|
How an Australian Republic Can Engage the Migrant Community - A Personal Perspective
2004 National Republican Lecture
by Huy Truong
at the Hellenic Club, Canberra
9 November 2004
Good evening distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen. It is indeed both an honour and a pleasure to be here.
I have been asked by the Australian Republic Movement to speak tonight not as an expert on the Republic or the Constitution or indeed an expert on Australian political history. There are many others who are more qualified in those matters. Instead, I have been asked to tell my story and to hopefully add another perspective to the discussion on the Republic.
So my objective tonight is to provide a personal reflection on the importance of the Republic, as an Australian whose life, both as an immigrant from Asia and a business person, personifies the decreasing relevance of the current British monarchy as the Head of State for this country.
There have been a number of arguments put forward as to why Australia should change to a republic. They include in no particular order:
- National identity - and the changing face of Australia
- Geographic relevance
- Changing pattern of our Economics and trade; amongst others
All these reasons are very valid and important in their own right. Tonight however, I would like to put forward another argument for a Republic and it is to do with how a Republic may lead to a change in the nation's psychological state that may lead to more effectively engaging recent non-European migrants to making a greater public contribution; and in doing so, make this country a more diverse, tolerant and greater nation.
My central hypothesis tonight can broadly be broken into 3 parts:
1. that there is a relative lack of contribution by non-European migrants to the public arena - defined broadly as political, civic, or other forms of public debate.
2. A key cause of this is that most non-European migrants do not in their hearts believe they have a right nor an obligation to contribute to the public debate on social and political issues. They still feel like a grateful guest as opposed to a member of the family.
3. I believe that the process of becoming a Republic will cause a change in the psychological and emotional state of the non-European migrant such that they do feel more like e member of the 'family' with all its rights and obligations - in this case, the rights to feel as entitled as a fifth generation Anglo Australian, but equally, an obligation to contribute like a fifth generation Anglo-Australian.
New migrants from a non- European background are a large productive group in this country and are a growing economic force. They age somewhere between 15 and 50, and are approximately one million strong in Australia, and if you account for their children, this segment swells in size to well over two million - or well above 10% of our population.
The key question, however, is why we see such a significant under representation in the public arena - say as defined by the composition of our politicians, the justice system or the public service. Whilst this group of new migrants are generally punching well above their weight in business, medicine, engineering, scientific research etc, when it comes to politics, public policy and broader public leadership however, this group is well under represented.
Whilst I acknowledge that there are a number of representative organisations that have heavy new migrant participation, by and large, they tend to focus on a specific interest - whether it be on commerce and business, sports and culture - as opposed to the broader 'nation building' issues of the country.
A back of the envelope analysis of the composition of Parliament and other public or political institutions will quickly bear this point out.
Net result is that I believe Australia loses out from this under representation of recent migrants in our public leadership.
In trying to think through why this may be the case, I have reflected upon my own personal journey to public engagement - only a recent experience, forced about largely as a result of significant concern over Australia's approach in recent years to refugees and asylum seekers.
I came to Australia as a refugee. My family and I immigrated to Australia from Vietnam in 1978. We left Vietnam primarily to escape political persecution - my father was an ardent businessman and capitalist in a hardline communist regime. Many of his peers were captured and 're-educated'. And contrary to recent perception, many of the refugees escaped Vietnam with the only wealth being the clothing on their backs and the desperation in their hearts - and our family was no exception.
There were about 40 of us on an 11 metre fishing boat - the youngest being my younger brother aged two to the oldest, the mother of the ship's captain who was well into her seventies.
We sailed south from Vietnam looking for a home. Along the way, we were rejected by Malaysia and Singapore. In Malaysia, we were boarded and towed away by the water police - a terrifying experience of assault rifles being pointed directly at us. In Singapore, we were put into a detention centre for a few weeks. Mercifully, the stay was short and we were on our way again.
Our captain attempted to head for Australia but the monsoonal waves of the Arafura sea became too much and after two attempts, we retreated back to the waters of Indonesia and seeked political asylum from the Australian Embassy whilst anchored off the coast of East Timor. After about a month of waiting, we heard our names read out over Radio Australia on the boat's short wave radio. The Australian government - under Fraser at that time - had accepted us as political refugees, and after a six month stay in a refugee camp, we were processed, arriving in October 1978. I was seven at the time.
In the intervening 25 years, I feel that I have integrated well into the social fabric of Australia and particularly, with what many would regard as the social fabric of Anglo-Australia. I certainly enjoy a pie with sauce, kick a drop punt and get as excited about the Boxing Day test as any person born here. I guess in line with recent use of fruits as analogies, I would be regarded as a 'banana' - yellow on the outside, whitish yellow on the inside. In hindsight, integration was as much more about survival than it was about good planning.
My first day at school was what one would regard as a real initiation. I arrived at Norwood Primary school - a school in the outer eastern suburbs of Melbourne where we were the first Asians to attend - wearing a Chinese ensemble of matching top and bottoms to appropriately mark the occasion. As soon as I stepped foot into Mrs McDonald's class, which was already underway, the whole class broke out into giggles and chatter, "who's the new kid and why is he wearing pyjamas to school?" Unfortunately, the rest of the first day did not get any better. At lunch, the other kids pulled out their vegemite and peanut butter sandwiches; I opened my plastic container of left over noodles from the night before. Well the aroma just set the kids off again. So by the end of the first day, my report card from the rest of the kids read something along the lines of "funny looking kid with a funny name, who wears pyjamas to school, eats smelly food…oh and does not speak a word of English." My first day was an experience of uncertainty, loneliness, anger and frustration.
These feelings pretty much captured the first two years of school which not surprisingly lead to a number of desperate school yard fights. Perhaps the only thing I had going for me was that I convinced the rest of the boys into thinking I was a martial art expert with a few well-timed kicks and leaps.
As my English improved, I discovered that what Australian kids - well boys at least - respected was sporting prowess, and specifically cricket and Australian rules football.
So in 1980 at the age of nine, I discovered the perfect strategy for inclusion and acceptance - it was called the cover drive in summer, and taking 'speccies' during winter. To top off my new-found identity, I adopted the Richmond Tigers as my VFL/AFL club. I thought this was quite clever as they had won the premiership that year and it gave me instant credibility. Who was to know that they would only play in two more final series over the next 24 years and cause me immeasurable anguish. The immediate emotional confidence boost that I received by identifying with the Tigers is something I have never forgotten and has some relevance for the Republic debate - but more on this later.
From that point onwards - in or about grade 4, I began to believe social acceptance would be based on becoming as Anglo-Australian as I could. I suspect my sisters who were one and two years older than me respectively also came to that conclusion as we stopped speaking Cantonese to each other and switched entirely to English. Needless to say noodles and rice also gave way to vegemite and jam sandwiches. Our parents did not like the fact that we appeared to be denying our Chinese heritage so blatantly, but could do little to influence the outcome as they were consumed with their own battles on the factory floor and putting food on the table. They were largely satisfied as long as we were getting good grades and staying out of trouble.
On reflection, the journey of assimilation was less about denying our heritage than it was about fitting in and being accepted by the order of the day. Central to my argument here is that moving to a Republic would in essence change the 'perceived' order of the day.
From those early foundations of the school ground, I have had a wonderful run of luck and opportunities to be where I am today.
I completed an honours degree in Economics and won a scholarship to the Federal Treasury. I have very fond memories of three months walking past the old Parliament House to Treasury building each morning and evening. I have worked as a management consultant and investment banker in Australia and Asia. I have been fortunate enough to receive a Masters from Harvard Business School. I have ridden the technology ride by starting an e-commerce company with my family - and proud to say that it is still going well. Today, I am an executive with a Global manufacturing company responsible for over 500 employees in two countries. And without a doubt what inspires me and gives me more pride than anything else, is my wife Cathy and two daughters - Madeline and Georgia.
Yet, with all this education and work experience behind me, I can still be immediately cut down by the words 'go back to your own country'. These words have had a habit over the years of instinctively taking me back into my shell. I guess those first 10 years or so in Australia where this phrase and other such terms of endearment were common, has left an underlying insecurity in me that has been hard to overcome. And it is because of this insecurity that I have shied away from engaging in the social and political debate on Australia's future. Instinctively, I still felt like I was a guest of Australia and the Australian people and specifically, a guest of Anglo-Australia and Anglo-Australians. In writing this, I was trying to recall if a non-Anglo-Australian ever told me to go back to my own country. Unsurprisingly, I could not as it would be the equivalent of one dinner party guest asking another dinner guest to leave. With this 'guest mentality' I have felt that I was not a bona fide Australian citizen a 'full member of the family' as it were - with its full set of social and political rights. This frame of mind has ensured that I have stayed purely focussed on technical leadership as opposed to making a contribution to the broader social and political sphere.
The insight that came to me is that if I - with all the opportunities that I have had - feel this inferiority complex, I wonder how many other of the one million plus non-European immigrants also share this frame of mind, and therefore have not allowed themselves to become a 'full citizen, full member of the family'. I certainly was not the only immigrant to receive the 'school ground' treatment in the first few years of arrival.
I wonder if this is why we see so many Asian migrant parents only ever encourage their children to study hard, get a good job and stay out of trouble as opposed to instilling in them a broader sense of civic duty and contribution from an early age to the greater future of Australia. I have from time to time mentored a number of students - some of them Asian. It has been to my dismay how often that Asian students stick to the core technical curricula of science, medicine, engineering or finance as opposed to politics, social studies or liberal arts. I used to think that the key rationale for this was that the key priority of immigrants was on building economic stability. Whilst this is undoubtedly true, I also now believe that some of it has to do with this sense of inferiority.
The whole Tampa incident really developed my thinking on this hypothesis. During Tampa, there were a number of refugees who were surveyed by various media that appeared to support the Howard Government in its approach. Indeed, even my parents bought into the arguments of queue jumping and the opening of the flood gates and how that would impact on the lifestyle of those already inside Australia. How can that be when we were the beneficiaries of a more open and embracing policy?
My personal view as to why so many refugees appeared to support the government's approach ties directly back to this concept of still being a 'guest' of the country. This mental state will lead instinctively to a respect for and agreement with any authority - particularly the govt of the day - and a willingness to accept arguments on face value. This hypothesis was proven with my parents who expressed serious concern when I told them I was very disappointed with Australia's approach on Tampa and that I planned to speak out about it. Their immediate response was 'but we do not want to cause any trouble'. How many members of your own families do not voice an opinion when they feel outraged about an issue?
How does this tie back to the Republic and how it may lead to a greater contribution from new migrants in public debate and leadership? The relevance is as direct as it is powerful, in that the Republic will formally and symbolically say to all Australians - old and new, Anglo and non-Anglo - that we are all members of the Australian family - with its full rights and obligations. Changing the head of state of Australia to that of an Australian citizen - and perhaps at some point having a Head of State who is not Anglo-Australian but rather Indigenous Australian, Greek Australian, African Australian or even Asian Australian - will go a long way to breaking down the insecurities that I myself have felt. Not unlike the immediately psychological confidence boost I received from the Richmond Tigers at the age of nine, I think a local Head of State will offer a similar boost to non-European migrants.
It is the process of becoming a Republic as much as the outcome of a Republic that will help eradicate this 'guest mentality', help build confidence in new migrants that they are as much a stakeholder in the future of this country as a fifth generation Anglo-Australian.
The journey to a Republic has and will continue to be a process of redefining or at the very least clarifying our self-identity as Australia and Australians.
The change process has and will continue to be very engaging and involved. Many questions will be asked about our collective identity - past, current and future: who 'we' were, who 'we' are today and who 'we' will be tomorrow.
There is absolutely no question that our geographic location and increasing economic ties are with the region - southeast Asia, China, North Asia. As the economies of Asia and in particular China continue to grow, this momentum will only increase.
If you look at Australia's trade, the facts are our largest trading partners are Japan (19% of our exports), the US with 10%, Korea 8% and China 7% and rising with a rocket. The UK just sneaks into the Top 10 and falling.
Similarly, of the 4.2 million Australians born overseas, only 26% are from the UK and more specifically, about 45% are from Asia Pacific and Africa. These numbers suggest that the composition of our population and the imagery of who the average Australian is will continue to evolve with time. My two daughters - a blend of German Irish Australian Catholic stock and Chinese/Vietnamese Australian stock are part of this evolutionary change.
And if you want local street level proof of a changing Australia, a walk down to the local takeaway, will often reveal that the queue for Thai food is longer than that of the fish and chip shop next store.
What is a fantastic testament to Australia is that, by and large, most commentators on both sides of the political fence believe that these changes are making Australia a more vibrant and tolerant society. Indeed, even many of the staunch monarchists would say that these continuing changes in our economic, social and demographic profile are as positive as they are inevitable.
If it is the case that most of Australia believes the next 200 years to be quite different from the first 200 years, then why not remove the one emotional and psychological symbol - that of the Head of State currently being the Queen of England - that far from aiding this positive change process, actually holds it back. In one significant gesture, the assumed status of Anglo Australians and Anglo Australian culture could be 'demoted' in a metaphorical sense to be only a part of the Australian identity - albeit an important part of the identity due to its strong heritage - but no longer be perceived as THE identity.
Monarchists may argue that it is already the case that Anglo Australian culture is just part of the broader Australian identity. Perhaps that is the case, but unfortunately, this change is yet to translate to the public arena and to provide non European migrants with a sense of 'family' and confidence in their place in Australian society and equally a sense of obligation to make a public and political contribution.
As a business person who has been involved in a number of change management programs, the observation time after time is that to change behaviour at a fundamental level, you need to win the heart, not just the mind. And to win the heart, you need to tackle the emotional insecurities. If you believe as I do that eliminating the inferiority complex will with time lead to a greater contribution by non-European migrants our public leadership and therefore greater diversity in our policies and perspectives, then we have to tackle the emotional insecurities. Changing to an Australian Head of State will go along way toward tackling these emotional insecurities.
To the extent that we are successful in winning the hearts of the non-European immigrant and changing their self perception of guest to family, it will I believe unleash their individual and collective energy, spirit and voice to the future direction and stewardship of Australia. And to the extent that the composition of the parliament, the public service, the judicial system and other important public institutions one day reflect the composition of the broader population, then Australia will benefit enormously from that diversity. I believe this prize to be great and moving to a Republic to be an important part of realising this prize.
It is important however that we approach the Republic with clarity. I do not believe we are pushing for wholesale constitutional change. My family, like many other migrant families have come to Australia because of the opportunities and compassion that arises from its democratic, legal and political foundations. These foundations should not change nor does it need to in becoming a Republic. However, past attempts at a Republic demonstrate that it will take strong and committed leadership to clarify the issues and create positive momentum as opposed to creating confusion and uncertainty.
To the extent that this can be achieved, I truly believe that the process of moving to a Republic - with the focus on identity and the future - will lead to greater positive engagement with non-European migrants, which in turn will lead to a greater contribution, and ensure greater diversity, tolerance and progress for this great country that is Australia.
Thank you.
|
