Last month, former Victorian Greens (now Independent) Senator Lidia Thorpe, ‘reiterated the call for Australian property owners to pay a weekly “rent” tax to Indigenous groups who claim to own the land’. Proposals of this sort have been put forth for more than 50 years. Now, in Victoria, this new Pay The Rent scheme proposes that non-Indigenous Australians pay 1 per cent of their annual income ‘as rent’, to be redistributed to Indigenous Australians. Any such proposal to mandate this inequitable tax for all Australians must be categorically rejected.

At present, Pay The Rent is a NFP registered with ASIC. Donations can be given on a voluntary basis, but it would appear that some members of the political class would like to see this tax legislated as compulsory.

Such a policy has numerous problems, I will touch upon my three foremost concerns. First, it is unjust and divisive. Second, there is scant evidence this scheme would raise the living standards of Indigenous Australians and there is ambiguity surrounding where this money would actually go. And finally, there is a glaring issue regarding selection criteria, i.e., what would qualify someone to be sufficiently Indigenous in order to receive funds?

Some proponents of such a tax seem more intent on creating division than unity, demonstrated by inflammatory comments, particularly those voiced at Australia Day protests. Declarations such as indicating that Indigenous people are ‘at war’ with non-Indigenous Australians are not helping. Extreme language of this sort can only fuel discord, not to mention it is inaccurate. As political commentator Chris Kenny noted of these hysterics at the Australia Day protest last month, ‘None of this can achieve anything.’

To tax people based upon their immutable characteristics, under the presumptive rationale that their ancestors were at fault, is a preposterous idea. Schemes like this are completely unreasonable and only lead to further division and polarisation within our society. Obsessing over ethnic background is simply regressive. To paraphrase the great Martin Luther King Jr, we ought to look at the content of an individual’s character, not at the colour of their skin. In addition, we ought not to obsess over historical failures, we need to learn from them and keep moving forward.

People cannot choose the situation in which they are born into, they can only try and make the best out of the situation in which they are. Why should new and recent migrants to Australia have to pay a tax like this? Matter of fact, why should anyone? The proposal is in essence a form of destructive identity politics which relies on the ridiculous notion of ‘collective guilt’. With collective guilt, irrespective of how good of a law-abiding citizen one may be, one is doomed by virtue of their ethnic make up. There is nothing more antithetical to liberalism than this – to paraphrase journalist Greg Sheridan.

Moreover, I am yet to encounter any concrete evidence that a divisive race-based tax is going to resolve the serious contemporary issues that Indigenous Australians – particularly those living in rural areas – have to navigate. The high suicide rates, domestic violence issues (including the sexual abuse of minors), substance abuse, incarceration rates, and welfare dependency are all acute issues that must be addressed.

The proposal is ultimately a form of additional welfare, which has proven largely ineffective in combating the myriad issues Indigenous Australians face. Indigenous lawyer and advocate Noel Pearson has described the welfare state as ‘poison’ for his people, as has Warren Mundine from The CIS – former President of the ALP. Indeed, Pearson in 2014 attacked ‘left-wing bigots who “believe themselves compassionate, sensitive, respectful, empathetic and morally correct” – for serving up a “poisoned pill” of low expectations to Indigenous Australians, and railing against ideas such as welfare reform and the development of traditional lands’. One could reasonably infer from this precedent that the proposed tax is unlikely to produce effective results.

Further, it is not clear where the money would be distributed. Pay The Rent claims that the taxed money is filtered to a ‘centralised distribution body which can make decisions about how best to support Aboriginal people’. This level of ambiguity is simply unacceptable and leaves the door open for a potential misuse of funds, without greater transparency.

Moreover, one of many vexing issues is that it is up to this ‘centralised distribution body’ to determine who is sufficiently Indigenous to receive funds (and who indeed should be taxed). Thorpe herself is not completely Indigenous, she has European ancestry. This begs the question, can one choose to wilfully neglect part of their ancestry, and only identify with the part which they choose? How does this work? Is a person X amount oppressor and X amount oppressed? Should they be taxed for their Anglo and migrant ancestry and then be refunded for Indigenous ancestry?!

To elucidate this point further, I am your classic ‘Anglo-mutt’ – i.e., English, Irish, and Scottish. I am, however, also a quarter Italian. Consider if I was to lean into my Italian quarter and disregard the rest of my ancestry, identifying only as Italian, or vice versa. This is what many involved in the activist movement are doing. It seems strange to be able to pick and choose that heritage of which you most want to define yourself!

In sharp contrast to Thorpe is Senator Jacinta Price, who takes a more constructive position on these matters. In her maiden speech to Parliament, Price aptly articulated:

‘Where we fail is where we encourage others to believe responsibility for one’s own life can be avoided and disadvantage can be charged to another. We need to focus on nation-building, not nation-burning. Our laws as they stand now are not racist, as some will claim, but exist because we have overcome historical racist legislation.’

As the words of Price implicitly indicate above, a vindictive scheme such as Pay The Rent is counterproductive in the pursuit of the noble and worthy goal of improving the standard of living for Indigenous Australians.

Mark Burgess is a contributor for Young Voices Australia.