A local government councillor in regional WA is standing by comments made during a debate over changes to the council’s acknowledgement of country that have been labelled offensive. 

Bunbury City Council, two hours south of Perth, was debating the expansion of the city’s acknowledgement of country this week when three councillors raised concerns about the new wording.

Councillor Betty McCleary said the statement should be kept simple.

“I believe we are giving just lip service,” she said at the meeting.

“To have that: ‘Respect to all members of the Aboriginal communities and their cultures’, I don’t think that I could, because I know that there are some — like in every community — there’s not everybody who is pure.

“I don’t think I would like to recognise those who are not pure, quite frankly.”

Councillor Wendy Giles then interjected: “I think that term ‘pure’ is very denigrating. Are you saying pure Aboriginal?'”

Cr McCleary replied: “No, pure in soul and heart.”

Human rights lawyer and academic at Curtin Law School, Noongar woman Hannah McGlade condemned the comments.

She said she found some of the comments “very offensive … insinuating that Aboriginal people are dishonest”.

“It is not surprising that a few council members held prejudice because that is the nature of Australian society and attitudes that still need to be improved,” Dr McGlade said.

The changes were adopted, nine votes to three.

Loading…

‘I take it on the chin’: McCleary

After the meeting, Cr McCleary said she accepted the council’s decision to adopt the new wording and that she could have chosen her words better.

“Yes, there are many better words that I could have chosen. I understand it, I take it right on the chin,” she said.

“I wasn’t clear with the word ‘pure’ … it was the ‘all members’ that stuck in me.

“Because I felt that I couldn’t acknowledge with honour the murderers, the paedophiles or the domestic violence offenders of any culture.

“So I hope people understand.”

Councillor Michelle Steck also voted against the item and, during the debate, said it would not do anything to repair “seen or believed damage” to the Indigenous community.

Cr Steck also raised concern about the mention of natural assets.

“I don’t believe that waters and things like that are owned by a certain group in the population of the community. They were provided by nature,” she said. 

“It’s also taking freedoms away from me to a country I was born in and raised children in.”

During the meeting, another councillor Karen Steele said she was “horrified by some councillor statements”.

Dr McGlade said the comments, in her opinion, showed racial prejudice.

“This recognition was about continuing connection, it clearly didn’t state ownership,” she said.

“We have an obligation to address racism and discrimination … and we don’t do enough about it and we have a rose-tinted approach that Australia is the land of a ‘fair go’.”

Cultural training on the horizon

Bunbury Mayor Jaysen de San Miguel distanced his local government from the comments and said the council reached out to Indigenous leaders after the debate.

“Important to note here that the individual opinions of elected members, they’re not a reflection of our council,” he said.

“I thought this item was quite a straightforward item.

“I thought it would go through on block unanimously, and I was a little bit probably confused on some of those comments.

“I feel for those who have been affected by it, but I’m hoping that we can look forward and say: ‘Well, this is a decision of council and council supported the changes.””

Cr Miguel said the council had been thinking for a while about getting councillors to undertake cultural awareness training.

“I’m very keen to continue the reconciliation journey. I know personally, I’ve still got a lot to learn as well,” he said.

Cr Steck declined to comment.