Campaigning for a Referendum ... continued

Image 3I: Charles Perkins with Aboriginal children after winning the right to use the public swimming pool in Moree
 

Where FCAATSI petitions and lobbying failed, it would appear the more confrontational methods of a small group of Sydney University students succeeded.

In February 1965, young Aboriginal activist Charles Perkins, inspired by Martin Luther King Jr and the freedom rides occurring at the time in the United States, led a small band of fellow Sydney University students on a tour of north western New South Wales towns where they deployed non-violent direct action to challenge racial segregation and bans on Aboriginal access to public facilities.

The vicious racism and violence unleashed against them made international headlines and drew unfavourable comparisons with America's Jim Crow South.

It was one of the first occasions the Commonwealth Government was put on the defensive over Australia's treatment of Aborigines and soon after it introduced a bill for a referendum to repeal Section 127.

The intention, stated Attorney-General Billy Snedden, was "to remove a possible source of misconstruction in the international field". 8

Although clearly intended as no more than a gesture to diffuse national and international opprobrium, it was the breakthrough the FCAATSI and its supporters needed and they seized the opportunity to press the Government further. During 1965 and 1966 more petitions were presented to Parliament and more deputations were despatched to Canberra. Menzies met a FCAATSI delegation in December 1965 and, according to Faith Bandler, gave the impression "he had never given a thought to the Aboriginal situation". 9

Labor leader Arthur Calwell was similarly disinterested by the campaign to include section 51 in the referendum. But the political ground was shifting. In late 1965 New South Wales Liberal MP W.C. Wentworth introduced a Private Members' Bill to include section 51.

And Labor parliamentarians Gordon Bryant and Manfred Cross were leading a push for Labor to adopt a new approach.

When Harold Holt replaced Menzies as Prime Minister in January 1966 the Government appeared willing to make more concessions, although, as Attwood and Markus note, "it was quite apparent that the Holt government had no more intention of playing a greater role in Aboriginal affairs than had its predecessor." 10

Menzies original bill was passed in February but the referendum itself was postponed. Twelve months later Holt finally agreed to include section 51 but gave no commitment to passing "special laws" to assist Aborigines if given the power to do so.

Image 3R: FCAATSI delegation in Canberra

The Government also decided to use the same referendum to seek approval for a constitutional amendment to enable membership of the House of Representatives to be increased without necessarily increasing the number of Senators.

Critics speculated that Holt was cynically banking on a goodwill vote for Aborigines to garner support for the parliamentary nexus question. For their part, Bandler and other FCAATSI activists worried that including the second issue would confuse voters and encourage a no vote.

 

Whatever their motives all sides in the campaign went to the ballot on 27 May 1967 urging Australians to "vote yes for Aborigines."

Prime Minister Holt talked up the need to end constitutional discrimination "for the good of our Aborigines", while the FCAATSI and its supporters played to the misconception that the Commonwealth needed and intended to use the reforms to the Constitution to create a new deal for indigenous Australia.

Image 3T: Herbert McClintock drawing from Common Cause, the journal of the Miners' Federation of Australia

 

< < Campaigning for a Referendum

> > Campaigning for a Yes Vote

 

Explore UQ Library
 
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•