Recently the New South Wales Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, David Harris, stated in Parliament that Aboriginal people in NSW may not yet be ready to progress a Treaty.

There may be some truth in that observation. NSW Treaty Commissioner Naomi Moran has rightly pointed out in response, many Aboriginal communities across NSW are still having important conversations among themselves about Treaty, conversations about sovereignty, land, governance and what justice should look like. Those are profound discussions and they must be led by Aboriginal people themselves, not rushed by political timelines.

But if Aboriginal communities feel cautious or uncertain, we must also ask why. The responsibility does not sit with Aboriginal people alone. It sits equally, and in many respects more heavily, with successive NSW governments.

We do not need to look far back in our history to see this.

In 1983 the NSW Parliament passed the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW), landmark legislation intended to provide a form of compensation for historic dispossession by returning land to Aboriginal ownership through the land council system.

More than four decades later, much of the promise of that legislation remains unrealised.

Today there are around 60,000 unresolved land claims across NSW. At the current rate of approximately 500 claims processed each year, it would take well over a century to resolve them. The estimated cost to settle these claims is around $600 million.

This is not a failure of Aboriginal communities. It is a failure of government.

In 2019, the NSW Government introduced the State Environmental Planning Policy (Aboriginal Land) 2019, a reform I had advocated for over nearly a decade while serving as CEO of the Darkinjung Local Aboriginal Land Council.

The intent of the policy was clear: to help unlock the economic and social potential of Aboriginal-owned land by creating a planning pathway that recognised the unique status of land returned under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW).

It was meant to remove barriers, not create new ones.

Yet today the SEPP-Aboriginal Land sits largely stalled in a bureaucratic quagmire. Instead of enabling Aboriginal landowners to activate their land for housing, economic development and community benefit, the policy has become entangled in slow planning processes, inconsistent application across agencies and a lack of coordinated government commitment to make it work.

This again illustrates a broader pattern.

Governments often announce reforms designed to empower Aboriginal communities, but too often fail to follow through with the practical implementation required to make those reforms meaningful.

Until governments demonstrate the capacity and commitment to deliver on the policies they have already created, it is hardly surprising that many Aboriginal people approach the idea of Treaty with caution.

Successive governments have failed to implement the legislative, planning and policy reforms needed to unlock the economic and social potential of Aboriginal-owned land. Instead, complex planning systems, slow claim processes and bureaucratic inertia continue to restrict the benefits that were originally intended under the Act.

The complexity only deepened following the recognition of Native Title after the landmark High Court decision in Mabo v Queensland (No 2) and the introduction of the Native Title Act 1993.

In NSW, Native Title and Land Rights can intersect in ways that require Native Title to be extinguished before land councils can fully activate land for economic development. At the same time, the slow progress of Native Title determinations across the state continues to create uncertainty and frustration for Aboriginal communities seeking clarity over their land rights.

Layered on top of this was the NSW Government's Local Decision Making initiative, a policy that promised community empowerment but ultimately lacked the sustained authority, structural reform and long-term commitment required to genuinely support local Aboriginal governance.

When viewed together, these realities help explain why many Aboriginal people across NSW approach the idea of Treaty with caution.

Too often what has been offered by governments has been piecemeal reform, commitments made without the long-term political will required to deliver genuine self-determination.

So, while it is true that Aboriginal people must take the time to talk with each other about Treaty, as Commissioner Moran has outlined - governments must also reflect on their own role in creating the conditions that have led to this caution.

If governments are serious about Treaty, the first question should not be whether Aboriginal people are ready.

The first question is whether government is ready.

Ready to resolve the unfinished business of Land Rights and Native Title.

Ready to honour past commitments.

And ready to genuinely empower Aboriginal people to determine their own futures.

Mr Sean Gordon AM, a proud Wangkumarra and Barkindji man, is the CEO of Yadha Muru Foundation and an advisor to the Commonwealth Bank, Woolworths, Steadfast, and the Insurance Council of Australia.