Introduction
In the multifaceted landscape of Australian society, few practices embody the intersection of ancient traditions and modern reconciliation efforts as profoundly as the “Welcome to Country” ceremony. This ritual, rooted in the customs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, serves as a formal acknowledgment of the Traditional Owners of the land on which an event or gathering takes place. It is a gesture of respect, hospitality and cultural continuity that has been adapted from millennia-old protocols to contemporary settings, such as public events, parliamentary sessions and corporate meetings. Far from being a divisive imposition, as some critics claim, Welcome to Country represents an invitation to share in the spiritual and cultural heritage of Australia’s First Nations peoples, fostering understanding and unity in a post-colonial nation.
This paper explores the meaning of Welcome to Country within the Indigenous Australian context, delving into its historical origins, ceremonial forms and evolving role in society. It then examines the deep spiritual associations that underpin the practice, highlighting how it connects participants to the land, ancestors and Dreamtime narratives. Finally, it addresses the deliberate misrepresentations propagated by figures like Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and organisations such as Advance Australia, who frame the ceremony as an exclusionary act that undermines non-Indigenous Australians’ sense of belonging. Such portrayals, this paper argues, are not only inaccurate but also fuel unnecessary culture wars, distracting from genuine issues facing Indigenous communities. Moreover, Advance is critiqued as an astroturf entity, ostensibly grassroots, but funded by wealthy elites to advance conservative agendas. Through a balanced analysis drawing on historical, cultural and political sources, this discussion aims to clarify the true essence of Welcome to Country while exposing the motivations behind its politicisation.
The Meaning of Welcome to Country in the Indigenous Australian Context
Welcome to Country is a ceremonial protocol performed by Traditional Owners or their authorised representatives to greet visitors and acknowledge the land’s custodianship. Its origins trace back thousands of years to Aboriginal customs where groups would formally welcome outsiders to their territory, ensuring safe passage and mutual respect. This practice was essential in a continent where diverse language groups and clans maintained distinct boundaries, and crossing into another’s Country without permission could lead to conflict. In pre-colonial times, these welcomes often involved rituals like smoking ceremonies, dances, or songs to invoke protection from ancestral spirits and affirm connections to the land.
In modern Australia, Welcome to Country has been formalised since the 1970s, gaining prominence during events like the 2000 Sydney Olympics and becoming a staple in public life. It is distinct from an “Acknowledgement of Country,” which can be performed by anyone to recognise Traditional Owners and their ongoing connection to the land. A Welcome to Country might include a speech in an Indigenous language, a performance, or a symbolic act like a smoking ceremony using native plants to cleanse the space and ward off negative energies. The purpose is multifaceted: it educates attendees about local Indigenous history, promotes reconciliation and honours the sovereignty of First Nations peoples over their ancestral lands.
Country, in Indigenous terms, is not merely geographical, but encompasses waterways, skies and spiritual realms. It is a living entity to which Aboriginal people are intrinsically linked through kinship, lore and identity. For instance, in the Yolngu traditions of northern Australia, welcomes involve exchanging cultural knowledge to build alliances. This reciprocity underscores that Welcome to Country is an act of inclusion, not exclusion; it invites all present to engage respectfully with the land’s heritage.
Critics often overlook this context, portraying the ceremony as a recent invention imposed on non-Indigenous Australians. However, historical records and oral traditions confirm its antiquity, adapted to address the dispossession wrought by colonisation. Organisations like Reconciliation Australia emphasise that it symbolises acknowledgment of past injustices while building bridges for the future. In educational settings, it teaches children about Australia’s pre-1788 history, countering narratives that erase Indigenous presence.
The ceremony’s meaning evolves with context; in urban areas like Sydney, it might reference Gadigal Country, while in remote communities, it ties directly to Dreaming stories. Ultimately, Welcome to Country affirms that Australia is built on Indigenous foundations, encouraging all citizens to share in this legacy without diminishing their own identities. It is a protocol of reciprocity, where visitors are granted permission to be on the land, reflecting ancient customs of hospitality that predate European arrival. As Australia grapples with its colonial legacy, the ceremony plays a vital role in truth-telling and healing, aligning with national efforts toward reconciliation.
Despite its positive intent, the practice has faced scrutiny over its implementation in various sectors. For example, in government and corporate environments it has become routine, sometimes leading to debates about authenticity when not performed by Traditional Owners. Yet, guidelines from bodies like AIATSIS stress the importance of proper protocols to maintain cultural integrity. In essence, Welcome to Country is a bridge between past and present, inviting reflection on shared history and mutual respect in a nation still navigating its identity.
The Spirituality Associated with Welcome to Country
At the heart of Welcome to Country lies a profound spiritual dimension, intertwined with Aboriginal cosmology known as the Dreaming or Dreamtime. This is not a historical epoch but an eternal reality where ancestral beings shaped the land, instilled laws, and continue to influence the living world. Spirituality in Indigenous Australian cultures is inseparable from Country; the land “owns” the people, providing physical sustenance and spiritual identity.
When a Traditional Owner performs a Welcome to Country, they communicate with ancestral spirits, seeking permission for visitors to enter safely. This act invokes protection, ensuring harmony between humans and the spiritual realm. For example, smoking ceremonies use eucalyptus or other sacred plants to purify participants, connecting them to the ancestors’ essence. It’s a reminder that the land is alive with spiritual forces – totems, songlines, and sacred sites – that demand respect.
Aboriginal spirituality emphasises interconnectedness: every rock, river and animal shares the same soul as humans. Welcome to Country extends this to visitors, integrating them into the spiritual web of the land. In Noongar culture, for instance, the ceremony acknowledges the rights of Traditional Owners and pays respect to the spiritual essence of Country. This spiritual reciprocity fosters wellbeing, as Country, culture, and spirituality are key to Indigenous health.
The practice also honours the profound connection First Nations peoples have with the land, which holds spiritual significance intertwined with identity and belonging. By welcoming others, Traditional Owners affirm their custodial role, passed down through generations via oral traditions and ceremonies. This spirituality contrasts with Western views of land as property, viewing it instead as a sacred entity requiring care.
In contemporary contexts, the spiritual elements persist, even as the ceremony adapts. It serves as a conduit for ancestral communication, saying, “We trust this person; let them pass.” Critics who dismiss it as mere performance ignore this depth, where spirituality underpins cultural resilience despite colonisation’s disruptions. For many Indigenous people, participating reinforces their spiritual ties, promoting healing and pride.
The spirituality also manifests in the ceremony’s role in social and emotional wellbeing. Connection to Country and ancestors provides strength, countering historical traumas like dispossession. In rituals like Welcome to Country, this spirituality is shared, inviting non-Indigenous Australians to appreciate the land’s sacredness. However, some interpretations clash with other beliefs, like spiritism conflicting with Christianity, but the core remains a celebration of interconnected life.
Ultimately, the spirituality of Welcome to Country is about harmony with the land, ancestors and each other. It transcends ritual, embodying a worldview where spiritual health is tied to environmental and cultural stewardship. As Australia moves toward greater cultural awareness, understanding this aspect is crucial for meaningful reconciliation.
Misrepresentations by Jacinta Price and Advance Australia
Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price has emerged as a vocal critic of Welcome to Country, framing it as divisive, overdone and a waste of taxpayer money that does little to address real Indigenous issues. She argues that the ceremony implies non-Indigenous Australians are not welcome in their own country, stating, “It’s not welcoming, it’s telling non-Indigenous Australians ‘this isn’t your country’ and that’s wrong. We are all Australians and we share this land.” Price claims it enables “real racists to hide in plain sight” and distracts from practical solutions for Indigenous communities. She has highlighted costs, noting expenditures like $450,000 per term, suggesting funds could better support remote areas. In parliamentary debates, she has linked it to broader grievances, such as recruitment challenges in the Australian Defence Force, attributing them to narratives that make Australians “ashamed of who we are.”
These portrayals deliberately misrepresent the ceremony’s intent. Welcome to Country does not question anyone’s Australian identity; it acknowledges the Traditional Owners’ ongoing connection to specific lands, inviting respect and inclusion. Price’s assertion that it is a modern invention by Ernie Dingo ignores its roots in ancient protocols, adapted for contemporary use. Indigenous leaders, including land councils, have rejected her views, stating she does not speak for them. Her criticisms often align with conservative agendas, fuelling culture wars that divide rather than unite, as evidenced by responses from figures like Yes campaigner Marcus Stewart, who accused her of spreading “hate”.
Price’s stance contributes to a narrative that portrays the ceremony as tokenistic and hypocritical, especially when she claims it allows racism to persist while ignoring violence in Indigenous communities. However, this overlooks how Welcome to Country promotes education and respect, countering racism through cultural exchange. Her mother, Bess Price, echoed similar sentiments, calling it a “city white folks” invention for self-satisfaction, but this dismisses its spiritual and cultural depth. By focusing on costs – around $225,000 annually federally – Price diverts attention from systemic issues like health disparities, using the ceremony as a scapegoat.
Advance Australia amplifies these misrepresentations through campaigns portraying Welcome to Country as “unfair, un-Australian, and unwanted.” The organisation runs petitions to end it, claiming it divides Australians and is heard more than the national anthem. They assert it attacks Australia’s history and delegitimises non-Indigenous belonging, using slogans like “Please, don’t welcome me to our country.” Advance polls suggest a majority view it as divisive, but these are self-serving and ignore broader support for reconciliation. Their ads feature Australians “fed up” with the ceremony, framing it as constant and unnecessary.
This rhetoric misrepresents the ceremony by conflating “Country” with the nation-state, when it refers to specific Indigenous territories. Advance’s campaigns exploit misunderstandings to stoke resentment, as seen in Anzac Day controversies where booing was encouraged. They spent $500,000 fighting it in one year, more than government costs, revealing it’s not about finances but ideology. Advance positions itself as representing “ordinary Australians,” but it is an astroturf organisation, funded by wealthy donors like mining magnates and conservative elites. Launched in 2018 to counter progressive groups like GetUp, it has doubled donations, with many from undisclosed sources tied to the Liberal Party. Critics label it a “dark money” entity advancing fossil fuel and right-wing interests, spreading division under a grassroots facade.
Advance’s ties to figures like Jillian Segal, who funds it while serving as antisemitism envoy, highlight inconsistencies, as the group has targeted other minorities. Their $14 million war chest targets progressives, using Welcome to Country as a wedge issue. This astroturfing, fake grassroots funded by elites, protects wealthy interests by diverting from economic inequalities to cultural battles. Indigenous voices reject this, emphasising the ceremony’s role in unity.
Price and Advance’s misrepresentations perpetuate division, ignoring the ceremony’s reconciliatory spirit. By claiming it excludes, they overlook its invitation to shared respect. This fuels culture wars, where Indigenous practices are politicised to maintain power structures. True progress requires recognising Welcome to Country as a step toward equity, not a threat.
Conclusion
Welcome to Country stands as a vital thread in Australia’s cultural fabric, weaving together ancient spirituality with contemporary calls for reconciliation. Its meaning extends beyond mere formality to embody respect for Traditional Owners and their enduring connection to the land. The spiritual underpinnings, rooted in the Dreaming and interconnectedness with Country, offer a profound invitation for all Australians to engage with this heritage. Yet, misrepresentations by Jacinta Price and Advance Australia distort this essence, portraying it as divisive and exclusionary to advance political agendas. Price’s claims that it undermines national identity ignore its inclusive nature, while Advance’s campaigns reveal an astroturf operation shielding elite interests through manufactured outrage.
These distortions exacerbate culture wars, diverting focus from pressing Indigenous challenges like health and violence. By substantiating claims with diverse sources, including Indigenous perspectives and critical analyses of funding, it becomes clear that such criticisms lack foundation. Embracing Welcome to Country fosters unity; rejecting it perpetuates division. As Australia evolves, honouring this practice can bridge divides, honouring the nation’s full history.