A treaty between the government and the state's Aboriginal community is unworkable as long as internal division persisted, two community heads say. The Tasmanian Government this year started what appeared to be its most genuine attempt to negotiate a treaty with the state's Aboriginal community. Australia is the only country in the Commonwealth without a treaty with its indigenous population - that is, a formal agreement between a government and an indigenous population with binding pacts on issues around certain rights and the acknowledgement of past wrongs. However, Australian jurisdictions have pledged to take their own actions - Victoria, Northern Territory, Western Australia and now Tasmania. READ MORE: Premier Peter Gutwein speaks on treaty for NAIDOC Week 2021 In the first sitting of Parliament following the May state election, it was announced professors Kate Warner and Tim McCormack would consult with Tasmanian Aboriginal groups and report back to the government with recommendations on moving towards reconciliation, a truth-telling process, and a pathway to treaty. The pair are due to report in October. Aboriginal Land Council of Tasmania chairman Michael Mansell said this deadline put pressure not on the reports authors, but the Aboriginal community. "We don't have much time to identify and articulate all the things that we want in the treaty," he said. The first consultation meeting was held with members of the state's Aboriginal community at Risdon Cove on Friday. An Aboriginal rights march had been planned for the day, but was cancelled following government's meeting and the announcement on a pathway to reconciliation and treaty. Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre campaign manager Nala Mansell said Tasmania could be the first state in Australia to establish a treaty with Aborigines. READ MORE: Tasmania's statues and monuments causing the most pain for Aboriginal community "Aborigines have been dispossessed of our lands and oppressed for over 200 years," she said. "No longer should we have to march the streets in protests for our lands to be returned, our heritage to be protected or for Aboriginal self-determination. "We now have an opportunity to be compensated for our losses and begin our lives on more of an even playing field'' Ms Mansell said people involved in the meeting suggested a treaty could include a return of a percentage of Crown land, dedicated seats for Aboriginal representatives in Parliament, and a share of state revenue from land tax to the Aboriginal community. She said this share of revenue could fund the employment of Aboriginal people to manage returned land. Ms Mansell said specific areas the community wanted returned would be discussed in future negotiations with the government. A lawyer, Mr Mansell said there were concerns raised about whether a treaty could be overturned or unilaterally changed by a future government. "People would like to see built into it that Parliament would have to get agreement with the Aboriginal people, and vice versa, to make any changes," he said. Tasmanian Regional Aboriginal Communities Alliance co-chairman Rodney Dillon said land handbacks were top of the agenda for TRACA for when they met with Professor Warner and Professor McCormack. "Every group would want a piece of land in their area - a piece of a national park, a piece of forestry area," he said. "We need land that can be used - not land, as has been done in the past, that is no good to anyone. "It could be land that can be used for tourism or for aquaculture." READ MORE: How researchers develop palawa kani, the revived language of Aboriginal Tasmanians Mr Dillon said anyone who feared having access restricted through land handbacks should consider the hypocrisy of that position. "It's like how we now are restricted from going onto other people's land," he said. "We have been better in allowing people onto our lands than the other way around." Mr Dillon said a Tasmanian-style treaty might take the form of individual treaties with organisations rather than the state's Aboriginal community as a whole. "There are different groups in the state with different views so I would think you would need to have different treaties with groups in their areas, rather than with a group of people that can't get on well together," he said. Not only do Tasmanian Aboriginal groups clash over objectives and priorities, but with issues around identity. Mr Dillon said that needed to be resolved. "Not everyone is going to agree on it, but we need to move forward," he said. READ MORE: Michael Mansell's vision for treaty in Tasmania "At the moment, it just pulls us all apart. "It's can be very hard sometimes to prove if somebody is Aboriginal or not." Ms Mansell said people needed to have conclusive evidence to prove Aboriginality in Tasmania and rejected Mr Dillon's proposal of separate treaties. "The good thing about these treaty discussions is there are no separate organisations," she said. "When Aboriginal people were dispossessed of our land and our rights, it wasn't organisations who were dispossessed. "A treaty between Aboriginal people and the state government has nothing to do with organisations - it's to do with Tasmanian Aboriginal people." Circular Head Aboriginal Corporation acting-general manager Di Baldock said a treaty would never work while division existed among the state's Aboriginal population. "There will never be a true treaty around truth-telling as long as there is division across the communities," she said. READ MORE: Patsy Cameron calls for reconciling Tasmania's past before treaty moves ahead "We will never have reconciliation among our own Aboriginal communities while we have division." Ms Baldock said the group would like to see their identity, which had been dismissed by the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre, inscribed into a treaty. Besides that, she said the organisation would like to see sections of local land returned and managed by the local Aboriginal community. Ms Baldock said non-Aboriginal people should not fear being restricted from accessing returned land. "It should be about sharing our culture and knowledge with everybody," she said. "It should be about inclusion, not exclusion." Premier Peter Gutwein was this week asked a number of questions week on what model a treaty might take and whether land handbacks, joint authority over resource management, or dedicated seats in Parliament for Aboriginal people would be considered. "I want this process to be truly consultative so to speculate or pre-empt the outcomes of those conversations in any way would not be in line with the process that is underway," he said. "My government is committed to continuing on our pathway to achieve reconciliation with our First Nations people, so we can all share in the potential that exists from a truly meaningful, reconciled relationship."