The removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags from Federation Council in New South Wales has raised questions about the Council's commitment to reconciliation and civic neutrality, with a formal submission being made to the Council critiquing recent actions.
The issue arose last month after Federation councillors voted five to four to remove Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags from council chambers in Urana and Corowa, and all council flagpoles across the shire.
The move sparked questions about the Council's approach to "civic neutrality", which critics believe is being applied in a way that erases First Nations recognition.
"Civic neutrality in a local-government context is often misunderstood as the absence of values," wrote Bronwyn J Thomas in a formal submission to the Council.
"In reality — especially for a council like Federation Council — it means fairness, consistency, transparency, and alignment with democratically adopted commitments, not silence or erasure."
Ms Thomas argued resolutions adopted under Resolution 374/2025FC - relating to the Draft Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Protocols - do not align with Federation Council's Community Strategic Plan 2040 (CSP) or its Integrated Planning and Reporting (IP&R) framework.
"The Draft Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Protocols are not operational documents alone; they are governance instruments... Any amendments that diminish, condition, or symbolically retract recognition of First Nations peoples directly conflict with these CSP commitments," Ms Thomas explained.
Under the IP&R framework, councils are required to ensure governance decisions demonstrably align with their adopted community strategic plans.
"Where they do not, Council risks undermining its own governance framework, community trust, and statutory planning integrity," she wrote.
"If the Community Strategic Plan 2040 commits Council to reconciliation, inclusion, and respect, then civic neutrality means honouring those commitments consistently," read the submission.
"Neutrality is not achieved by removing recognition. It is achieved by faithfully implementing what the community has already agreed to."
Importantly, the submission challenges the idea that flying Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags compromises civic neutrality or diminishes the Australian flag.
"Flying Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags does not diminish the Australian flag," Ms Thomas wrote. "It strengthens the narrative of shared history, recognition, and respect within the nation."
Beyond the restrictions placed on flying the flags, Ms Thomas' submission also outlined other key areas of misalignment in the Council's amendments.
She argues that conditional Welcome to Country requirements fundamentally contradict the CSP's commitment to respectful and culturally safe engagement, which requires a specific Council resolution before a Welcome to Country can occur.
"This approach reframes cultural recognition as something to be 'permitted' rather than respected; a position inconsistent with the CSP's values."
The submission also questioned the removal of the Acknowledgement of Country from non-public council committees and workshops from 1 January 2026, believing this approach framed reconciliation as a public performance rather than an organisational responsibility.
"Cultural respect does not diminish behind closed doors," Ms Thomas wrote, "In fact, the CSP emphasises leadership, integrity, and consistency — values directly contradicted by limiting recognition only when visible to the public."
The submission calls on the Federation Council to remain consistent with the reconciliation principles embedded in the CSP, and to not amend them in ways that reduce recognition of First Nations peoples and weaken governance integrity.
