Anthony Albanese never read 25-page manifesto which shaped Uluru Statement from the Heart

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese did not read the 26 pages of briefings, notes and context that led to the Uluru statement from the heart.

Mr Albanese has repeatedly vowed to implement the declaration ‘fully’, arguing for all three pillars that emerged from the dialogues in Australia in 2017: voice, treaty, truth.

It has since been revealed that there is an in-depth 26-page explanation of the statement calling for reparations, ‘rent’ to be paid and a reconsideration of land rights. Such words were never included in the statement itself.

The Prime Minister was asked if he “agrees with most of what is said in those pages” during a lengthy sit-down interview with 3AW’s Neil Mitchell.

To the surprise of the radio host, Mr. Albanese revealed that he had not read it.

“I haven’t read it,” he said. ‘There are 120 pages, why should I?

‘I know what the conclusion is. The Uluru Statement from the Heart is one page. That’s the conclusion.’

What was adopted at the 2017 Uluru Convention was the one-page statement, and other requests and suggestions made during the dialogue process were not “endorsed by the statement” or “adopted as government policy.”

Yes, campaigners and officials have repeatedly insisted that the Uluru statement of the heart “respects the primacy of parliament” and that all decision-making power will ultimately fall to the politicians of the day to negotiate.

The referendum would ensure that an advisory body – the Voice to Parliament – is constitutionally enshrined and that there is no way a future government can completely abolish it.

Confusion surrounding The Voice and Mr Albanese’s handling of the approaching referendum has hurt him at the polls, with support for his party and him as leader slumping over the past month.

Labor is still the preferred party to govern, but core support has fallen from 39 to 37, while the coalition has risen from 30 to 33 percent.

Respondents overwhelmingly described the vote as a bone of contention in the Resolve poll as campaigns heat up from both sides of the divide.

Mr Albanese argued that Peter Dutton and the No campaign know full well that the statement is ‘one page, not hundreds of pages’.

He said the pages recently “excavated” under a Freedom of Information request have never been hidden.

“Those pages have been on the website for years, placed there under the former coalition government,” he said.

“I respect that people can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions, there are legitimate reasons why people would do that. I wish people would discuss what’s real, rather than what they know isn’t real.’

Yes campaigner and Uluru Dialogue co-chair Professor Megan Davis said last year that First Nations people had been calling on the Australian public for years to read all 26 pages of the Uluru Declaration document.

She said: ‘For seven years we have been encouraging politicians, the media and Australians at large to learn more about the Uluru Declaration from the heart.

“We asked Australians to read one pager and the next ‘Our Story’, as well as the decision summary and many other documents in the report.

“We’ve had thousands of conversations about it and offered many more.”

Mr Albanese confirmed that he will not attempt to legislate the Voice if it is voted down in the referendum, and that he will respect the wishes of the Australian public.

But he does think it would be a missed opportunity to improve the lives of people suffering from ‘intergenerational disadvantage’.

“We are doing our best,” said the prime minister.

Mr Albanese flatly denied support for reparations and assured listeners that such a policy is not on his agenda.

He was asked, ‘are we going to have to face that? Regardless of whether the Voice rises, somewhere down the track, should we face that?’

The prime minister replied: ‘no’.

Mitchell asked if it was “unreasonable for people to read the extra pages and ask questions about the prospect of treaties, reparations and telling the truth.”

But Mr Albanese said his problem was that No campaigners seemed to confuse that business with The Voice.

“What’s not legitimate is pretending that’s what the referendum is about. There is nothing in the Uluru statement about reparations. Truth is being told, but is anyone actually against telling the truth?’

Mitchell said, “Well, it depends, the truth according to whom?”

In 2018, Prof. Davis told a convention that: ‘The Uluru Statement of the Heart is not just the first one-page statement; it’s actually a very long document of about 18 to 20 pages, and a very powerful part of this document reflects what happened in the dialogues.’

In an effort to clarify, Prof. Davis now says: ‘The first page, the one page, is the statement and the rest shows how our mob worked that out over the course of the two years we’ve been doing this work .’

Yes23 campaign manager Dean Parkin told 2GB’s Ben Fordham: ‘The additional documents being talked about are the inputs. These are the wider consultations that have taken place in the run-up.

“It was about making sure people understand there’s content that led to the process, that led to that last page of one document.”

But there are concerns about the contents of the broader document, as it shows the agenda of those who drafted the Uluru statement, which the government intends to fully adopt.

Within the 26-page document, discussions are held about land rights, reparations and sovereignty.

The core of our activism has been the long struggle for land rights. “The taking of our land without authorization represents our fundamental complaint against the British Crown.

“There are unfinished business that need to be resolved. And the way to deal with these differences is through making agreements.’

The document clarifies that Makarrata is another word for Treaty, which is another word for making agreements. The terms can be used interchangeably.

“This is the pinnacle of our agenda,” the document states – a line that made its way into the final version of the Uluru statement.

“It summarizes our ambitions for a fair and honest relationship with the government and a better future for our children based on justice and self-determination.

“Through negotiated settlement, First Nations can build their cultural strength, regain control, and make practical changes to the things that matter in their daily lives.

“By making agreements at the highest level, the negotiation process with the Australian government allows First Nations to express our sovereignty.”