Rebecca Bateman: ... respect to the traditional custodians of the land that we're on today, the Ngunnawal people, and to pay my respects to the Elders, past, present. I would also like to extend those respects and acknowledgement to the many, many, many First Nations peoples whose knowledges and cultures, languages and stories are represented, held in custodianship, in the organisations that we all represent at such a important, and I think it's a responsibility that we all feel the importance of. So, my respects to all those people.

My name's Rebecca Bateman. I'm the Director of Indigenous Engagement here at the National Library of Australia. I'm not going to take up too much time because I want to hand over to this deadly panel of people that we've got here. Just briefly, I'm a Weilwan-Gamilaroi person, so my mob are from North West New South Wales, out along the Macquarie Rivers-Castlereagh Rivers mob areas, beg your pardon. I also have connections up through South West Queensland, up through the Charleville region, through my [speaking in language], great-grandfather.

I've been at the National Library since 2018. Prior to that, I worked with Phyllis over at the National Archives for a number of years. And prior to that, I was actually at the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies for 12 years. So, it's been a long time in the GLAM sector, I guess. Really working to connect mobs with the knowledges and the materials that are in our collections that often our people don't know were there and our communities, don't know were there. So, I think that's what we all have in common is working so hard to change that, to make those connections between the collections that we care for and the people that they rightfully belong to.

And on that note, let's introduce the rest of the panel. We're really, really fortunate to be joined here today by an amazing group of people. To my left, Adam Ford is the Associate Curator, First Nations Art at the National Gallery of Australia. Adam is a Menang/Goreng person. I was fortunate enough a month or so ago to go to one of the lunchtime talks that you did, Adam, about what ICIP is looking like over there at the National Gallery. So, I know that there's definitely some synchronicities and things that we have in common and this will be a really great conversation, I think, teasing all that out.

Dr Jilda Andrews is a Yuwaalaraay Cultural Practitioner and was recently appointed as the inaugural Deputy Director, First Nations at the National Museum of Australia. Jilda has more than 25 years' experience as a leading scholar of museums, anthropology and ancestral futures. She's worked extensively in the GLAM sector in public-facing spaces, learning and exhibition roles, as well as exhibition, design and gallery development, including the National Museum's Great Southern Land Gallery and the Australian Pavilion for Expo 2025 in Osaka. Jilda is extending continuities from Australia's deep cultural roots to inform dynamic culturally strong and inclusive communities and future societies.

We're really lucky to be joined today by Lucy Hannan who is the Assistant Acting Director of the Standalone Legislation Team at the Office of the Arts, the team who's working on the coming ICIP legislation that we're all keeping our eagle eye on. And Lucy's joined us today to give us a little bit of an update and insight into where work is on that really important piece of work.

And then last but by no means at all least, the lovely Phyllis Williams from the National Archives of Australia. Phyllis is Gummulkbun from her father from the northwest of Arnhem Land and Larrakia Kulumbirrigin and Tiwi from her mother, from Darwin and Tiwi Islands. And she's the Director of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Engagement at the National Archives.

I'll let Phyllis talk a little bit more about the work that's going on there in a minute. But briefly, her team is responsible for the strategic and operational implementation of the National Archives' Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander initiatives including centering Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives across the organisation. They work with business areas delivering related functions, policies and activities, and doing a whole plethora of work that enable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to connect to and to access the National Archive collection, services and employment at the archives. Really very similar work to what we do here at the National Library.

I might just talk very, very quickly about the ICIP work that's been happening here at the Library and then I'll hand over to everybody else to give us a little bit of insight into what's happening in their spaces. So, as many of you will be aware, in 2022, the Library released its Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property Protocol. That was a protocol that was developed in close collaboration with Terri Janke and Company. The amazing Anika Valenti, Senior Associate at TJC has become an honorary member of our team. We couldn't have got through the last two years without her. She's really been a real key part of what's been happening here at this organisation. And hi, Anika, if you're watching online.

So, from early 2023 through to mid-2024, myself and my team really concentrated on implementing the ICIP Protocol within the organisation. So, this meant bringing everybody, all of the staff members, all of our colleagues on board with what ICIP was firstly, what ICIP is, where you're likely to see it in the Library's collections. And even for those colleagues who don't work with collections, they still play a really important role as enablers of this work. And so, there were some really interesting conversations had around that.

But what we did was we ran about 25 workshops internally, team by team, to really drill down to what does this look like in your work area? What processes and policies and workflows could be adapted or could you include some ICIP considerations in. Lots and lots of work but really, really worth it?

And so, we're now at a point where we're seeing teams just running with this feeling very confident to use the ICIP Protocol, do their assessments, come to us for advice when it's needed or for guidance or for surety. But really, we're really starting to see some amazing changes to the way that things work across the Library.

And on that note, what I thought we'd do is, sorry, can you hear me? We'll hear from Adam and Jilda and Phyllis about the work that's happening in your organisations and then maybe we'll go to you, Lucy, and hear about what's happening in the legislation space.

Adam Ford: Yeah, you go. We'll reverse the order of alphabet. I know you said as an R, you were often left out at school or.

Phyllis Williams: Yeah. No, that's all right. Now, I would like to also acknowledge our peoples from all over Australia and also the Ngunnawal people from this country here and to all the countrymen here and also on this panel as well.

[speaking in language]. My name is Phyllis Williams. My father is [speaking in language]. My mother is [speaking in language]. So, my mother is Larrakia Kulumbirrigin and Tiwi. Thank you.

National Archives of Australia appreciates the interdependency of the work that we do not only within our organisation but with our peoples and the work that we have to do to ensure that we are providing culturally safe spaces at every different level.

So, we're committed to providing these culturally safe places and that includes accessibility, findability, and provision of accurate information. And this is where that interdependency comes into it so that we're consistently reaching out and mindfully reaching out to individuals, groups and the right groups, the right people in communities as well, so that we can engage and they can engage with our programmes, services and connect particularly to the archival collection onsite, offsite and online. Because we have so much vital and important information for people to assist themselves with reconnecting to culture, community and heritage, and also for redress and repatriation as well.

So, like the other cultural institutions, we adhere to archival policies of original order and provenance. And so, National Archives staff don't alter the information on original records as these are provided by the records' creators in the agencies. What we can do and we do is amend or withhold metadata and that's via our databases and collection management systems.

So, I'm just going to give you some areas, give you an idea of some areas of the work that we are doing. So, we're currently reviewing the Australian Government Recordkeeping Metadata Standard. And part of the review involves ensuring that the relevant metadata for transferring material about Indigenous culture matters and peoples is embedded in recordkeeping systems metadata requirements. So, we're planning to incorporate Indigenous cultural and intellectual property metadata into this standard.

And so, this is in the area of access restrictions based on cultural requirements. And this hasn't been a requirement, a usual requirement in business systems until the last couple of years.

And so, our proposal will help agencies identify any Indigenous cultural access restrictions under property rights and sub-properties as well. And that's by adding the Indigenous cultural within the database.
This also extends to cultural rights status and this is associated with men's business, women's business, culturally secret or sacred content, et cetera. And the proposal is also to incorporate Indigenous languages as well. And this is specifically Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages AustLang into that database as well.

Another area that the National Archives is progressing work in a big way is new fields or the addition of new fields in our described records provenance system. And so, this is one of our main databases where we have descriptive information about our series, our agencies, and also individual items as well.

So, in 2024, we implemented system changes to recognise and document ownership of Indigenous traditional knowledge, cultural expression and intellectual property.

The new descriptive metadata fields were incorporated to enable the documentation of ICIP, parallel provenance, cultural sensitivities and information about Indigenous traditional knowledge and languages. And staff can now enter information about Indigenous languages as well.

We have also recently written an internal report on reparative description and are currently drafting reparative description guidelines for staff as well.

Now, we receive records which are transferred to the National Archives from Australian government agencies across Australia. And so, our transfer sections have recently revised their item list forms. And these forms now include the ICIP metadata fields that document Indigenous cultural knowledge and restrictions at the time of transfer. And these new fields are also aligned with the ICIP property metadata fields and describe records provenance system.

Another area of work is Mediaflex, audiovisual records, and the inclusion and also implementation of a rights model. So, we've now implemented the rights management model and this is the same module used by National Film and Sound Archive. And so, the module has data fields that allow for copyright and intellectual property records to be created and attached to records.

The last area that I'll touch on is associated with cultural sensitivity warnings about inappropriate language and tech terminology that we include cultural sensitivity warnings which allow National Archives to allow people to potential trauma triggers when engaging with our national collection. And that is on our website and also through our records search database. And we have also, include cultural sensitivity warnings in our exhibitions as well.

An example of using the cultural sensitivity warnings is that we will be attending the AIATSIS Summit 2025 in Darwin and appreciating that the National Archives has a collection of over 40 million items. And we do have a lot of images as well with unnamed peoples with very, very small or limited descriptions. So, we see this as an opportunity because there are going to be so many countrymen from all over Australia and locally as well, we'll have these photobooks and seek out for people to assist us to add further details.

Rebecca Bateman: Thank you very much, Phyllis. I'm hearing lots of things that ring true for what we're doing here as well. But yeah, really interesting to hear what the changes that are happening at the Archives and really be really excited to see what the future holds as well.

So, Jilda, would you like to.

Jilda Andrews: Yeah, sure. So, hello, everyone. I am at the National Museum of Australia. I'm really grateful hearing Phyllis speak first because I think what really strikes me is the importance of the nature, I think, of our collections that we each have carriage for and how the nature of our collections pretty much really give us an incredibly important frame around how we might understand ICIP, how we might think about languaging it internally to our respective institutions and then how we apply it. And I imagine that there are similarities across our institutions with aspects of them, but there will also be differences as well.

So, I guess in relation to that then, it's probably useful for me to kind of preface my ICIP little blurb by saying we have the National Historical Collection at the NMA. The National Museum of itself was established in 1980. And as a result, that means that a fair proportion of the National Museum's holdings and collections, like to think of them as legacy collections or inherited collections from other institutions and from lots of different angles too and different pathways.

So, with that, how we might consider agency of First Nations people in the makeup and the composition of the National Historical Collection is really important. And how we might think then about how ICIP might be in some way performing a redress role.

But in other ways, we have collections that were acquired much more recently where Indigenous agency is absolutely present and that means that we can look to enact different parts of ICIP in different ways or we have more information to work with or relationships with the creator and their community, et cetera. So, that's probably really important for me to talk about the breadth of our collections underpinning then our approach with ICIP.

So, at the museum, the way that we articulate ICIP is through a policy called the First Nations Cultural Rights and Engagement Policy. And that was established in 2022 or written in 2022. Again, I think the museum enlisted the services of Terri Janke and Co for that as well, which I also would like to make a point about how much the institution itself is involved in the composition and in the writing of these policies so that we make sure that we can actually apply them and that I guess that we have the opportunity of embedding it in practise.

And that's not to say that outsourcing or enlisting the assistance of an outside legal firm doesn't allow that, but I think you have to make a provision for the capacity for an institution to be able to apply them. And also champion them too. And I think if you develop policies and procedures in-house, in a way, you're able to also grow a body of people within the organisation that can actually champion that protocol and that procedure and also engender its application throughout the institution.

But what I really like about our policy is that we really articulate the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People in there. It's named. And particularly, Article 12 sets the kind of the why or the rationale as to what ICIP is trying to achieve.

So, by having that at the top, then what sits underneath that for us are principles. So, it's a principles-led approach and there are 11 of them. So, it's already I'm giving you the idea that it's quite a large document and there's a lot of detail in it as well. But I will just read out what these 11 principles are to give you an idea of how we've bridged Article 12 down into practise.

So, we've got recognition and respect of First Nations cultural rights; involving First Nations peoples; consultation; free, prior and informed consent; interpretation, authenticity and integrity; acknowledging cultural and customary laws for secret and sacred privacy and representations of deceased people; acknowledgement; sharing benefits; recognising, maintaining and strengthening First Nations culture; recognition of ongoing rights; and a timely, transparent and respectful process for responding to feedback.

And so, I guess the point I want to make about this is that I guess in 2025, we're probably in a really good position to actually look internally in our institutions to recognise the way that lots of this is embedded in what we already do and how we do it. And then for a protocols document then to be able to support that in an ongoing way, but also be courageous with how we then extend or move on. And maybe three or four principles might better help that trajectory moving forward.

Because I think a lot of the things I just read out, and all of you guys would agree with me, that a lot of that is already implied and embedded in the work that we do. And we would never dream of mounting an exhibition, for example, without the, not just engagement, consent of course, but what next? It's also sharing of benefits but also fair and equitable sharing of resources that go into the production of things like that.

So, I think we're probably in the right kind of time and place to be able to get down into the details here and scrutinise the, how far we've come, I think, particularly in the past 10 years to embedding this so that these policies can become really useful for us moving forward.

Rebecca Bateman: Yeah. You're right, Jilda. I mean, I think, I speak for myself anyway but for those of us who have been around for a while, sometimes it feels like we're having the same conversations that we had 15, 20, 25 years ago. But then you look over your shoulder and you go, "Oh my goodness, in the last five years, in the last 10 years, did, all these things have changed?"

And we are here now, as you say, in an amazing position where I think you're right, this is a really good time to be making these changes and really embedding not just writing a document but making sure that it infiltrates through everything that happens within the organisation.

Jilda Andrews: Yeah. And actually, on from that, one of the more significant changes is that First Nations people are now taking leadership positions in institutions like ours.

Rebecca Bateman: Absolutely, yeah. Incredibly important.

Jilda Andrews: So, we can now stop putting institutions and communities always as separable entities and actually be more courageous in recognising the ways that our institutions have become more First Nations spaces because we have leaders in these spaces that can actually do different work.

Rebecca Bateman: They can become First Nation spaces. Yes.

Jilda Andrews: Yes. Yeah.

Rebecca Bateman: Full stop.

Adam Ford: I'm feeling a little bit unprepared of not bringing a sheet with me to run off memory break but.

Jilda Andrews: It's because there are 11 of these.

Adam Ford: Yeah.

Jilda Andrews: I had to write them down.

Adam Ford: But I like what Jilda said about it's almost implied with what we do and what we kind of carry in our jobs. And I give thanks to Jilda and Phyllis and people like Brenda Croft and the audience who have done it long before I have. And I continue to join in that spaces and have created those pathways for people like myself who were quite still young in this kind of career to keep going.

But like you said, with the implied, it's never at an arm's length as well with the governance that the organisation sets and I see that filtering down into our role. It's just as maybe as an aside to some of the really amazing points that both Jilda and Phyllis have touched on.

For example, in our collection and acquisitions development strategies and how not only do we incorporate ICIP but how do we support the individual and collective rights of Aboriginal peoples. And at the centre of the NGA's policy, self-determination, First Peoples first.

And like what Phyllis said as well, that filters through collection management: how do we name artists? And where the NGA sits, obviously, at the kind of forefront of contemporaneous art collection but also historical material as well.

I think one of the interesting things that I've seen, and I've only been there for I think about seven months now so still early days, is just there's these little touches as well in the way that we name ancestors for peoples where we might not know the maker of that object or of that artwork. But also some of those more pressing concerns that are coming up for OFTA and in those conversations more broadly around fake Aboriginal art or the idea of cultural appropriation and then you break that down into intercultural appropriation.

I think at the forefront at the moment is I think OFTA kind of keeps hearing is dot painting. And like Jilda said with the implied, it's implied that we wouldn't be mounting a show of dot painting artworks if they weren't from the Western Desert or the kind of authenticity. And that is definitely a loaded word that sneaks through ideas of tradition and so forth.

But being responsive to community needs, and as you said as well, I think institutions are now seeing that we are front-facing to our communities as well. And there's a set of expectations that come with holding materials, but also using those materials to tell stories. When I think of curatorship and what a curator is, it's at the Latin root, it's cura, to care. So, there's an element of actually having to care for these objects and to care for that means to care for the community and their expectations and their aspirations around those materials.

So hopefully I haven't run out of things to say, but there's so many things that kind of filter through. And I think, like you said, this implied nature of what we do. For me, maybe I was kind of leaning on that implied, nature of being a little underprepared maybe for this conversation or in these kind of points, but yeah.

Rebecca Bateman: Thank you, Adam. It's really interesting. It occurred to me as we're sitting here yarning, we've got the entire GLAM sector up here. So, we've got galleries, libraries, archives and museums which is a really nice element I think to bring to this conversation as well.

But I think what's really jumping out to me is even though we come from quite different organisations, the commonalities that we have weight out-far our differences. And I think that extends to what we are trying to achieve in terms of, as you said, Jilda, all of this is about Indigenous agency and the restoration of cultural authority. And we all have our different pieces of paper that we use to embed this stuff, but it's all coming down to the same end goal.

And on that note, I think it's really interesting to reflect that in our organisations. At the moment, we are developing things like our ICIP Protocol, your policy and your First Nations strategy, Phyllis, and the similar things that you have at the Gallery in the absence of a legal framework to bring to this particular piece of work. And I think we are all doing a lot of work to really make sure that these things are as rigorous as they can be to uphold the rights of our people where there is no other framework just yet to really call on to do that.

And I think this is why it's really exciting to have Lucy here today to let us know where we are up to on that journey and where we can expect to go next, I guess. So, yeah.

Lucy Hannan: Well, thank you very much for inviting Office for the Arts to come along and speak. It's an honour to be sitting alongside the panel members and to hear about the work being done in your organisations.
I thought I'd give a little bit of a snapshot, so the background to Office for the Arts work. So, there's been over the decades previous reports and inquiries calling for new legislation to protect traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions. Part of this is that existing legislation doesn't provide adequate protection so it's not designed to protect ICIP. And I guess the definition of ICIP in this context is all aspects of culture and rights to heritage.

So, under the National Cultural Policy, the Australian government committed to develop new standalone legislation. So rather than amending existing legislation to protect traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions, and this is including to address the harm associated with fake art, merchandise and souvenirs.
So, where we're up to, so Office for the Arts and within the standalone legislation team, our team's responsible for developing the legislation. Really importantly, this is under a collaborative model. So, the key part is we've established an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Expert Working Group on ICIP led by Dr Terri Janke, the global leader in ICIP.

So, this Expert Working Group is set up to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander lived experience and perspectives inform the development of the legislation. Really importantly, the nature of the commitment is quite broad. The definitions of traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions are potentially a little bit narrower than the broader concept of ICIP. I mean, some aspects of ICIP already have some protection under existing legislation.

So, what we've done is we've also set up a collaboration framework to make sure that we're talking to other Commonwealth agencies. So, these include the Attorney General's Department which is responsible for copyright, IP Australia which is responsible for registered IP rights, and the National Indigenous Australians Agency.

So, yeah, I guess the key part is the process in developing this legislation. The scope of the legislation is something to be worked out and brainstormed and discussed between the Expert Working Group and the key Commonwealth departments.

A key part of the process is obviously community consultation as well. So, in 2024, we held initial national consultation. This was to hear from the community about some of the problems, what people see as the role that the legislation could play. We also have further community consultation plans for the rest of the year which will be informed by our Expert Working Group.

Rebecca Bateman: Great. Thanks so much, Lucy. And while we all understand that this initial work is focused on the fake arts industry and so it should be, it's really, really important to provide a framework, a legal framework that can provide protections in that space. I think we all have experienced what can happen when ICIP is misused or mishandled within the GLAM sector as well. And I wonder whether any of you wanted to speak to that in terms of the impacts of the misuse or lack of protections around ICIP in the collecting sector?

Adam Ford: I think there's some interest, that's where some of my interest comes in is the scope of the ICIP legislation as it's developing or some of the slippages as well. We think in our collecting role as well, things of authorship as we know that, and a painter might paint an artwork, but the custodianship of the story with which it's being painted is owned by another artist or by a senior member in that community and where those protections lie.

I also think about the kind of living and embodied material nature of objects. I won't give too much away because it's further down the track. But for example, the use of ceremonial dancing sticks, the way that they can be reactivated and reperformed and rehomed and that kind of suggestion that there's a material and ongoing life to ICIP as well. And I think we have to be responsive to that as culture is not as a fixed thing but as a constantly evolving and kind of living essence.

And I think what the fake art touches on upon so well not only in that kind of the material degradation of what it implies as well, but it's also this suggestion more broadly that indigeneity is a veneer, it's this aesthetic surface that can be utilised and reperformed out of its context as well. And that's where I see my role and where we as curators obviously see our role is kind of re-peopling, re-storying, re-placing, re-spiriting those objects and that artwork, so it doesn't sit as this kind of aesthetic veneer, as this kind of surface-level thing to be replicated or recreated outside of the context of our communities, of our people, of our stories and our histories as well.

Rebecca Bateman: I really love that idea of re-storying and re-spiriting the things that sit within the four walls of these really austere and colonial buildings. I think that's really, really powerful.

Jilda Andrews: Yeah. Something that I guess we've started to really engage with is that the concept of Indigenous knowledges are collectively held. And the tension with how they're individually expressed. And this is something that I think ICIP legislation is going to have to really, really think through, as well as how we understand and enact cultural rights and moral rights and intellectual property rights around cultural expressions.

Where is that interface where we can talk about the ways that cultural knowledge is collectively held, especially when our communities aren't supported necessarily to wrap around the governance structures and the social structures and the cultural structures to enable them to uphold their own aspiration and authority around those cultural knowledges?

So, I think it's really important for us as representatives of national cultural institutions to talk about how legislation might operate for us. But there are real fundamental things that I think we need to also be addressing and engaging with. And essentially, this is a western legal structure that is engaging with a worldview that sits outside of that.

And I think forums like this, forums like AMAGA, the Australian Museums and Galleries Association, those national conferences are so important. The AIATSIS Summit is so important. These spaces where we can actually forge ahead and keep talking and working these things out are so incredibly important because we haven't properly addressed what it means to apply western frameworks around cultural knowledges yet.
To the point that I think it's okay that we haven't had legislation up to this point. It's the same for repatriation of ancestral remains. We don't have legislation for that and yet that practise has evolved in a really interesting way through the advocacy of our elders who have really fought for the right way and the cultural way to be able to do that.

And perhaps, we mightn't have been able to do that had we had legislation wrapped around it. So, I think actually seizing the opportunity where we don't, sorry, Lucy, where we don't have legislation is actually there's an opportunity for us to do that other thinking work.

Because while my community doesn't, we're drinking bore water, while we don't have the kind of investment to be able to educate, get healthcare and drink clean water and we don't have investment to be able to support cultural authority and governance around our cultural knowledges, then a big gap emerges where potentially, legislation isn't able to address. It might be addressing the public institution outward-facing bit, but all this other bit where cultural knowledges are actually expressions of culture don't apply.

So, my recommendation is for us to be really testing this open field and open ground before we get legislation so that we can actually use the legislation not just to address this problem but to provide scaffolding for all these other bits.

Rebecca Bateman: I'm looking around the room here and I know there are a few of our colleagues here who have been to one or other of our workshops that we ran internally. And I know that one of the things that you would've all heard at those workshops was Anika in particular saying, "There isn't legislation now, but you know what, we're not waiting." And I think that's what it's about.

And I think there is a lot to be said for getting in and doing the groundwork and setting the principles and changing the thinking and framing of the way we do things so that when legislation does come.

Jilda Andrews: It's servicing us.

Rebecca Bateman: It's servicing us. It's not something that is then, "Oh my goodness, there's this thing that we now have to retrofit." We've already in waiting and it will service us and just fill in a gap, not be the whole solution because we've already created.

Jilda Andrews: And if I can say something about how ICIP hasn't worked, and I'm not going to talk from the National Museum but from the museum sector, is that free, prior and informed consent which we all would understand is absolutely important, incredibly important. It often doesn't map to the nature of our collections having poor data, no provenance, et cetera. And I've seen free, prior and informed consent as a principle used to prevent access to collections. So, it's working against us in that way. And I think as a community, we can do workarounds that don't diminish the intent behind what free, prior and informed consent is there to do, but to actually think through a procedure that doesn't limit access so that we can actually attend to that other principle of access which is where we all need to be thinking and talking about.

Phyllis Williams: Well, Archives doesn't have an ICIP policy as such. We have appreciated that there is this big issue. And so, we have taken the initiative to develop our processes, our procedures, and to look at what are our systems and to work within those.

And picking up on what you've said, Jilda, about indigenous knowledges, this is a key area associated with provenance and ensuring that we make sure to include the voices of our peoples with the multiple provenances. So, it's not just the official provenance when collections come into our institution, it's the stories, the knowledge that has come with whatever information or objects before. Really, really important.

Lucy Hannan: And really fantastic points about what role the legislation can play. So, the first thing is the reason why we've set up this framework, we've got the Expert Working Group on board is because there are some areas where it's not appropriate for legislation to interfere. So, it's really important that we get that right, that we produce legislation that's fit for purpose.

The other thing I'd say is the legislation will have to work alongside existing legislation and be conscious of existing protocols. So, I think a good way to think about it is that it would be complementary rather than something that sweeps away existing practise. So, it's really, they're big complex questions for our Expert Working Group to figure out and figure out exactly how can the legislation fit in this broader puzzle.

And something interesting is that the Productivity Commission report recommended a whole suite of measures. So, this was particularly about inauthentic arts and crafts, but acknowledging the complexity of the problems. You need multiple different measures. You need funding, education, legislation, voluntary industry codes, all of those sorts of things. So, it's yeah.

Rebecca Bateman: Yeah. I think yeah, as you said, Jilda, as everybody has alluded to, there's a real tension and a juggle in that we don't want these protocols and policies to be leading to situations where they're counterproductive in terms of they end up being a mechanism to lock things away and where we take things like free, prior informed consent to the nth degree where it becomes a blocker rather than an enabler. And I think that's one of quite a number of challenges that we face in this space.

And I think it could be a really heavy thing to carry sometimes, that juggle, that trying to find the balance. And I think we all have such a sense of responsibility to get it right particularly for our mobs to make sure that we're doing the right thing. And I think that certainly brings with it a certain cultural load for want of a better way of putting it and a sense of we're all very celebratory about things that are changing and the position that we're in now to make change and what's happening, but I'm really interested in the impact that it has.

As a Blackfella working in that space, it's not always easy. It's not always without weight. So, I was wondering if anybody would like to share your perspectives from.

Phyllis Williams: I often think about, this is using a Black American analogy. That as a Black person in Australia, a professional working in an organisation, regardless of where, there's always a Black tax that we have to pay. We have to be better. We have to be able to speak up. We have to be able to advocate. And we have to be able to go on journeys with people, with our organisation, which might not sit comfortably with us. And also appreciating what our community, what our families. And our communities aren't just the community, there are layers and layers and layers and we sit within each of these layers as well.

Rebecca Bateman: And you don't leave it at the door at 5:00 when you go home. It's a 24-hour job.

Phyllis Williams: Not at all. Not at all. Constantly.

Jilda Andrews: I've kind of struggled a little bit with this term of cultural load. And also, I think some people refer to it as a colonial load as well which I think is interesting. And I guess I also try and recognise in my non-Indigenous colleagues the way that they're also, I mean it's different, but the way that they're invited into this space as well and how they're supported to be able to navigate it knowing that they can see their colleagues also having to deal with a whole other different tax with it.

So, I like the idea about how we might think of it in a broader way as well as. And really useful, that's a useful frame, that kind of Black tax, but you just have to keep paying it. That's the problem.

But I guess over my time in the sector, I've shifted the way I've thought about the cultural load. And because I'm thinking, if you're going to think about it in a tax way, who am I paying this tax to? And I think in my career, I've made a decision maybe in the last five years to change who I pay the tax to.

So, I'm not paying the tax to the GLAM world or my boss or the minister. I'm paying my tax to my family and my community. And for me, that's been it. It's helped me think about where that extra effort, how I direct the benefit of that extra effort and I'm much more comfortable by thinking that I've directed it in a place that is of my choice. So, I've probably shifted I think in the past few years around who I pay my taxes to.

Rebecca Bateman: Yeah. That resonates with me a lot. Yeah.

Jilda Andrews: Yeah.

Rebecca Bateman: What about you?

Adam Ford: Yeah, definitely. It's who am I paying that tax to, but what am I paying that tax for as well? And I don't speak in terms of necessarily the NGA, but I think across our section, we would all have felt it. The push to embed First Nations perspectives and to preference and prioritise First Nations voices in that from non-Indigenous colleagues that sit outside of that, sometimes that's where that tax is recreated or that cultural load comes from, especially if they're ill-supported to be making those decisions.

And sometimes, and I don't say this for the NGA, but previously where in terms of First Nations Art, we're being shoehorned in by people that didn't have a holistic understanding of not only of that object but the Indigenous knowledges that encompasses and the kind of material and cultural consequences. So then, you're then having to take on an extra kind of caretaking capacity for a load that you weren't quite responsible for or might not have been active in materialising as well.

So, yeah, I think that's probably my thing now is who am I paying for this tax for? Do I have to pay this tax? And if I don't have to, I won't. And it's always I guess it's a very loaded term these days, but self-care, prioritising the self, which is quite difficult to do as collective-facing peoples as well. And sometimes that tempering, that challenge between how do I care for myself while also understanding that that self-care also is in conversation with a community care, not just in my own specific community but a broader First Nations community, especially when I work off country and I'm a guest on somebody else's country as well and how does that care extend towards them and their ambitions as well.

Phyllis Williams: I also think organizationally, it's really, really important that we bring our non-Aboriginal Torres Strait Islander colleagues along with us on this journey.

Rebecca Bateman: Absolutely.

Phyllis Williams: It's not about quietening, retreating or you might want to retreat for a little while. It's not bearing the whole lot, taking it all on. It's bringing your colleagues and your organisation along with you as well.

Rebecca Bateman: Yeah. And the last two years here at the Library, we've been doing exactly that and I just have so much deep respect for the non-Indigenous colleagues that we work with who have brought themselves to conversations that are sometimes out of their comfort zone, that embrace new ways of doing things and new ways of thinking about things.

This is all familiar to us, but it's so new when we are having these workshops and talking to teams and we can feel people going, "Oh, I don't want to offend anybody. I've got all these questions, but I don't want to upset." It's like, "You might have to try a little bit harder."

It's a really vulnerable place to be. And I think embracing a whole new worldview and learning and meeting that this is not something, this is not a space that I'm familiar with or comfortable with but hey, I'm here to learn.

Adam Ford: And I think that fear of offence as we've all seen is that kind of inhibiting factor sometimes for meaningful engagement where there is that curiosity and there is that willingness to learn. Of course, we want to bring our colleagues along with us as well. But I also think of the white board that hangs above Tina Baum, our senior curator's, board 'not your black Siri' as well. So, there's that kind of element.

Rebecca Bateman: I love it.

Adam Ford: As well as that we can do this, but we're not your black Siri, I'm not your black ugga bugga. I'm not your black best friend at the end of the day as well. But there is a genuine appetite and we're seeing that those kind of that inhibition of offence and getting it wrong slip away. And I think we also need to hold mistakes for our non-Indigenous colleagues, and I say this myself, to not get it right 100% of the time, but how do they redress that going forward in that are they prioritising First Nations voices and stories?

Rebecca Bateman: If I've said it once over the last two or three years, I must have said it 100, 200, 300 times, it's okay to make a mistake. No one's limbs going to fall off. The world is not going to end. And you will learn from it and you won't do it again next time.

I think on that note, I'm keeping an eye on the time and I think we're getting pretty close to time. I think that's a really nice positive place to round off actually. So, on that note, I'd like to invite everyone to join me in thanking Adam, Jilda, Lucy and Phyllis for your generous.

Unfortunately, we don't have time at the moment for questions, but what we do have is some refreshments upstairs in the conference room on level four. So, if you would like to come along with us upstairs and continue the yarn, we would love to see you up there.

Loris, who is over here, will be outside and help you find your way up to the conference room. But please feel very free and welcome to come up and have a bite to eat and a yarn. Thank you all so very much for coming along.