Can truth-telling deliver the change needed?
By Bridget Cama
Like reconciliation, co-design and a myriad of other policy mantras, truth-telling glosses over the acute power imbalance that drives Indigenous disadvantage, writes co-chair of the Uluṟu Youth Dialogue, Bridget Cama.
Pieces like this one are free to read. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber so Cheek can continue paying writers for their insight and expertise.
A national truth-telling process is not universally supported by Aboriginal people, and recent enthusiasm for a national Indigenous truth commission has been met with perplexity by many in grassroots communities. However, without a national Voice, there is no credible mechanism to gauge the full breadth of community sentiment.
Truth-telling has become a trendy buzzword in Indigenous affairs and among well-meaning allies. Like reconciliation, co-design and a myriad of other policy mantras, truth glosses over the acute power imbalance that drives Indigenous disadvantage. For some, “truth-telling” is the only process through which “justice” for First Nations peoples will finally be realised. It is spoken of as some new innovation. I don’t agree.
We’ve been here before. We’ve been here for 35 years since the formal process of reconciliation began in 1991 and ended in 2001. The Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation was a national truth telling process. What happened to its recommendations after a decade?
As a nation, we have yet to formally deal with “unfinished business”. But it’s a furphy to say Australia has not been on a journey or that Australians are ignorant to this history.
While it’s easy to astroturf community sentiment on a national truth commission, what communities on the ground - without funding, means and time - are talking about is survival. It is schoolbooks and food. It is shelter, rent, petrol, clean water, reliable power, accessible health care, safe housing and bodily security: protection from violence.
Commissions are mechanisms through which Australian governments defer reform. They substitute progress for our people’s toil, while substantive rights, legal recognition and institutional change are avoided. The record speaks for itself. The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody has entire volumes on the regional history of dispossession and colonisation across the Federation. The Bringing Them Home inquiry has a report and holds testimony from the Stolen Generations. Reports have been delivered and recommendations left to gather dust.
The First Nations Regional Dialogues that led to the Uluru Statement from the Heart discussed history. Truth is the metaphor. The Uluru Statement called for a Makarrata Commission to be supervised by the Voice to Parliament. An important and often overlooked point about deliberations on that commission is that it was based on the idea of the Waitangi Tribunal: to bring resolution to land claims and to consolidate agreements between First Nations and the state. As a part of that process, the history of an area is formally recorded. It is part of that final settlement, not separate.
To be frank, Indigenous policy is in a bad way. Closing the Gap targets continue to falter despite the government’s glossy reports and glowing social media. Proposed amendments to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act threaten to narrow Aboriginal cultural rights and confine claims only to settler-recognised traditional owners, excluding the majority of cultural authority. A widening culture and class schism has emerged in Indigenous policy, with the government favouring the affluent and elite who are pursuing more wealth creation and “economic empowerment” on the taxpayer purse.
Without truth-telling, there can be no justice for First Peoples
In 2025, more than 22,000 people joined First Nations Peoples in the Walk for Truth in Victoria. This year, the movement is going national. Travis Lovett explains why now is the time for the Federal Government to commit a national truth-telling process.
Redirecting attention and funding to a national truth-telling commission will distract from these matters. And the assumption “truth-telling” automatically leads to change is flawed. The historical record, both in Australia and internationally, demonstrates that truth commissions rarely shift settler understanding in ways that produce redistribution of power.
Now is not the time for a national truth commission.
It is not the time to divert scarce financial and emotional resources and political capital of our people into another elite national truth talk fest that will repeat work already done.
The core issue is not “truth”. It remains accountability. That’s not as glamorous and grandiose, but it is a fact. Governments have long understood the consequences of their laws and policies. The problem is not the truth of history. It is that there is no enforceable mechanism to ensure governments listen, or act.
If there is to be a foundation for justice, it must be guaranteed in the federal Constitution so First Nations have a protected say in the laws and policies that affect them, not being “spoken for” by incorporated entities.
Victoria is pursuing its own Voice, Treaty and Truth framework. Other states and territories are navigating distinct pathways. Communities do not require a national process unilaterally imposed upon them displacing ongoing work for change.
If there is one reform that would strengthen the nation, it is this: comprehensively embed Indigenous history in the national curriculum. That was a clear and practical ask of the Regional Dialogues. You don’t need a truth commission for this.
The task before us is not to convene another elite talkfest that produces another report. It is to redesign Australia’s public structures to mandate accountability so that governments cannot look away once the stories have been told.
About the author
Bridget Cama
Bridget is a Wiradjuri First Nations and Pasifika Fijian woman who was born and grew up in Lithgow, New South Wales and has connections to the Cudgegong River just outside of Mudgee. Bridget has been working with the Uluṟu Dialogue since March 2019, is an associate of the Indigenous Law Centre at UNSW and legal support team to the Uluṟu Dialogue. Bridget is also the Co-Chair of the Uluṟu Youth Dialogue alongside Allira Davis, who work closely to provide a national platform for First Nations youth voices to be heard in the Uluṟu movement and in First Nations affairs more broadly.
About the Uluṟu Youth Dialogue:
The Uluṟu Youth are a collective group of young First Nations peoples who support the Uluṟu Statement from the Heart and a First Nations Voice to Parliament enshrined in the Constitution. They stand by the mandate of the Uluṟu Statement for Voice, Treaty and Truth. The Uluṟu Youth Dialogue are a diverse group of young people between 18 and 30 years old. They come together from all different boundaries, waterways and lands, standing tall on their ancestors’ shoulders, passionate about the common goal of continuing the fight of their old people, for a better future for their mob, communities and nation as a whole.
Excellent piece by Bridget Cama, thank you. I couldn’t agree more with her recommendation for adding true Indigenous history to the curriculum.
Thank you for this insightful essay, particularly around the conditions of Australian society many people experience today - 'A widening culture and class schism has emerged in Indigenous policy, with the government favouring the affluent and elite who are pursuing more wealth creation and “economic empowerment” on the taxpayer purse.'