The revelations in 20-year-old cabinet documents, released on Sunday by the National Archives of Australia, counter the later position John Howard would make in 2007 on the preamble and the arguments now which flow in favour of a representative Voice to Parliament.

The 2002 positions came as cabinet approved a review of the later-abolished national representative body, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC), as it noted a "difficult" working relationship between it and the minister Philip Ruddock.

And it came as the Howard cabinet noted a record $2.5 billion funding for Indigenous programs and the global view that Australia was now "effectively in isolation" in its active opposition to the term "self-determination".

READ MORE

But in the response to the final report of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation, cabinet formally decided not to issue an apology, not to pursue a treaty, and not to have a referendum for a new preamble to the Constitution.

"The government is deeply concerned that rather than offering closure, the pursuit of treaty would be a recipe for ongoing disputation and litigation - as has happened in North America and elsewhere," the submission, headed by Mr Ruddock, notes.

The position on an apology, a recommendation of the landmark Bringing Them Home report, was that it was "inappropriate" as it would imply that current generations were somehow responsible and accountable for the actions of earlier generations. Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd later made the national apology in 2008 on behalf of Australia.

Cabinet also countered recommendations for Bill of Rights or constitutional recognition that the "best guarantee" of fundamental human rights was "Australia's vigorous and open political system, an incorruptible judicial system and a free press".

On the preamble question, cabinet noted it had been the subject of a similar proposal which was rejected by the people and a "case for revisiting the issue so soon has not been made".

Mr Howard later changed his mind just before the 2007 election, admitting he had often "struggled" with the issue of reconciliation during his time as prime minister.

In a speech, he promised to hold a referendum within 18 months of the election which would incorporate a Statement of Reconciliation into the Constitution's preamble, but he was not electorally returned.

"It would reflect my profound sentiment that Indigenous Australians should enjoy the full bounty that this country has to offer; that their economic, social and cultural well-being should be comparable to that of other Australians," he said.

But cabinet was, in 2002, grappling with ongoing problems with the operations of ATSIC. The documents noting the tension between the ATSIC administration and the elected arm and the minister had "proven difficult".

Referred to in the past tense in the document as "ATSIC was (and still is)" and as having "significant powers" and the Minister having "only limited" powers and only of a general nature.

The internationally unique body had been in operation since 1990, and in 2002, half of the record $2.5 billion funding for Indigenous affairs was controlled by ATSIC.

"There is considerable debate over whether ATSIC should be in the business of delivering programmes at all," the cabinet submission said.

Cabinet moved to review ATSIC with a "small review team" in 2002, a move which led to its abolition in 2004.

As UN member nations sought to agree on a draft declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples, cabinet noted that Australia was now "effectively in isolation in its active opposition to the term "self-determination".

The Howard government preferred "self-management" and "self-empowerment" as self-determination "implied separate nations or separate laws". It said it was dealing with the "blocking tactics of Indigenous hardliners".

The documents also show a request from the Commonwealth Grants Commission (CGC) for "substantially more funding" for services for Indigenous people to address high levels of "entrenched" disadvantage particularly in remote areas, but it was knocked back.

The Howard cabinet instead moved to focus efforts on mainstream services for Indigenous people where possible, noting Indigenous-specific programs "relieve the mainstream programmes of some of their responsibility which are then apportioned to non-Indigenous people."

READ MORE 2002 CABINET PAPER NEWS:

"Indigenous-specific programs in urban areas in effect top up services for non-Indigenous people," the document said.

"As a result, disadvantage in remote areas persists longer and is deeper than would be the case under better targeted, needs-based funding arrangements."

Cabinet noted the Howard government had increased Indigenous-specific funding to a record $2.5 billion a year in 2002.