Dan Rose, LALC’s chief executive officer, said he has refused to ask anyone from his organisation to give the Welcome to Country requested by Great Lakes Council’s event organiser in an email on January 5, due to Council’s lack of interest in allowing LALC a more meaningful role in this year’s ceremony.

In an email on January 6, the day after he received the emailed request, he responded to council saying: “I … suggest that you reconsider the invitation to this year’s event to not only do Welcome to Country but the participation of appropriate Worimi leaders presenting new citizenship certificates, traditional dance groups etc.

“Forster Local Aboriginal Land Council is not just an organisation to arrange Welcome to Country [by] Worimi representatives. We will agree to participate in a meaningful way with appropriate representation of significant groups such as Forster LAC, Worimi Elders as well as the Lakkari Traditional Owners.” 

He wrote that meaningful participation between white Australians, Worimi Australians and indeed new citizens of Australia goes a long way in practical reconciliation and to show new citizens that white Australia is proud of the first Australians, their culture and heritage. 

Mr Rose believes significant events like January 26 should not simply celebrate European settlement of 200 years, but importantly also celebrate the first peoples’ nations of 60,000 years, documented through skeletal remains, cave painting, other artefacts and relics.

In the email, Mr Rose also commented that the LALC’s chairperson should be accorded the same respect as other dignitaries, and be officially invited to attend the event.

He said representatives of the Worimi people of Great Lakes Council area should be afforded respect as the traditional owners of the Great Lakes Council area in the same way as the mayor and other politicians and dignitaries are on this day.

But what was received was an email asking: “Will I see you or any of your reps at Club Forster?”

Great Lakes Council’s general manager Glenn Handford said that he was aware of Mr Rose’s email on January 6, but (with 20 days still to go) they came too late as the program had been finalised, and the speech notes written out. 

Mr Handford suggested to the organiser that they leave the program as it was for this year, and incorporate the suggestions, which he fully supported, in next year’s event.

However Mr Rose said he had first broached the topic with council’s event organiser a year ago. Twelve months later, nothing had changed.

Mr Handford said that he only heard of Mr Rose’s request this year, and did not know about the earlier conversation, at which he was not present.

“I am happy to do it next year. I would like to sit down with Dan and work out how to do it in a programmed, not ad hoc, way.”

Mr Handford said that there are always two sides to a conversation, but agreed there needed to be a meaningful relationship between both councils, and didn’t know why there hadn’t been a larger role given to the LALC in the past. 

Responding to whether or not the LALC chairperson had received official invitations in the past, Mr Handford said he did not know, but if not, he did not know why not.