Relationship: Orientation, politics, ethics, and the idea and practice of self‐determination

Abstract First Nations people deeply value relational modes of organising politics, governance, and social order that do not feature in European‐derived political ordering or in dominant governance and policy scholarship. While Indigenous peoples have long sought equitable and respectful relationships in the context of forced colonial engagement, the settler state has largely refused relational engagement, accountability, and responsibility. Nonetheless, the configuration and practice of public policy contain possibilities for openness as well as closure. The concept and policy of self‐determination promise a relationship, while its conceptual vagueness and application in complexly ambiguous and unbalanced settler colonial conditions mean that its relational possibilities tend to be gradually and seriously eroded through settler solipsism and dominance. However, self‐determination continues to suggest possibilities for relating that recognise Indigenous political ordering and agency, and thus for ethical and effective forms of Indigenous policy. These and wider possibilities in Indigenous affairs policy can arise through practitioner vulnerability amid relational exchange in policy engagement and practice in response to the conceptual vagueness of self‐determination. Points for practitioners Relations are foundationally important for First Nations people and governance. Dominant public administration retains power by returning to itself rather than entering relationship with First Nations peoples and their systems. Awareness of the history and workings of dominant policy provides a foundation for seeing and engaging difference. Centring relations and relatedness can usefully inform the pursuit of just and effective forms of Indigenous policy. The personal vulnerability of governance practitioners opens possibilities for negotiation and relationship between Indigenous and European‐derived governance systems.