrenched in many parts of our society.
Systems and institutions designed to serve us all are still infected by racist attitudes and practices in place well before the RDA's inception.
Racism continues to affect everyday life. People are confronted with it through verbal attacks or left isolated by policies or practices that disadvantage them.
This includes people with "foreign sounding" names being less likely to be selected for a job interview or having their work more scrutinised than colleagues; over-policing in some communities; and cultural biases within the medical system that can prevent people of colour receiving the same standards of care as everyone else.
First Nations people still suffer the fundamental racism of a denial of self-determination. This has consistently been confirmed by consultation, research, and work led by advocacy groups.
The work of the Australian Human Rights Commission confirms it too.
There is no doubt that urgent reform is needed. And, half a century since Whitlam's address, a speech by another Prime Minister - our current one - touched on what I believe will help drive the solution.
In his election victory speech last month, Anthony Albanese spoke of what he believed were the Australian values the majority of people had voted for.
"For the strength," he said, "to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need".
Courage and kindness.
For me, this has always been at the heart of who are - or who we should aspire to be.
Reform takes courage. It takes kindness. Changing systems and institutions to eliminate racism requires our leaders to take courage.
In November last year, I released the National Anti-Racism Framework, a roadmap for widespread government-led reform to defeat racism in 10 years.
Its 63 recommendations take a whole-of-society approach to eliminating racism, across our legal, justice, health, education, media and arts sectors as well as for businesses.
Courage and kindness could manifest in action by the government supporting these recommendations. This would see the principles of the RDA truly realised.
But after 50 years, the RDA also needs an update. One of the framework's proposed changes is introducing a legal responsibility on employers to proactively prevent racism in the workplace.
Similar to the positive duty under the Sex Discrimination Act, it means taking reasonable steps to eliminate racism, rather than only reacting once a complaint is made.
Kindness is recognising privilege and the advantages bestowed by race.
It means having difficult but respectful conversations, listening to uncomfortable truths without defensiveness, and finding ways to move forward together.
Kindness is one of the greatest examples of strength one could show.
In 50 years' time, when people look back at this moment, I hope it's seen as another landmark moment when we made an active commitment to implementing the framework to eliminate racism.
The moment our leaders and community had the courage to choose dignity, respect and fairness - to ensure we are all truly equal with the same rights and opportunities.
Time is the marker of everything.
In a civic context, we use time to understand what policies, actions, and even words have changed our lives - for the better or worse, or not at all.
This helps us find ways to make our futures safer, healthier, and more just.
I want to find a way to a future free of racism. And, at this point in time, I can't help but think of the words of two prime ministers - in speeches delivered half a century apart.
First, let's go back to this week in June 1975, when Australia enacted the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA). With the White Australia Policy only recently abolished, this was a landmark moment in our history.
It was the first Commonwealth law that focused on human rights and discrimination, setting a new vision for Australian society that sought to shake off the racial segregation that had defined it.
In a speech at the RDA's proclamation, then prime minister Gough Whitlam said our nation must "spell out in enduring form ... the principle that all Australians, whatever their colour, race or creed, are equal before the law and have the same basic rights and opportunities."
But has Whitlam's aspiration to "entrench new attitudes ... in people's hearts and minds" been realised?
The answer is yes and no.
A legislative framework around racial equality has helped shine a spotlight on employers in workplace discrimination cases, provided remedy pathways for people who've experienced racial hatred, even invalidate laws that discriminated against First Nations peoples, such as the famous case of Mabo v Queensland. It also set a precedent for similar anti-discrimination laws around age, sex, and disability that were passed in the years that followed.
Over the past 50 years, we have seen monumental progress in our society, and its shape has changed significantly.
These are achievements to remember, to celebrate.
But, sadly, racism remains entrenched in many parts of our society.
Systems and institutions designed to serve us all are still infected by racist attitudes and practices in place well before the RDA's inception.
Racism continues to affect everyday life. People are confronted with it through verbal attacks or left isolated by policies or practices that disadvantage them.
This includes people with "foreign sounding" names being less likely to be selected for a job interview or having their work more scrutinised than colleagues; over-policing in some communities; and cultural biases within the medical system that can prevent people of colour receiving the same standards of care as everyone else.
First Nations people still suffer the fundamental racism of a denial of self-determination. This has consistently been confirmed by consultation, research, and work led by advocacy groups.
The work of the Australian Human Rights Commission confirms it too.
There is no doubt that urgent reform is needed. And, half a century since Whitlam's address, a speech by another Prime Minister - our current one - touched on what I believe will help drive the solution.
In his election victory speech last month, Anthony Albanese spoke of what he believed were the Australian values the majority of people had voted for.
"For the strength," he said, "to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need".
Courage and kindness.
For me, this has always been at the heart of who are - or who we should aspire to be.
Reform takes courage. It takes kindness. Changing systems and institutions to eliminate racism requires our leaders to take courage.
In November last year, I released the National Anti-Racism Framework, a roadmap for widespread government-led reform to defeat racism in 10 years.
Its 63 recommendations take a whole-of-society approach to eliminating racism, across our legal, justice, health, education, media and arts sectors as well as for businesses.
Courage and kindness could manifest in action by the government supporting these recommendations. This would see the principles of the RDA truly realised.
But after 50 years, the RDA also needs an update. One of the framework's proposed changes is introducing a legal responsibility on employers to proactively prevent racism in the workplace.
Similar to the positive duty under the Sex Discrimination Act, it means taking reasonable steps to eliminate racism, rather than only reacting once a complaint is made.
Kindness is recognising privilege and the advantages bestowed by race.
It means having difficult but respectful conversations, listening to uncomfortable truths without defensiveness, and finding ways to move forward together.
Kindness is one of the greatest examples of strength one could show.
In 50 years' time, when people look back at this moment, I hope it's seen as another landmark moment when we made an active commitment to implementing the framework to eliminate racism.
The moment our leaders and community had the courage to choose dignity, respect and fairness - to ensure we are all truly equal with the same rights and opportunities.
Time is the marker of everything.
In a civic context, we use time to understand what policies, actions, and even words have changed our lives - for the better or worse, or not at all.
This helps us find ways to make our futures safer, healthier, and more just.
I want to find a way to a future free of racism. And, at this point in time, I can't help but think of the words of two prime ministers - in speeches delivered half a century apart.
First, let's go back to this week in June 1975, when Australia enacted the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA). With the White Australia Policy only recently abolished, this was a landmark moment in our history.
It was the first Commonwealth law that focused on human rights and discrimination, setting a new vision for Australian society that sought to shake off the racial segregation that had defined it.
In a speech at the RDA's proclamation, then prime minister Gough Whitlam said our nation must "spell out in enduring form ... the principle that all Australians, whatever their colour, race or creed, are equal before the law and have the same basic rights and opportunities."
But has Whitlam's aspiration to "entrench new attitudes ... in people's hearts and minds" been realised?
The answer is yes and no.
A legislative framework around racial equality has helped shine a spotlight on employers in workplace discrimination cases, provided remedy pathways for people who've experienced racial hatred, even invalidate laws that discriminated against First Nations peoples, such as the famous case of Mabo v Queensland. It also set a precedent for similar anti-discrimination laws around age, sex, and disability that were passed in the years that followed.
Over the past 50 years, we have seen monumental progress in our society, and its shape has changed significantly.
These are achievements to remember, to celebrate.
But, sadly, racism remains entrenched in many parts of our society.
Systems and institutions designed to serve us all are still infected by racist attitudes and practices in place well before the RDA's inception.
Racism continues to affect everyday life. People are confronted with it through verbal attacks or left isolated by policies or practices that disadvantage them.
This includes people with "foreign sounding" names being less likely to be selected for a job interview or having their work more scrutinised than colleagues; over-policing in some communities; and cultural biases within the medical system that can prevent people of colour receiving the same standards of care as everyone else.
First Nations people still suffer the fundamental racism of a denial of self-determination. This has consistently been confirmed by consultation, research, and work led by advocacy groups.
The work of the Australian Human Rights Commission confirms it too.
There is no doubt that urgent reform is needed. And, half a century since Whitlam's address, a speech by another Prime Minister - our current one - touched on what I believe will help drive the solution.
In his election victory speech last month, Anthony Albanese spoke of what he believed were the Australian values the majority of people had voted for.
"For the strength," he said, "to show courage in adversity and kindness to those in need".
Courage and kindness.
For me, this has always been at the heart of who are - or who we should aspire to be.
Reform takes courage. It takes kindness. Changing systems and institutions to eliminate racism requires our leaders to take courage.
In November last year, I released the National Anti-Racism Framework, a roadmap for widespread government-led reform to defeat racism in 10 years.
Its 63 recommendations take a whole-of-society approach to eliminating racism, across our legal, justice, health, education, media and arts sectors as well as for businesses.
Courage and kindness could manifest in action by the government supporting these recommendations. This would see the principles of the RDA truly realised.
But after 50 years, the RDA also needs an update. One of the framework's proposed changes is introducing a legal responsibility on employers to proactively prevent racism in the workplace.
Similar to the positive duty under the Sex Discrimination Act, it means taking reasonable steps to eliminate racism, rather than only reacting once a complaint is made.
Kindness is recognising privilege and the advantages bestowed by race.
It means having difficult but respectful conversations, listening to uncomfortable truths without defensiveness, and finding ways to move forward together.
Kindness is one of the greatest examples of strength one could show.
In 50 years' time, when people look back at this moment, I hope it's seen as another landmark moment when we made an active commitment to implementing the framework to eliminate racism.
The moment our leaders and community had the courage to choose dignity, respect and fairness - to ensure we are all truly equal with the same rights and opportunities.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Sydney Morning Herald
34 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Give Trump ‘a new Pine Gap', say experts claiming AUKUS go-slow
AUKUS was announced in 2021, but the government has not picked a nuclear waste site or an east coast submarine base, and there are concerns about the speed of planning for a shipyard in Henderson, Western Australia. Australia made the first of six $US500 million ($770 million) payments to boost the capacity of the US submarine industry earlier this year as part of the $368 billion deal, and has hosted visiting American vessels. The US informed Australia about a 30-day review of the pact weeks ago, which became public on Thursday. Defence Minister Richard Marles said he welcomed the review. 'It's something which is perfectly natural for an incoming administration to do,' he said on the ABC. Senior Australian government sources, not permitted to speak publicly, said the US stood to gain from AUKUS and believed the review might be designed to gain leverage as Washington pushed Australia to spend more on defence. Former US ambassador Joe Hockey said bases should be expanded into locations at which the US could perform large volumes of submarine maintenance to help the US overturn a backlog crippling its ability to keep subs in operation. 'It would be enormously important to the Americans and allow for a significant increase in their capability and deterrence value in the region,' Hockey told this masthead. 'Australia is lagging behind.' The man central to the US' AUKUS review, defence official Elbridge Colby, has previously expressed reservations about handing over nuclear submarines in the early 2030s at the same time as a potential confrontation between China and Taiwan may demand all the US' firepower. Colby has this year made more positive remarks about AUKUS' first pillar. The review was instituted by Colby, not the White House. But Colby's focus on war-readiness in the case of a conflict with China – which is far from guaranteed, and may not draw in Australia – has spurred calls to make the AUKUS deal more useful for its short-term focus on China. Pezzullo, who helmed the 2009 defence white paper, said the Henderson base should be transformed into a joint facility. 'Better still, Australia could establish this shipyard, by treaty, as a joint Australian-US facility, in recognition of its vital role in the alliance, which could be at least as significant as the contribution of the Pine Gap satellite ground station,' he wrote in an article for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute think tank last month. In 2023, the Albanese government dismissed Pezzullo for exerting undue political influence under the previous Coalition government. 'Being able to operate routinely in the Indian Ocean without having to transit the congested littoral waters of Southeast Asia and in the Western Pacific in times of tension and conflict is of immense strategic value to the US,' Pezzullo wrote. Such a move would likely be contentious and trigger concerns, particularly on the left, about Australian sovereignty and hewing more closely to the US at a time when Western allies and citizens are growing more doubtful about US President Donald Trump's reliability. Loading But Shoebridge said Australia was already deeply enmeshed in US military architecture via Pine Gap, a critical intelligence facility near Alice Springs, and the presence of US Marines in Darwin, approved by former prime minister Julia Gillard. 'I think it would be getting to a level with Pine Gap,' Shoebridge said, backing the idea of a bigger plan for Henderson and criticising Labor for the speed of decision-making and funding on AUKUS milestones. 'If we're not doing those long lead-time items, how can we still tell the Americans we are serious about AUKUS?'

The Age
34 minutes ago
- The Age
Give Trump ‘a new Pine Gap', say experts claiming AUKUS go-slow
AUKUS was announced in 2021, but the government has not picked a nuclear waste site or an east coast submarine base, and there are concerns about the speed of planning for a shipyard in Henderson, Western Australia. Australia made the first of six $US500 million ($770 million) payments to boost the capacity of the US submarine industry earlier this year as part of the $368 billion deal, and has hosted visiting American vessels. The US informed Australia about a 30-day review of the pact weeks ago, which became public on Thursday. Defence Minister Richard Marles said he welcomed the review. 'It's something which is perfectly natural for an incoming administration to do,' he said on the ABC. Senior Australian government sources, not permitted to speak publicly, said the US stood to gain from AUKUS and believed the review might be designed to gain leverage as Washington pushed Australia to spend more on defence. Former US ambassador Joe Hockey said bases should be expanded into locations at which the US could perform large volumes of submarine maintenance to help the US overturn a backlog crippling its ability to keep subs in operation. 'It would be enormously important to the Americans and allow for a significant increase in their capability and deterrence value in the region,' Hockey told this masthead. 'Australia is lagging behind.' The man central to the US' AUKUS review, defence official Elbridge Colby, has previously expressed reservations about handing over nuclear submarines in the early 2030s at the same time as a potential confrontation between China and Taiwan may demand all the US' firepower. Colby has this year made more positive remarks about AUKUS' first pillar. The review was instituted by Colby, not the White House. But Colby's focus on war-readiness in the case of a conflict with China – which is far from guaranteed, and may not draw in Australia – has spurred calls to make the AUKUS deal more useful for its short-term focus on China. Pezzullo, who helmed the 2009 defence white paper, said the Henderson base should be transformed into a joint facility. 'Better still, Australia could establish this shipyard, by treaty, as a joint Australian-US facility, in recognition of its vital role in the alliance, which could be at least as significant as the contribution of the Pine Gap satellite ground station,' he wrote in an article for the Australian Strategic Policy Institute think tank last month. In 2023, the Albanese government dismissed Pezzullo for exerting undue political influence under the previous Coalition government. 'Being able to operate routinely in the Indian Ocean without having to transit the congested littoral waters of Southeast Asia and in the Western Pacific in times of tension and conflict is of immense strategic value to the US,' Pezzullo wrote. Such a move would likely be contentious and trigger concerns, particularly on the left, about Australian sovereignty and hewing more closely to the US at a time when Western allies and citizens are growing more doubtful about US President Donald Trump's reliability. Loading But Shoebridge said Australia was already deeply enmeshed in US military architecture via Pine Gap, a critical intelligence facility near Alice Springs, and the presence of US Marines in Darwin, approved by former prime minister Julia Gillard. 'I think it would be getting to a level with Pine Gap,' Shoebridge said, backing the idea of a bigger plan for Henderson and criticising Labor for the speed of decision-making and funding on AUKUS milestones. 'If we're not doing those long lead-time items, how can we still tell the Americans we are serious about AUKUS?'


Perth Now
an hour ago
- Perth Now
Reynolds' fresh target in Higgins lawsuit
Linda Reynolds has turned her attention to former Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus in her bid to sue the Commonwealth over its compensation payment to Brittany Higgins, as the nation's anti-corruption agency revealed there was 'no corruption issue' in the payment. The retiring former Liberal minister in May launched action in the Federal Court against the Commonwealth, with the crux of the claim over the $2.4m compensation payment to Brittany Higgins in 2022. Senator Reynolds argued the payment was 'publicly affirming' of Ms Higgins allegations against her that she didn't support her former staffer when she alleged she was raped by Bruce Lehrmann. Brittany Higgins was paid a $2.4m compensation payment. NewsWire / Jeremy Piper Credit: News Corp Australia The Federal Court has found Mr Lehrmann raped Ms Higgins on the civil standard of the balance of probabilities. A criminal trial was aborted due juror misconduct and a charge against him was dropped. Mr Lehrmann has always denied the allegation and is appealing the Federal Court's finding. An amended version of Ms Reynolds statement of claim was filed on Wednesday, just a day before the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) said there was 'no corruption issue' in the $2.4m payment. The NACC on Thursday announced there was 'no evidence that the settlement process, including the legal advice provided, who was present at the mediation, or the amount was subject to any improper influence by any Commonwealth public official'. Senator Reynolds' amended statement of claim was made public late on Thursday afternoon. Linda Reynolds has amended her statement of claim. NewsWire / Martin Ollman Credit: News Corp Australia Among the changes is a reference to a speech by Mr Dreyfus the then Attorney-General made to parliament on March 15, 2021. Mr Dreyfus is not a party to the claim. Mr Dreyfus recounted to the House of Representatives a speech by Ms Higgins just outside Parliament House, where she told a large crowd she was raped inside the building by a colleague, and how her story was 'a painful reminder to women that it can happen in Parliament House and can truly happen anywhere'. 'If a woman cannot feel safe from rape in Parliament House, a veritable fortress ringed with security cameras, with entrances protected by armed guards and with Federal Police officers on duty inside, where can women feel safe?' Mr Dreyfus told the House of Representatives, according to a transcript excerpt in the claim. 'How strong is the rule of law if it isn't able to protect a young woman working in the ministerial wing of Parliament House?' The amended statement of claim argued Senator Reynolds had suffered loss and damage as a result of Mr Dreyfus' conduct, including denying her the opportunity to rebut Ms Higgins' allegation 'in the appropriate forum'. Former attorney-general Mark Dreyfus. NewsWire / Martin Ollman Credit: News Corp Australia It also argues Mr Dreyfus 'enabled and encouraged the falsity of Ms Higgins' claim to be maintained by Ms Higgins'. HWL Ebsworth, which acted on the Commonwealth's behalf, is also being sued by Senator Reynolds for negligence. Lawyers on behalf of Senator Reynolds argued HWLE breached its fiduciary duty to her by excluding her from the mediation conference where the $2.4m settlement was reached, and failing to conduct independent investigations to establish if there was 'at least a meaningful prospect of liability' by Ms Higgins. However, similar alleged breaches initially put forth against the Commonwealth were withdrawn in the amended document, with it now largely focusing on allegations of Mr Dreyfus' misfeasance of public office and alleged breaches of HWLE. Mr Dreyfus has been contacted for comment. He earlier welcomed NACC's statement. 'The NACC has conclusively found there was no improper interference by any Commonwealth official at any stage,' Mr Dreyfus said. 'I regret the baseless allegation of corruption has been so widely publicised ahead of this finding and hope future matters can be resolved in a more timely manner. 'I also regret any further distress caused to Ms Higgins as a result of this matter.'