WeRise · Policy platform
First Nations
Key findings
- 19 targetsClosing the Gap has 19 socioeconomic outcome areas, yet the 2024 national report found only five improving and four worsening among targets with assessed trends. Source: Productivity Commission · Closing the Gap Annual Data Compilation Report · 2024
- 8.9 yearsThe life-expectancy gap at birth was 8.9 years for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander males and 8.1 years for females in 2020–22. Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics · Life Expectancy Estimates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians · 2024
- 32%Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children made up about 32% of children in out-of-home care in 2023 despite comprising a far smaller share of the child population. Source: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare · Child Protection Australia · 2024
- 2,227 per 100,000The age-standardised imprisonment rate for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults was 2,227 per 100,000 in the June quarter 2024 – many times the non-Indigenous rate. Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics · Corrective Services, Australia · June 2024
Part 01
The Case for Change
Why First Nations matters
Nothing About Country Without Its People
Closing the gap means changing who holds power, not merely changing programs.
Australia has spent decades measuring inequality in First Nations communities. It has been much less consistent at transferring the authority and resources needed to change it. The Closing the Gap agreement itself recognises the point: outcomes are tied to whether governments share decision-making, build the community-controlled sector, transform their institutions and share data with communities.2
The latest national reporting gives no basis for complacency. The Productivity Commission’s 2024 Annual Data Compilation Report assessed trend progress for 19 targets and found five improving, four worsening and others not on track or not assessable.3 Those results do not mean First Nations communities have failed. They show that government systems are still not consistently delivering the conditions people need to thrive: secure housing, culturally safe health care, early support for families, quality education, economic opportunity, safety and control over community life.
Health illustrates the scale and the nature of the problem. In 2020–22, life expectancy at birth for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander males was 8.9 years lower than for non-Indigenous males; for females the gap was 8.1 years.9 Life expectancy is not a single medical statistic. It reflects income, housing, food security, environmental conditions, racism, service access, trauma and whether care is culturally safe. Community-controlled health organisations have developed models rooted in local governance and trust, yet short funding cycles and fragmented programs can undermine the stability that effective care requires.
Justice and child protection are equally urgent. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults were imprisoned at an age-standardised rate of 2,227 per 100,000 in the June quarter of 2024.10 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children remain dramatically overrepresented in out-of-home care.11 These systems are linked: family poverty, housing insecurity, unmet disability and health needs, racism, policing practices, bail laws and lack of early family support can drive state intervention. Removing children or imprisoning adults may appear as an individual administrative outcome, but at population scale these are markers of system failure.
The evidence does not support a one-size-fits-all national program designed in Canberra and delivered to communities. Australia contains hundreds of First Nations, languages and local circumstances. A policy that takes self-determination seriously must fund national representation while ensuring regional and local authority; protect universal rights while allowing local design; and measure outcomes without turning communities into data sources for governments that refuse to share control of the data.
WeRise should therefore make a practical commitment: legislate enduring First Nations participation in Commonwealth decision-making; implement Closing the Gap Priority Reforms through enforceable funding agreements; expand Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations; support state and territory treaty and truth-telling processes; protect Country and culture; and publish transparent annual progress reports written with First Nations partners, not merely about them.
Part 02
Evidence and Experience
First Nations: what other countries show
Self-Determination Is Practical Government
Aotearoa New Zealand · Canada · Norway · United States
International comparisons cannot erase the distinct histories, nations and legal traditions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. They can, however, show that Indigenous representation, treaty institutions, land and language rights, community governance and shared fiscal authority are workable features of democratic states. The common lesson is that symbolic recognition without resources or legal standing is fragile.
Aotearoa New Zealand provides lessons in treaty institutions and Māori representation; Canada in modern treaty and self-government agreements; Norway in a statutory Sámi Parliament; and the United States in tribally administered health services. Each system has serious limits and unresolved inequities. None is a model to copy wholesale. Together they show that self-determination requires enduring institutions, funding and real decision authority.
Aotearoa New Zealand · Treaty of Waitangi signed 1840; contemporary settlement and Māori representation systems ongoing
Treaty settlement framework, Waitangi Tribunal inquiry process and Māori electorates in Parliament; Māori have the option to enrol on Māori or general electoral rolls. Six Māori electorates at the 2023 general election; Treaty settlement processes involve iwi and hapū across Aotearoa.
- The Waitangi Tribunal was established in 1975 to inquire into Crown actions or omissions alleged to breach Treaty principles.
- Māori electorates provide dedicated parliamentary representation and their number is linked to enrolment on the Māori electoral roll.
- Six Māori electorates were used at the 2023 general election.
- Treaty settlements can include financial and commercial redress, cultural redress and acknowledgements, but do not resolve all Māori claims or inequities.
- The framework has created enduring legal and institutional pathways for Māori–Crown relations, while remaining politically contested.
Australia can learn from durable representation and treaty institutions without assuming a single national treaty template. First Nations-led regional and national structures need statutory permanence, funded secretariats, transparent accountability and a relationship to Parliament that is more than consultation.
Canada · Modern treaties and self-government agreements from the 1970s to present
Negotiated agreements addressing land, resource, governance and fiscal arrangements between First Nations, Inuit or Métis groups and Canadian governments. Canada reports 26 modern treaties covering approximately 40% of Canada’s land mass, alongside numerous self-government agreements.
- Modern treaties are negotiated agreements that can address land ownership, resource management, financial compensation and governance.
- The Government of Canada reports 26 modern treaties in effect.
- These treaties collectively cover approximately 40% of Canada’s land mass.
- Self-government agreements can recognise authority over matters such as culture, education, health, lands and local administration, depending on agreement terms.
- Outcomes vary considerably because agreements, fiscal capacity and implementation differ across nations and regions.
Treaties are not merely declarations; they require long-term negotiation capacity, fiscal arrangements, land and resource rights, dispute resolution and implementation accountability. Any Australian treaty agenda must be led by First Nations and recognise regional diversity.
Norway · Sámi Act 1987; Sámi Parliament operational from 1989
Elected Sámi Parliament (Sámediggi) with advisory, administrative and cultural responsibilities, including allocations connected to Sámi language, culture and community development. National representative body for Sámi people in Norway; 39 representatives elected from seven constituencies.
- The Sámi Parliament in Norway was established under the Sámi Act and first opened in 1989.
- It has 39 representatives elected from seven constituencies.
- The body works on Sámi language, culture, industries and societal life, with powers and responsibilities defined in law and delegated arrangements.
- Its authority does not amount to full sovereignty; state decision-making remains decisive in many contested areas, including land and resource questions.
- The model demonstrates the importance of a standing elected representative institution rather than ad hoc consultation.
A legislated First Nations representative body can be durable even without constitutional amendment. Its legitimacy depends on First Nations-designed election or selection processes, stable funding, public reporting and an obligation on government to respond substantively to its advice.
United States · Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act 1975 to present
Tribes can contract or compact to administer programs previously delivered by federal agencies, including health services; Indian Health Service arrangements support tribal self-determination. Hundreds of federally recognised tribes and tribal organisations participate in self-determination and self-governance arrangements.
- The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act authorises tribes to contract for programs previously administered by federal agencies.
- Tribal self-governance arrangements are used in health and other service areas.
- The Indian Health Service reports that many health services are operated by tribes or tribal organisations under self-determination authorities.
- Evidence and evaluations emphasise the importance of governance capacity, stable funding and locally controlled service design.
- Chronic underfunding and health inequities remain major limitations, showing that control without adequate resources cannot deliver equity.
Community-controlled organisations require multi-year, flexible funding and authority to design services, not only contracts to administer centrally designed programs. The objective should be Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander control over policy and service models, backed by guaranteed resources and transparent outcomes.
Part 03
Costs and Trade-offs
The cost of First Nations
Pay for Power, Not Perpetual Failure
Long-term self-determination costs less than repeating crisis responses designed without communities.
First Nations policy should never reduce justice, rights or self-determination to a narrow budget exercise. Yet credible commitments need transparent funding. The final fiscal design depends on choices that must be co-developed: the structure and powers of national and regional representative bodies; treaty and truth-telling processes; expansion of community-controlled sectors; justice-reinvestment sites; land and cultural-heritage protection; and the degree to which existing mainstream expenditure is redirected to First Nations-led delivery.
Gross cost includes new and expanded Commonwealth investment, particularly for permanent representative infrastructure, independent truth-telling and treaty support, multi-year community-controlled service agreements, early family support, housing and justice-reinvestment initiatives. Net cost must account for avoided expenditure from reduced incarceration, child removal, crisis health care and repeated program duplication. But no single national net saving should be claimed without transparent modelling: the benefits occur across Commonwealth, state and territory budgets and over different time horizons.
The National Agreement on Closing the Gap already identifies structural Priority Reforms. The problem is not the absence of language; it is inconsistent implementation, short funding horizons and inadequate transfer of decision authority.2,3 WeRise should commission Parliamentary Budget Office costings after co-design and publish a First Nations fiscal statement that distinguishes new funding, redirected funding, state–Commonwealth contributions and expected but unmonetised social benefits.
| Item | Amount | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Permanent First Nations representative and shared-decision-making infrastructure | To be costed | Co-designed national and regional structures, secretariat, accessibility, translation and independent policy capacity. |
| Expansion of Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisations | To be costed | Multi-year flexible funding across health, family services, legal services, housing, disability, education and justice. |
| Truth-telling, treaty readiness and cultural-heritage protection | To be costed | Jurisdictional partnerships, archival access, community research, repatriation, language and heritage capacity. |
| Justice reinvestment and early family support sites | To be costed | Place-based community-led prevention; requires agreements with states and territories, which hold major justice and child-protection responsibilities. |
| Avoided incarceration, child-removal and crisis-service costs | Potential but unquantified | Plausible benefits require independently modelled baselines and must not be used to delay upfront investment. |
| Consolidation of duplicative, short-term grant administration | Potential administrative saving | Multi-year block agreements may reduce transaction costs; quantify only after program mapping. |
| Net cost estimate | Not policy-grade costable until co-design and jurisdictional funding agreements are completed | Seek PBO costing and First Nations-led fiscal review before Active Position status. |
The strongest objections to First Nations
The strongest objection is that a dedicated First Nations representative body or treaty process creates unequal citizenship.
This concern should be addressed seriously. Equal citizenship does not require identical treatment when peoples have distinct historical rights, enduring cultural and political status, and have experienced systematic exclusion from decisions about their lands and lives. The proposed model would not give any body a veto over Parliament; it would create structured, transparent representation and require governments to hear and respond to First Nations perspectives before acting.
A second objection is that the 2023 referendum settled the question.
It settled one proposed constitutional amendment at one point in time. It did not abolish the Commonwealth’s legal capacity to legislate advisory mechanisms, fund community-controlled services, support treaty work, protect heritage or implement Closing the Gap. Respecting the result means not pretending it says something it does not. Durable reform must now earn legitimacy through careful co-design, practical outcomes and open accountability.
Third, treaty is criticised as legally uncertain, expensive or socially divisive.
Treaty processes are complex and different nations may seek different arrangements. That is precisely why they require patient, properly resourced negotiation rather than a single symbolic announcement. International evidence shows treaties require institutions for fiscal arrangements, land and water rights, dispute resolution and implementation. The policy should not promise a national treaty on a predetermined timetable without First Nations mandate; it should build the capacity and legal pathways for First Nations-led treaty-making.
Fourth, community control can be criticised as creating duplication or lowering scrutiny.
Community-controlled organisations should be subject to robust governance, financial accountability, safeguarding and outcome reporting – like any public-funded institution. The evidence-based argument is not that Indigenous-controlled organisations are beyond scrutiny; it is that services designed and governed by communities are often better placed to earn trust, understand local conditions and deliver culturally safe support. Government must fund this capacity rather than demand it without resources.
Fifth, Closing the Gap statistics can be used to portray First Nations peoples as deficient.
The policy must reject that framing. Data identifies systems and material conditions requiring action; it cannot measure the strength of culture, connection, survival or community. Reporting should be First Nations-governed, strengths-based and connected to assets such as language revival, land management, cultural institutions, enterprise and family networks as well as to inequality.
Part 04
The Australian Design
How First Nations would work in Australia
Self-Determination, Written Into How Government Works
Representation, community control, truth and treaty readiness – not another consultation cycle.
WeRise would establish a First Nations Self-Determination and Justice Framework, developed through paid, accessible and First Nations-led national, regional and local engagement. Its first purpose is structural: implement the four Priority Reforms in the National Agreement on Closing the Gap through enforceable Commonwealth funding and procurement rules. Commonwealth departments receiving or administering First Nations program funding would be required to demonstrate shared decision-making, data access, community-controlled sector development and institutional transformation – not simply consultation.2
Second, legislate a permanent national First Nations representative body with secure funding, independent research capacity and a statutory right to make public representations on proposed Commonwealth laws and policies that materially affect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Its membership, selection and regional structures must be designed by First Nations peoples. Parliament and ministers should be required to publish a substantive response, but elected Parliament would retain lawmaking authority. This is a practical, legislated route to durable participation after the 2023 referendum, while leaving open future constitutional pathways should First Nations peoples pursue them.4,5
Third, fund the community-controlled sector as core national infrastructure. Agreements should be multi-year, flexible and indexed; support workforce development and governance; and enable Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations, legal services, housing organisations, family services and disability providers to determine local delivery. Where mainstream services remain necessary, they should meet cultural-safety standards and be accountable to local First Nations governance.
Fourth, partner with states and territories on treaty, truth-telling and justice. Victoria’s treaty process and Yoorrook Justice Commission demonstrate that state-level work can proceed even when national constitutional reform stalls. The Commonwealth should support – not control – jurisdictional processes, fund archival access and repatriation, reform cultural-heritage and procurement settings within its powers, and negotiate national principles for free, prior and informed consent in matters affecting Country and culture.12,13
Fifth, establish transparent accountability: an independent First Nations Outcomes and Accountability Office, governed with First Nations leadership, should publish annual progress against Closing the Gap targets, Priority Reforms, funding flows, community-control measures and government responses. Implementation should begin in the first term: six months of co-design mandate and interim funding; legislation within 18 months; five-year funding agreements within two years; and annual public review thereafter.
Part 05
People and Transition
Who First Nations affects
Justice Is Local, National and Personal
First Nations people carry the consequences when policy is designed without their authority.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are directly affected, but the policy concerns every Australian because the legitimacy of the nation depends on whether it confronts or reproduces the conditions created by colonisation. The ABS estimated that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people comprised 3.8% of Australia’s population at 30 June 2021.14 This is a national population with enormous cultural and geographic diversity; policy must not reduce people to a single statistic or treat remote communities as the sole First Nations experience.
Case study
A grandmother in a regional town is caring for grandchildren after a family crisis. The nearest culturally safe family-support service is underfunded and the mainstream agency’s case plan changes with staff turnover. Rather than receiving early, locally governed support, the family enters a child-protection system that may separate children from kin and Country. A community-controlled family service with secure funding can intervene earlier, keep family involved and make cultural connection a non-negotiable outcome.
Case study
A young man in a remote community is repeatedly remanded for minor alleged offences because transport, bail accommodation, legal support and diversion programs are inadequate. His family sees public money spent on police, courts and prison far from Country but little invested in community-led prevention, jobs, housing or youth programs. Justice reinvestment does not deny harm or accountability; it shifts resources toward the conditions that prevent repeated contact with the criminal legal system.
The policy also affects governments, service providers, landholders, resource companies, universities, cultural institutions and non-Indigenous Australians. Some stakeholders may resist because shared decision-making changes procurement, licensing, heritage approvals, data governance or control over public funds. Others fear treaty or representative structures will be divisive. The response is honest: reform will change established power relationships. That is its purpose. But it should do so through transparent law, negotiated processes, public accountability and respect for every person’s democratic rights.
Part 06
Related policies
First Nations sits within a wider set of WeRise policies.
- Country & Culture: more WeRise policies in this pillar
- WeRise: all 29 policies across seven pillars
Notes
Sources and Supporting Documents
- Australian Human Rights Commission. Wiyi Yani U Thangani (Women’s Voices): Securing Our Rights, Securing Our Future Report. 2020. humanrights.gov.au
- Coalition of Peaks and Australian Governments. National Agreement on Closing the Gap. 2020. www.closingthegap.gov.au
- Productivity Commission. Closing the Gap Annual Data Compilation Report July 2024. Australian Government. 2024. www.pc.gov.au
- Uluru Statement from the Heart. Uluru Statement from the Heart. 2017. ulurustatement.org
- Australian Electoral Commission. 2023 Referendum Results. 2023. www.aec.gov.au
- Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. Native Title and Land Rights Resources. 2024. aiatsis.gov.au
- Federal Register of Legislation. Native Title Act 1993. Australian Government. Current compilation. www.legislation.gov.au
- Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Bringing Them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families. 1997. humanrights.gov.au
- Australian Bureau of Statistics. Life Expectancy Estimates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, 2020–2022. 2024. www.abs.gov.au
- Australian Bureau of Statistics. Corrective Services, Australia, June Quarter 2024. 2024. www.abs.gov.au
- Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Child Protection Australia 2022–23. 2024. www.aihw.gov.au
- Yoorrook Justice Commission. Yoorrook Justice Commission. Victoria. 2024. yoorrookjusticecommission.org.au
Record