During a recent policy debate concerning the proposal to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in our Constitution, a prominent supporter of the move implored those present to ‘have a look at the good work that Recognise is doing’.

Recognise is the campaigning arm of Reconciliation Australia. It was first established by the Gillard Government in 2012 to be the ‘people’s movement’ in support of constitutional recognition. Naturally, in the finest traditions of Labor Governments, it was funded with $10 million of the people’s money. Subsequently, in late 2014, the organisation was gifted an additional $5 million by then-Prime Minster Tony Abbott to support its efforts. The most recent Federal Budget, in May this year, provided yet another $5 million to the Recognise campaign.

So, after more than four years and around $20 million in funding from Australian taxpayers, it’s only fair that we do look at the ‘good work’ Recognise has undertaken to support this significant constitutional change. Or at least it would be, if there was any semblance of an agreement about what the proposed change actually is.

Astonishingly, there still is not. In its marketing collateral, the Recognise organisation repeatedly characterises its mission as one that is taking Australians on a ‘Journey to Recognition’. However, a journey must have a destination.

In fact, what we actually get from the Recognise campaign are mixed messages, and a growing indulgence of ideas that venture well outside its supposed remit. Worse still, no one is calling the organisation to account. In May this year, Recognise’s Joint Campaign Director Tanya Hosch released polling which found that in March 2016, 51 per cent of non-indigenous Australians and 63 per cent of indigenous Australians were ‘aware’ of the concept of constitutional recognition.

This information was issued as part of a media release which boldly declared that ‘momentum is building towards a Referendum in 2017’. Except, it isn’t. Contained elsewhere in the same media release was the real story.

On the previous occasion the awareness of Australians was measured, in July 2015, it was 63 per cent among non-indigenous Australians, and 73 per cent among indigenous Australians. Thus, over the course of nine months, when Recognise was being provided with millions of dollars from taxpayers to boost public awareness, it actually dropped by significant levels. In any other ‘awareness’ campaign, this would be called failure. In the case of Recognise, it formed the basis of a feeble claim that ‘awareness is still above long-term trend’ – a contrived and utterly meaningless metric.

Since that time, Tanya Hosch has departed from her role, accepting a high-profile job with the AFL, who are an official Recognise campaign partner.

So it was that in September, Recognise’s remaining Campaign Director, former ALP National Secretary Tim Gartrell, was joined by Ms Hosch’s replacement, community activist Mark Yettica-Paulson. In the first days of his appointment, Mr Yettica-Paulson was asked whether momentum was being lost. He disputed the notion, saying that if campaign forces ‘need a bit more time to get things right, then that’s fantastic’.

Well, yes. If you’re running an organisation that can seemingly rely on regular gifts of taxpayer funding and you are not being held accountable for that organisation’s failures, more time would seem ‘fantastic’. Of far greater concern, however, is that Mr Yettica-Paulson’s view about Recognise’s objective does not appear to align with that of the elected Government. In the same interview, he declared that ‘I do see constitutional recognition and [a] treaty as part of the same general push’.

Now, why does that sound familiar?

It could be because Opposition Leader Bill Shorten confirmed during the election campaign earlier this year his enthusiasm for ‘talking about what a post-constitutional recognition settlement with Indigenous people looks like’, and said he would support a treaty.

So now the Labor Party’s former National Secretary, supported by a community activist who supports the Labor leader’s position, are in full control of a taxpayer-funded campaigning machine. They are seemingly pursuing a treaty, despite this being completely at odds with the Government’s position.

Indeed, prior to his appointment as a Campaign Director, Mr Yettica-Paulson was a regular presence at community events staged by Recognise, talking up a treaty.

The Southern Highland News reported a local event held by Recognise at Batemans Bay on 20 July this year, at which he told those gathered that constitutional recognition ‘will not stop the push for a treaty; we can still pursue this and other things such as changing fisheries laws’. Perhaps new personnel at Recognise should be asked to read the content of their own organisation’s website, which states its role ‘has a very specific focus. It is to raise awareness of the need to end the exclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples from the Australian Constitution and deal with racial discrimination in it’. How did we get from here to talk of treaties and changing fisheries laws?

Trawling through the promotional material issued by Recognise does little to enlighten taxpayers as to where their $20 million might have gone. Its website contains various reports about ‘community yarn’ events, and sausage sizzles held to ‘talk about fixing the Constitution’.

Although $20 million will buy an awful lot of sausages, there are perhaps more effective ways to conduct constitutional debates. It’s little wonder that any talk of a public vote in 2017 has been quietly dropped. As a point of comparison, the devastatingly effective campaign the Minerals Council ran against Kevin Rudd’s mining tax is reported to have cost around $15 million, and achieved its objective within weeks. In the case of Recognise, we have paid activists moseying around the country, wandering violently off-message, and trying to convince voters (one sausage sizzle at a time) to support a constitutional reform proposal they still can’t explain, or provide any detail of. Given its want of direction and clear leadership, perhaps it’s unsurprising the events calendar on the organisation’s website does not list a single upcoming event between now and the end of the year.

Recognise has already made a meal of its primary objective. It should not also be permitted to keep making a fool out of taxpayers.

The post All sizzle, no sausage appeared first on The Spectator.