Aboriginal Children II
I have been one of many people, black and white, who have been calling on governments for a long time to make child abuse and Indigenous issues major, national priorities. As was noted in the Foreward of the recent Northern Territory Report on the Protection of Aboriginal Children from Sexual Abuse, it was via my motion that the Senate passed an all-party resolution last year supporting a national strategy to address child sexual assault (for all children, not just Indigenous ones).
So not surprisingly, I believe it is a good thing that priority and focus has been given to this issue by the Prime Minister. I will do what I can to keep it there, including via regular examination of developments and detail on this blog.
There has been a fair degree of cynicism amongst many of the responses to the government’s plan, including from many Indigenous Australians. Given the past history of many grand government announcements which have not been followed up with adequate resourcing or implementation once the headlines have died down, there is every reason for people to be cynical. However, that should not be a reason to try to tear this plan down, it should be a reason to keep the focus on it, to do everything possible to translate all the current waves of rhetorical flourishes into real and lasting positive change.
Let’s start with a reminder about recommendation 1 from the Northern Territory report, which has been used as the hook for the major federal intervention which has been announced:
That Aboriginal child sexual abuse in the Northern Territory be designated as an issue of urgent national significance by both the Australian and Northern Territory Governments, and both governments immediately establish a collaborative partnership with a Memorandum of Understanding to specifically address the protection of Aboriginal children from sexual abuse. It is critical that both governments commit to genuine consultation with Aboriginal people in designing initiatives for Aboriginal communities.
It looks like we’re on track with the first sentence of that recommendation, but there’s not much sign of the second one even being acknowledged yet, let alone acted on.
As Noel Pearson has said, “Howard and Brough will make a historic mistake if they are contemptuous of the role that a proper and modern articulation of Aboriginal law must play in the social reconstruction of indigenous societies.” He also states that “Aboriginal law, properly understood, is not the problem, it is the solution.”
There has been a wide range of comments about the Prime Ministers proposals, which are clearly still being developed. Despite the diversity of the comments, there is still a tendency to put people in the ‘for’ or ‘against’ camp, even when people supposedly in separate camps appear to be saying quite similar things. Given Noel Pearson is put unquestioningly in the camp of those in favour of the proposals, it is worth highlighting a few of the other concerns he has expressed, some of which are quite close to ones others who are seen as ‘against’ have also voiced.
“The Howard-Brough plan to tackle grog and to provide policing is correct. However, the plan needs to be amended so that there is a concerted strategy to build indigenous social and cultural ownership.”
“the Howard-Brough plan needs to be amended so responsible behaviour is encouraged. Responsible people shouldn’t just be lumped in with irresponsible people.”
“There is a huge implementation challenge. Based on the performance of the federal and provincial bureaucracies up to now, I am not confident they are up to it.”
“The land-related measures are clumsy and ideological, but they are not an attempt at a land grab, and the problems with the land measures are nowhere near as high a priority as action for the welfare of children.”
I agree that action on child welfare is more important, but I have not seen any convincing arguments why the land measures are needed. And my concern is while this may not be as urgent an issue, if Land Rights law is changed to implement these measures, there’s a fair chance it may not be changed back, no matter what the success or otherwise is in regards to child welfare.
Pearson also says “If not Brough and Howard’s plan to stop the suffering, then what alternative plan should be pursued? Here most of the critics fall into a deafening silence. They have vociferous views about what will not work, but they are silent about what will work.”
I don’t agree with all of this statement. To me, the alternative plans are out there, including Pearson’s own plan for Cape York, which has some similarities to Howard’s but also some very significant differences. The Northern Territory report itself constitutes a comprehensive plan of action in its 97 recommendations, although I would agree it could do with including an immediate circuit breaker or two on top of its suite of measures. Past reports into the same issue also contain comprehensive plans of action which have never been fully acted on or resourced. However, Pearson is right in the sense that only governments are in a position to implement this, so we have to work with what they put forward (assuming they let people work with them). We also have to make damn sure this one is properly resourced, something of which there is little sign so far.
Interestingly, Pearson’s article in last weekend’s Australian is called “Politics aside, an end to the tears is our priority”. This matches well with Kevin Rudd’s proposal for a bi-partisan ‘war cabinet’ to deal with Indigenous issues, an idea which has a lot of appeal to me, as a way of keeping the issue in a state of continuing national priority for all politicians.
A range of Australian blogs recently addressed the theoretical question of whether a politician’s motives are relevant in assessing their policies. The Prime Minister’s plan to tackle sexual abuse of Aboriginal children in the Northern Territory provides a very current and crucial real world example. While assessment of motive may give an insight into how likely it is that a policy will be fully followed through, it really isn’t relevant in assessing whether the policy is any good.
The motives may be as pure as can be and the policy still be bad. Conversely, the motives may as devious as possible, but the policy may still be spot on. Indigenous affairs provides lots of sad examples where the political intentions may have been totally honourable, but the policy was disastrous. Some people argue that the hugely destructive policies that led to the Stolen Generations were mostly carried out with good, albeit misguided intentions. This history of the Stolen Generations, which played no small part in creating some of the circumstances that has led to the crisis we are now trying to address, is worth keeping in the back of our minds in this debate. Not because I think these latest proposals are similar, but rather because urgings that “it’s for the good of the children” shouldn’t be used as a catch-all phrase to silence any criticisms or concerns about the details. In the same way that I think it’s a distraction to criticize the Prime Minister’s motives, I don’t think it helps to focus on the motives of people who express concerns about the details.
In his appearance on TV’s Meet the Press today, the Prime Minster waved away questions about on the ground details by saying that was falling into “the old Canberra trap of talking about this as some kind of generalised philosophical debate.”
This is a bit ironic, given that at this stage, the whole thing is being driven and developed by politicians and bureaucrats in Canberra. Given that almost everyone actually supports the stated goal here, I hope the government becomes a little bit more open to advice on how to make their policy work, rather than insist they are the only ones with all the answers. The lack of details, including the lack of work done on the likely costs, is one area which will need urgent attention to flesh out the initial hasty announcement.
If people keep getting howled down everytime they ask for more details, or point out problems they see in details that do become apparent, there’s a fair chance that some good advice on how best to implement this plan will be missed.
Even the head of John Howard’s hand picked taskforce to implement this plan, Sue Gordon, has been quoted as “being among those warning of inadequate resources to support the plan”. However, she has said “her taskforce would move quickly to determine what extra resources were required. And she said the commonwealth had promised to pay.” (my emphasis)
As is pretty obvious just reading the comments by the health experts in the same article, just doing the measures relating to grog properly will probably cost more than the “tens of millions” John Howard has floated as a possible cost of his plan. My guess is that the full cost of properly implementing what has been proposed will go well into the billions of dollars, particularly if it is taken beyond the Territory and into the States, as the Prime Minister is urging, so I hope Sue Gordon has got that promise in writing.
(I will probably do a series of posts on this topic over the coming weeks. You can read my previous post here).
71 Comments, Comment or Ping
sublime cowgirl
THe most balanced and thoughtful summary of the current political circumstance i have read so far.
Jun 25th, 2007
philip travers
I read some of the Australian blog post,and ,frankly Pearson is just getting a free ride,and he doesnt deserve it.Now he can waft on about the nature of Aboriginal contemporary law,etc.,like he is the only one who could make this point,whereas there are many ,I am sure, who could.Then in his own statements he characterises in inverted commas some peoples statements,and on reading after that,he is just plainly,contradicts himself completely.I think Pearson is now over-exposed himself,and this is deliberately being done by the media so to reduce the effects of any aboriginal spokesperson on this subject,by the obvious reality,what he has to say already,including his plan has its immediate detractors,acting coherently and democratically.This is the way the Liberals will ignore the estimated $Billions, the Australian blog-post fog horns will quickly dart in the other direction of….its a beat-up for the Aboriginal community industry,…….once the figures become widely known.So Aboriginal Law will appear a costly monster,and,Pearson will be the fried remains of a barramundi.Why couldnt athletic people who have undergone training in naturopathy and complimentary medicine and psychology,be the ground troops of recovery overseen by Aboriginal elders,and the Canberra based Sports Institute has to do a circuit through the NT!?
Jun 25th, 2007
Evil Pundit
Only two weeks ago, Andrew, you accused me of being a racist and put my comments into the moderation queue — all because I dared to mention the reality of Aboriginal child abuse.
How times have changed.
Jun 25th, 2007
doctor victor kacala
i went to the cape york institute & gave my set of skills in the area of system design & management control feed-back.
at a basic level, the ‘institute’ is a business, with quiet a few white fascists inserted – the beauty of looking like a down market dame edna, is that people show them-selves i.e., they think u have no power, and thus show what they are.
noel pearson, based on what i know, does not have the support of the wider community [he may have support in cape york via a 'set' of buddies].
the key is that education of kids, is for the most part, based on the slogans of gurus from WHITE urban conTEXT. as it turns out, education of whites in urban jungles are seriously defective – as andrew knows from his own work in the area [see senate report].
what should abc people learn? how should they be taught? who should teach? i.e., answer the why, how, when, where, whom & what questions PLUS a set of goals, SUITED to the here & now.
i have given an outline in my other comments.
there is a whole industry based on abc people, and they form a VERY powerful [i.e., they do NOT want to lose money, power social credit] BLOCK to fixing systemic inter-generational violence for abc people.
i repeat: li & num in FAIR play, a system to BLOCK violence on kids, checks & info [VALID], use abc ART [dance, music, painting] as a key forum for learning.
sport & rules for sport can form a basis for learning rules in a more general setting – use linked [via computer video] communities AND use stories FROM a local context, BUILT by kids of any age. use kids as TEACHERS, where teachers [they do NOT need to be qualified] are the managers, rather than the fountains of wisdom & nice-NESS.
GIVE kids THIS outline. they can improve what i say, and what u say, such that it suits kids & allow a max level of low ris, max fun frame work to develop i.e., kids will teach adults of all ages, including tribal elders.
improve food and health care for all, using the ideas of
Jun 25th, 2007
mog
I find Howard and Brough’s idea police state for Indigneous people to be abhorrent. They may as well change their titles to Chief Protectorate and revert back to the last century. The average Australian probably thinks it’s a fine idea to go into Aboriginal communities guns blazing in an attempt to ‘clean them up’ but this is how Indigenous people ended up in the state of abject poverty and disadvantage they find themselves in now. The problem is that it is now been left so long that this is seen as the only choice and that playing the blame game with state and federal pollies from both sides who sat on their hands for decades is futile. Appropriate funding for health, education, housing, welfare support and employment had been withheld from Indigenous people since Cook landed. Now suddenly a report comes out and we all say ‘how shocking’ like we didn’t know that stolen wages and stolen generations did exist and that we didn’t already know that life expectancy, birth rates, health, education and employment amongst Inidgenous people wasn’t already equivalent to third world countries. And now, excuse my cynicism, Howard is going to do something because in an election year he can’t afford not to be seen kissing babies – black and white! Brough meanwhile has been taking a jackbooted approach waiving the necessary funding at Indigenous communities on the proviso they give up their land (sorry lease it). I think you’ve been a bit soft on them Andrew. Let’s tread carefully before we charge into these communities and assume we know how to fix the problem.
Jun 25th, 2007
Andrew Bartlett
That’s total rubbish, EP. I’ve spoken about Indigenous child abuse and the need for action on it many times in the past. I just don’t perpetrate the myth that it doesn’t happen in non-Indigenous communities and families.
You were trying to deny the reality of the stolen generations – a policy which played no small part in creating the current situation – and smear Indigenous people in the process. But your comments and mine are on the record anyway, so people can judge all that for themselves.
Jun 25th, 2007
pal
Hi, I feel that the governments plan to ban alchohol and take an authoritative approach to Indigenous communities is valuable in that it highlights the problems faced by Indigenous Australians, however this strategy does not work towards fixing the cause of the problems. It all stems back from the stolen generation, and a non existant sence of cultural identity in Indigenous communities. Lets fund schools for Aboriginal traditional language and develop cultural centres to instill a sense of self in these communities. Simply banning alcohol will only make problems worse and further take away their rights. Two Aboriginal paedophiles who were charged came from the community of Kalumburu in WA which is a dry community anyway.
I am studying Indigenous studies at ECU so have explored this issue at length.
what are your thoughts Andrew?
Jun 25th, 2007
doctor victor kacala
i think i might add a note that is of general issue about science [physical & social] and education of ALL people, at a global level.
let me give u a quote that puts the above in a proper social context – this is more about science rather than engineers who do stuff i.e., make stuff that works.
it is very hard to ‘kill’ a dominant set of ideas: see “the Prince” by the master blaster from the past.
This is a quote from Bryan Magee, “Popper”, 1978, Fortune:
p41 “The point has been made that at any given time the over-whelming majority of scientists are not trying to overthrow the prevailing orthodoxy at all but are working happily in it.”
this is the issue for social & physical sciences, especially social sciences such as psychO, sociology, economics AND so on…
it is extremely hard in the social sciences to prove some thing is fluff using fluff as a substitute; physical sciences do have at least some hope of dis-prove by an alternative that has evidence using physical evidence, that may be in fact ‘invented’.
thus, in large measure, social sciences can neither be proved or dis-proved AND so nothing ever changes e.g., psyho-analysis in psyh is one of the biggest cons ever perpetrated on the human species [an HUGE disaster in the area of education]. Getting education gurus to admit they ‘got it wrong’ is a near impossible task, given that many build their social status, power base and income on this drivel.
so, since pollies have kids & are not often pysho people, then pollies will take decisive action to save THEIR kids, and so other kids also. in fact, there are large numbers of lawyers [not every one's cup of coffee or tea] who slide and slip through the alleys of polly power systems, at all levels.
now i wonder, would these people actually get their act together?
yes, they have an OVER-whelming REASON :=: THEIR kids and as an after-think, every one else’s kids.
so andrew, do u have your leverage point_$$$ with other pollies?
Jun 25th, 2007
Jezery
Hi Andrew,
It’s a little bit spooky reading my own thoughts on someone else’s blog!
You’ve highlighted what I see as the three main points:
– Howard’s motive doesn’t necessarily matter; we should focus on whether or not it might work.
– After years of reports and recommendations, a circuit-breaker such as this could be exactly what the situation needs.
– The most important part of this will be the long term response and putting in place all the necessary support structures and keeping them in place for the next 10-15 years.
I heard an interview with Mal Brough around six months ago where he made the point that these communities needed law and order first, otherwise all the health and education measures can’t be effectively delivered. Now that they’ve taken a heavy hand to law and order, let’s hope they then deliver on the latter.
I hope you can keep the focus on this issue past the current ‘electioneering’ mode.
Jun 25th, 2007
Marilyn
Well the people don’t want the army or the police trampling all over the communities and their kids.
Imagine if a whole city suburb was taken over by the army and police because a few kids reported being abused in that suburb and every kid under 16 had to be medically tested.
There are 23,000 kids needing help and have needed help for the last 3 generations.
Boredom, grog, pornography – all irrelevant for real pedophiles, that is power and only power.
50 reports have crossed Howards desk and only last month the AMA renewed their desparate call for the $400 million in health care money and got told to get stuffed.
The reality is that 1 in 3 girls and 1 in 5 boys in Australia are molested, abused or raped before they reach 18 and that is in every community.
Every 28 seconds a kid is harmed. Calling out the troops for a “national emergency” is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in light of the last 40 years I alone have been calling for decency and human rights and equality for the aboriginal people.
For many to use it as an excuse to turn on the people like Lowitja O’Donohue who has worked her guts out more years than Pearson has been alive though is the height of disgusting grand standing.
I bet Pearson himself would tell those tossers that the elder women must be respected at all times and not abused as this amazing woman continues to be by the rednecks and wasters who have hated aborigines all their lives and have used her for a decade to try and prove the stolen generations didn’t happen.
Jun 25th, 2007
Balgaal
PM pleads for time on Indigenous plan results
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/06/25/1961166.htm
• Our Prime Minister John Howard is now pleading with Australians not to expect immediate results from his plan to curb Indigenous child sexual abuse.
This is interesting given he’s had over ten years of ‘time’ to act on these matters.
But this call for time is paradox as he’s clearly stated that he has no time line for his ‘shock and awe’ plan; sees no need to engage in negotiation with stakeholders and Aboriginal ‘community’ leaders.
On a similar line of discussion – I am appalled that Noel Pearson is now qualifying his perspective with reference to Aboriginal law and morality “to build indigenous social and cultural ownership.”
So much of his public discourse over the last 7 years has not been focused on empowering ‘Aboriginal law’ but alas – publicly pathologising ‘Aboriginal dysfunctionality’ to such an extent that any talk of building social and cultural ownership was considered to be near impossible. Aboriginal people were a problem to fix without anything remotely redeemable.
That Howard has cherry picked his ideas is an astounding example of political naivety on behalf of Pearson. How could anyone really think the conservative rationality of Howard’s government would engage in a holistic way with Aboriginal communities?
That song by the Baha men ‘Who let the dogs out’ has never been more relevant.
The boy who cried wolf is another.
Andrew, I recommend that you call for observers -independent observers – to be put on the ground with the police being deployed into these communties. Its a disaster waiting to happen.
Jun 25th, 2007
red crab
well againe i have to totaly agree with marilyn.
talk about motives just why is howard dowing this now .seams to me there mite just be an election soon .
i wonder how long this will last if they win the next election.
Jun 25th, 2007
philip travers
I listened to Brough tonight on the ABC Radio,and he gives me the creeps.The school of thought that suggests that sounding positive claiming something about others who will not recognise,your sounding positive for the reality of being positive,as outcome, keeps dinosaurs like Brough going.I have seen and heard so many like Brough..the positive gush, help me or you are a hindrance,do better, etcetera is the excuse laden cornucopia,well lets say smorgasbord,of the empty twits dependent on their self-importance.If Brough s self importance is going to solve the problems,when everyone but him,has to first find the problems and the human beings involved,then it is as plain as the thing with nostrils on your face..this aint no plan Brudder,this is rudderless gimmickry,oiled by all those who just want to do nothing but criticise the failures of others,without probably knowing any NT. aboriginals, much at all.Then spread the disease elsewhere.
Jun 25th, 2007
Donna
Thanks Andrew for your further information on this concerning issue.
I’ve heard in the latest news bulletin that a number of people have already fled the targeted settlement. And of course that would be predictable if you thought an army was coming to decide whether your children will be taken from you or not.
Just a note on Noel Pearson. He may be Indigenous, but I believe his father was Scottish and the Mayor of Cook Town? Someone might be able to confirm or correct this information.
This is important because within his own community (and our white communities for that matter), and possibly from an Indigenous woman’s point of view, he might be perceived as someone who was raised with a silver spoon in his mouth, and not tuned in with issues concerning women and the hardships they face raising children within these communities.
They may not trust him anymore than they trust the likes of John Howard. And if they think that he’s been collaborating with this Government, then of course they’ll be running like hell. I would.
Jun 25th, 2007
sublime cowgirl
From Recommendation One:
THe Australian Indigenous Doctors Association (www.aida.org) – the national body representing
“…the increasing number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander medical students and doctors, trained in clinical medicine, who are committed to our culture and our people and are proudly walking in the path of our ancestors’ tradition of healing.
… to strive for excellence in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health, wellbeing and life outcomes through leadership, and in the spirit of cultural integrity, incorporating the philosophy that Life is Health is Life”…
would seem a critical body to consult around the medical strategies, though as i understand, they haven’t yet been invited to be involved in any consultative role by the Feds.
I would hope this is amended immediately.
Jun 25th, 2007
M.Andrews
The democrats take a commendable stance on the plight of the indigenous people no doubt.
But lets be blunt, no one is going to change their vote from the coalition to the democrats over this issue.
I myself am a disaffected coalition voter who is becoming alarmed by the constant assaults on our civil rights and freedoms, and the dangerous moves to centralize power, by an increasingly authoritarian coalition government.
So i go to the democrats home page to see what their stance is, and find their agenda is mainly focused on indigenous policy with little on what the democrats should be focusing on – protecting democracy and our freedoms.
If your election platform is based on protecting our freedoms, civil rights ect and promise to block horrid legislation such as the access card, then you will definitely gain some traction come polling day.
If you intend to focus mainly on indigenous rights, i think the democrats might well face a complete wipe out.
I will be interested to see what your ultimate election platform stands on Mr Bartlett. You have a big opportunity to revive your prospects this election – a pray your party takes that opportunity
Jun 25th, 2007
Robert
Dear Andrew,
A first to comment here and may I pass on gratitude for the occasion.
A couple of points.
*) There is value in recognising that the nation is in shock. This is shock induced from the intensity of the hurt and damage that has occurred to the powerless and defenceless. This is also shock induced by the impact of not only what John Howard has announced, but that Howard himself is shoving himself into this. Many of us are deeply wary of Mr Howard’s humanity and therefore his ability to create a positive result, and that the issues are so deeply affecting this causes a clashing of enormous proportions within us. The onus is on us to resolve this, lest we pass up the opportunity, ourselves, to speak well.
While in a state of shock, it is worth noting that we can react in ways we’d otherwise not, and it is sensible to include this in our considerations. Perhaps a certain reticence is required at times; likewise, we cannot in this state let others take from us what we believe in.
This is a difficult time for those of good humanity who’ve cared and contributed one way or another towards a prosperity of our Aboriginal folk.
*) If we put aside, for just a moment, the heartache and suffering which occurs in our fellow folk, we can see there is another powerful issue running deep within this.
Please note that the thrust of what Howard is planning, and what we all want to see achieved, sits squarely on a vision for Aboriginal people that would have them live by our society’s ways. Healthcare, education, the real possibilities of jobs – these things we are seeking for our Aboriginal folk are noble, and yet they are distinctly from our cultural perspective.
What is running deeply, and unsaid, within this moment in the nation of Australia is this: Is this the realisation that the end of the road for Aboriginal culture as it was is now coming to view?
This question is written into what Howard is doing.
Jun 25th, 2007
Robert
(cont).
This current government has no history of wishing to develop the Aboriginal culture for its own worth.
We may rightly say it’s not our place, as non-indigenous, to do so.
I disagree with that. As a non-indigenous person I cherish the traditional Aboriginal culture and find in it a source of inestimable value for the future not only of this country, but for the planet. Its philosophical approach to the environment, to put it crudely, far surpasses ours, and there is much we could learn from that alone.
I am commenting here to bring these points to attention, and not to denigrate attempts to relieve suffering nor provide hope, including hope from the mainstream Australian perspective.
But I believe we need to keep in mind, as this massively impacting action takes place, that if, whoever we are, we care about the traditional Aboriginal culture, we should include that voice with clarity and force.
If “modernity” is to grind the traditional Aboriginal culture into dust, it is at national junctures like this that giant steps are taken to do so.
For one, my heart breaks that this juncture will pass, and the mainstream voice included in our expressed concerns for a positive result in this massive Howard action fails to carry the day for the vast history we’ve yet hardly come to know.
My point, essentially, is this massive Howard action must include respect for that traditional culture, as well. And, naturally, there are those of us with deep concerns such respect is not written into these drastic actions by the progenitor of them.
This is a juncture, and the fullness of the consequences of immediate actions need, in the right time, fair and forceful airing. It is too early to provide this, yet, as we come to grips with the shock of this action – but it must.
Jun 25th, 2007
The Piping Shrike
Senator, the ’stolen generation’ was a result of the political class deciding that the indigenous population were incapable of looking after their own children. This latest intervention is based on the premise that the indigenous population is incapable of preventing their own children from suffering widespread sexual abuse, a premise you appear to accept. Can you not see the similarity? Can you not wonder why the women of Mutitjulu are now fleeing out of fear that their children will be taken from them again? Especially after these same women had to suffer the false child abuse smear made by Lateline and the government last year? Your acquiescence to this is a disgrace.
Jun 26th, 2007
Andrew Bartlett
Piping Shrike
Yes, I can see the potential similarities with the Stolen Generations, that’s why I mentioned it in my post.
But you are in effect asking me to ignore the many Indigenous people, including many women, who have called for action on this issue for many years. Indeed, it’s a pity that more non-Indigenous people don’t show the same concern about tackling the high levels of serious child abuse and neglect in the wider community. The key is to make sure the action is the right one – Indigenous people are wanting help and support, not domination.
I met with a group of about 15 people in Brisbane just yesterday who work dealing with the consequences of stolen generations. Some had dealt directly with child victims of sexual assault. I am aware that many Indigenous people are very concerned or apprehensive about these plans, and particularly would like to see evidence that there will be proper resources beyond an initial ’shock and awe’ action. But there is also widespread agreement that strong action is needed.
If you’ve been calling for a government to take this issue seriously for years, you can’t then just attack them when they show signs of doing so, whatever their motive might be. However, having made it an issue, the government must be held accountable for doing the job properly and not be allowed to get away with an underfunded publicity focused blitz which takes away people’s rights unnecessarily while leaving them with little extra ongoing support.
Which brings me back to Noel Pearson’s quote: “Howard and Brough will make a historic mistake if they are contemptuous of the role that a proper and modern articulation of Aboriginal law must play in the social reconstruction of indigenous societies.”
—–
M.Andrews – check out this page on the Democrats’ site for our position on the Access Card, and this one on some of the other assualts on our democracy through government misuse of the Senate.
Jun 26th, 2007
Andrew Bartlett
Having said all that, Piping Shrike, I appreciate you drawing my attention to that aspect of the NT report which indicates the lack of data. It is something I will follow up on.
I have had far too many Indigenous people over the years say to me there is an urgent need for action on child abuse and domestic violence (usually alcohol related) for me to think there is no serious problem. And there have of course been many other reports prior to this one, which seems to be why the latest NT one didn’t focus much on evidence collecting. However, it is worth trying to get a better handle on exactly how widespread the incidence of abuse is – as it would in the wider Australian community I might say.
Jun 26th, 2007
red crab
i just cant help but think that this is another tampa eppisode.
question 1
why do this now was there not time in the last 11 years
question 2
why pic a place that is out off the way why not close to a city.
question 3
why send in the army and make so mutch noise about it if there is not some sort of political adjenda.
question 4
why wate untill the end of govt bussines to bring this up giving no time for debate .
i once asked a friend who worked as a remote police officer what was the solution for these people and his answer was short.
education!!
it would seem to me that howard should be sending ppl who were willing to go and educate .
Jun 26th, 2007
Evil Pundit
Reading the comments here, I am amazed once again at the wacky attitudes of people out on the margins of the political wasteland.
But then, that’s why they’re on the margins. They’re still holding on to the discredited ideas of the 60s, 70s and 80s — not to mention those of the Paleolithic era — while the rest of us have moved on.
Jun 26th, 2007
Justin Campbell
Yes, I can see it now aboriginals being deported to Naru. That sounds like a Howard solution.
This whole initiative seems a bit half ass by the government. It’s a wedge issue.
Andrew keep the bastard honest. By the bastard I mean John Howard. Try to turn this political stunt into something that produces a lasting good outcome.
By the way great blog.
Jun 26th, 2007
Fay
The bottom line for me is:
If it is the intention of the Coalition govt to ’succeed’ then great care will need to be paid to ‘how’ their policy is implemented and ‘what’ strategies are used to empower the indigenous people and communities to protect their children in the long term.
I am eager to hear what ACOSS say after their current meeting.
I have just received a report entitled: Cultural Respect Framework for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health, 2004-2009 – produced for the Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council. An interesting diagram:
Inputs:
Knowledge and Awareness
Outputs:
Skilled Practice and Behaviour
Strong Relationships
Outcomes:
Equity of Outcomes.
Equity of outcomes must include Indigenous input.
Thanks Andrew for your information.
Jun 26th, 2007
Fred
Good to see you’re up with the modern era, Evil Pundit. Although I’m surprised you haven’t blamed all the child abuse allegations on the evil, man-hating Family Court – that seems to be your usual assessment of the cause of the problems of the modern world.
Jun 26th, 2007
doctor victor kacala
i have read your comments policy, for the first time – i figured that one out for myself [strikes me as fair and reasonable].
how hard should we push the boundaries of ‘free’ speech? i advocate FAIR, rather than free speech, esp’ if u are in a position of power relative to the person or group who u attack. in this sense, it is always [NEARLY] best to err on the side of caution when in a position of great power UNLESS u must act.
so, i agree with RED CRAB that education for abc people, and other people, is crucial.
who should decide on:
a: CONtent,
b. CONtext,
c. CONduct?
to a max extent, kids should decide the a,b,c issues above – kids already have wisdom & local knowledge about a wide range of issues [some good & evil].
it is important for kids NOT to crucify adults in their community; this has already been done to adult abc people via their history & whites in the past.
build on what kids know & they can teach adults the basics in literacy & numeracy in ethics e.g., sport & cooking are two key areas that all kids know at least a little.
kids can use the POS aspects of their social history [such as art, bush craft, etc] and NEG aspects [in-direct ONLY] of their current situation.
kids forgive far more quickly than adults, & so a private SORRY can quickly heal [in part] some of a chid’s pain.
abc adults must forgive themselves, starting with “i will NOT do that again” PRIVATELY to them selves.
a round of finger pointing & revenge will mean adults will shut down & no change of attitude will occur for people who hold power in the community.
i have had a lot of personal experience with alcoholics [family, social system & where i am forced to live].
the idea that u simply CUT the supply of alcohol will NOT work – the gov is trying a very big step that will cause a lot of pain to adults. alcoholism is a disease – it will cause a HUGE amount of un-necessary pain.
the ‘trick’ is to BLOCK the effects from kids etc…
Jun 26th, 2007
Donna
Andrew
You said to Piping Shrike:
‘If you’ve been calling for a government to take this issue seriously for years, you can’t then just attack them when they show signs of doing so, whatever their motive might be.’
I disagree with this. What their motives are is of primary significance.
If we sit passively by while the Government adopts this stance, then we are setting ourselves up for future deplorable acts of social injustices.
This Government, for many woman, are eerily too similar to males and females abusive towards women. They are totally predictable.
They claim the moral high ground, and demonise others to deflect from outrageous acts of social injustice, such as economic abuse. And if that doesn’t work, they then slanderously allege ‘abuse’, and move in to ‘rescue’ children from their Mothers, if it proves to be a more financially viable option.
They don’t give a stuff about these Indigenous kids. They’re motive is to steal those Indigenous children from their Mothers, purely to establish the pathway to move into the white community and do the same there.
It is extremely important not to support this measure. If you do support this action, then you are implicit in actions that are intent on stealing children from their families.
These blokes are danger. They are not to be trusted. Noel Pearson, and I think he’s probably a good bloke, should wait until Labor is voted in, rather than work with this Government.
Jun 26th, 2007
The Piping Shrike
Senator, thank you for your response. I am not saying the claims you have heard should be ignored, but if they are to be taken seriously then he first step is surely the gathering of reliable data. The problem I find with this emotive but deeply flawed report is that as it says in the introduction on p27, the gathering of actual conclusive data was a secondary aim. Indeed the only evidence it seems to point to (e.g. p272) suggests child sexual abuse is rare. The report’s main aim was to focus on the problems of the behaviour of indigenous people as though the problem already existed. These are very serious charges, Senator, against the indigenous communities and we have already had one case in Mutitjulu of the upset caused by an unsubstantiated smear of child abuse. This intervention is in danger of reproducing this mistake on a grander scale.
Jun 26th, 2007
Mel
The last time I heard the phrase ’shock and awe’ being so widely used in the media was in the American invasion of Iraq. Now, the phrase is being used to describe how the federal government is going to deal with children who have suffered the horrors of sexual abuse, families who have been torn apart by substance abuse, and communities devastated by the consequences all of these. Howard has really outdone himself! Looks like he was waiting for his own little war and oh how convenient it be in his own backyard. He gets to play Commander in Chief – George W and Brough gets to be Condolezza. And in true US fashion he sends in the troops. Here’s an idea Im sure the govt has already contemplated -instead of an oil for food program, how about aboriginal land for basic health and education? Makes me also wonder how many (more) human rights this govt can violate and then stand behind its economy and say ‘oh but we’re so rich we couldnt POSSIBLY be guilty of violating human rights’. Its beyond a joke…its just plain pathetic.
Jun 26th, 2007
paul walter
Yes must agree with most of Donna’s comments.
Since when has the Howard government earned even a ghost of a right to a chance on this, given their numerous past antics as to social policy?.
Does a leopard change its stripes?
Jun 26th, 2007
The Feral Abacus
… and just how long is it since members of the Howard govt were stridently lambasting the Australian medical fraternity over a Lancet editorial that was critical of Federal neglect of Aboriginal health?
Jun 26th, 2007
philip travers
Heard the unremarkable Brough again tonight,fostering good relationships with Queensland,and well my opinion of him is the same.The death in custody adds another disturbing continuity about adult Aboriginal health,and I noticed the Whittington story from the NT. which was alarming,for all concerned,and maybe,the man just mentioned…he may not be opposed under present conditions,of insuring more detail is accessed,yet Howards government inflexibility about when aid lawyers could be used will keep things malingering.It seems Senator,that we maybe in disagreement about Pearson.I simply do not like the person,and that is just about it.I listened to him going on about passive welfare,for a number of years now.And for the life of me I think he is cruel and heartless about that.Confusing welfare with a lack of services to those on welfare,including a point reassembled by a Treasury Nong,which is anti-community,move on with skills,always that one,somewhere over the rainbow of government organisation. Pearson is a bloody smart-arse,because whilst there are well educated non-aboriginals being told they arent trying,job snobs etc. by the Howard gang,I just wish he would just shut up. If Pearson wants some equality,with bloody who!? And to have Treasury nongs,and commercial lawyers talking work ethics its the last straw for me.The other filth I heard yesterday that on learning the capabilities of English,a whole dialogue of self potential can be met.Alright,if,Pearson has an ambition to be the Bloody PM. will you ask him to get on with it!? I wont vote for him……
Jun 26th, 2007
Marilyn
I wonder just why it is that no-one has asked the kids yet what they need or want?
Jun 27th, 2007
The Happy Revolutionary
I’m glad to see that Andrew has discussed this issue repeatedly – few Federal politicians seemed interested prior to last week.
I think we have good reason to be deeply pessimistic about the proposed responses. Child protection services in this country are a nation-wide shambles at the best of times, never mind isolated Aboriginal communities.
Ultimately, there is no ‘pay-off’ for politicians and senior bureaucrats to improve these services, as ‘good news’ in this field is almost never reported.
What develops instead is a response to complex cases of child abuse and neglect that is wholly negative, in that it seeks merely to avoid worst-case scenarios. In the meantime, workers in this field are burnt out at a staggering rate, police and hospitals attempt to pick up the slack, and the children concerned remain unattended.
I look forward to the day when addressing child maltreatment becomes an issue of national significance, but sadly, I don’t think this is it. The community (at least in Victoria, where I’m from) has consistently shown that it does not tolerate child abuse. Unfortunately, discussion of the issue does not last very long as those agencies charged with the responsibility of addressing child abuse pour their meagre resources into keeping horror stories out of the newspapers.
If Governments can’t get these things right in Rose Bay or Brighton, what hope NT?
Jun 27th, 2007
CORAL
I think most of these problems would be resolved more quickly if all of the aboriginal peoples integrated with the rest of the Australian society – with the same laws, responsibilities and rights applying to all.
If you leave them out on their own in remote locations, where there may be insufficient work and other activities available, these problems may never be resolved.
Donna:
Although I agree with you in general terms where women and children are concerned, I think you and some others are being paranoid in relation to the Northern Territory initiative.
Jun 27th, 2007
Marilyn
For all the idea that this was an “emergency” not one thing has been done. If anyone wants to hear a truly fascinating interview they should go to Radio Nationals program with Philip Adams on Monday night. He interviewed that old raving pinko lefty Warren Entsch and they were in scary agreement.
Just listen to the interview – I found myself liking Entsch.
Jun 27th, 2007
Donna
Coral
Thank you again for your positive feedback.
Jun 27th, 2007
Graham Bell
Andrew Bartlett [your post 21]:
One thing that does worry me over the reactions to the hypocrisy and blatant exploitation in this whole mess …. is that many, many people will start believing that stories of child abuse in Aboriginal communities are just like stories of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq.
It would be tragic if widespread doubts led to inaction.
Jun 27th, 2007
philip travers
A subject that has come up more than once,stated in different words,and melded with other people making statements can be found in the genetics of Miranda Devine and writings.Her father a boring right wing idiot who regularly mouthed off his superiority in The Australian and a New Zealander,to boot,has now continue through the daughter.And in reading her work today,she has joined her usual pious superiority to the likes of Pearson. Now,there is a problem,in the Northern Territory that covers Adult health,re alcoholism,and the end result of that into the murky area of pedophilia. But both Pearson and Devine have melded two distinct unevidenced opinions,into one and have further melded other attitudes written here and elsewhere into a comprehensive,but not factual in anyway, assemblage of her and Pearsons and the Howard governments actions. And those actions are being defended and praised. Her claim also rests on opinion of intellects in a state of paranoia.Wrong on every account except maybe intelligence,if intelligence is measurable by the expressions,limited by number of characters allowed or otherwise limitations on the restrictions of form of statement.What happens when the Devine types are allowed to express their contentions,is a deliberate attempt to devalue any body elses statements.If someone following the issue were to gather up the moments of factual matters,and matters of opinion to determine after the six months are up,who were stating apparent realities from hypothetical,legal matters from assumptions of law,expertise and, processes involved in medical and legal matters,and matters of plain human concern,some based on real aboriginal contact,and others of other types of support for aboriginals,but not the Howard government support.Could bullies be telling mothers to run and hide as has been reported?Well,I maybe characterising what I dont know,but the question is put to show the fallacy of the Pearson Devine and now Mundine approach.
Jun 28th, 2007
Madd McColl
EP: ‘But then, that’s why they’re on the margins. They’re still holding on to the discredited ideas of the 60s, 70s and 80s — not to mention those of the Paleolithic era — while the rest of us have moved on.’
Geez EP, you’re a real ball of original material aren’t you.
The behaviour of many a conservative on this issue has been ridiculous. Are we to take seriously the assertion that to question any aspect of this plan is to wish for its failure? Such attitudes have been particularly prevalent in The Australian this week, especially (though not surprisingly) in the editorial.
Do they deliberately shut their ears to important details, such as the fact that dramatic, immediate action is almost universally supported? It seems that if one raises a single query one is viciously stomped upon for ‘inhibiting progress’.
Doesn’t such behaviour reek of the shameless use of this issue in the culture war?
I rather hoped to culture war would be put aside in regards to this issue but I suppose that was wishful thinking.
Jun 28th, 2007
Together
Really insightful thoughts and comments.
For anyone interested in getting out and meeting the people, check out this grassroots community walk. We’ve worked very hard to get approval from the communities involved and it’d be a good opportunity for people to get out and develop a first-hand understanding of the issues… And it will be good fun too :)
http://www.peacepilgrimage.net/sacredlife
This walk is about people coming together to show support for indigenous wisdom and how it has much we can all learn from.. It’s not intended to be political, but given the current situation, it is fair to say it is about consultation and sharing an understanding about how we can work towards improving things together.
Importantly we are hoping to bring education, music and workshops into the equation :)
One thing Pearson says that we all agree on is: “Aboriginal law, properly understood, is not the problem, it is the solution.”
We’d be interested to hear what people think…
Jun 28th, 2007
Mel
Coral, I think you could be on to something!! INTEGRATION may be a solution. Perhaps if this time round we tried to integrate non-indigenous people into INDIGENOUS culture. This way we could not only eliminate the social problems of indigenous people but also the social problems of mainstream Australians and the plethora of environmental, health, economic, political and legal issues of the nation.
Aboriginal people have the right to live in remote areas if they so wish. We have done so for thousands of generations successfully. As an aboriginal person I find it insulting that SOME non-indigenous people (like yourself) think that your way of life is what we blackfullas should aspire to have. Um, thanks but NO THANKS. Our culture is the answer to our problems…not employment or education. If we were allowed to practice customary laws and traditional values then I believe that most, if not all, of these societal problems our mob faces would be fixed.
To think that indigenous people should have the same ‘laws, responsibilties, and rights’ applied to us as other Australians is ridiculous! Our responsibilities and rights to the land and sea of this country is based firmly and deeply in spirituality (as opposed to economically). Our rights and responsibilites to this beautiful country were here long before you came and will remain long after you are gone. We have been the custodians for 50,000 years. The last 200 years of European occupation is merely a stroke on our timeline.
Decimation, assimilation, INTEGRATION… the only way forward is reconciliation and REAL self-determination.
Jun 28th, 2007
The Piping Shrike
Mel sounds so radical but actually comes out with the same old rubbish that any reactionary conservative would be comfortable with. The greater rights you claim on the basis of your race being here longer than Europeans is exactly the same the far-right in Europe would use against foreign immigrants. Your ideas about unequal application of laws based on separate cultural development is something any white South African supporter of Apartheid would be happy with. Both would use such arguments to conceal the barriers that exist to people on the grounds of race. You do the same to deny those barriers exist. The idea that indigenous people have a ‘choice’ on integration as though they could stroll into a comfortable life in the cities unhindered by any racial barriers is a joke.
Jun 29th, 2007
Graham Bell
Mel [on 43]:
Heartily agree. What I learnt from blackfellas when I was a kid did me no harm at all throughoout the rest of my life …. However, for the rest of us to benefit likewise, first you would have to knock down the brick wall of colonial racism, then that of virulent racicm that came with the American military presence 1942~1945 and then the impregnable one, the apartheid-for-funding wall, erected by cynical academics from the ’70s onwards. Con’t worry. There are plenty of ordinary Aussies – not the screaming yobbos that the media always publicizes – who would be only too happy to knock down those walls too ….
Now, how about having Aboriginal or Islander descent as a qualification for ALL future Governors-General or Presidents?.
. .
Jun 29th, 2007
doctor victor kacala
bell, it is NOT a good idea to choose to any person on the basis of skin colour, religion, sex, sexuality, ‘genetics’ [however defined], etC…
we are all mongrels, any way.
so, this is my problem for all social criteria that uses implicit [often hidden from a wider public & scrutiny] or explicit [butt hidden under terms that cannot be defined or known to the 'select few', or buzz words used by FAT-mice, under the banner of a BENCH_mARK].
i see sea marTON of nt as a prime case of a chook, dressED up as a turkey, in her mode of speech, tone and the slogans born from abc/ETc.
“less is more” saID t. sizer, a guru of the mind, in prime prim, in sin-EDUCATION for the train, in machine of HARD-wire.
Jun 29th, 2007
Mel
Piping Shrike, I am fully aware and quite experienced in the barriers faced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living every day lives in towns and cities across the country. As for being likened to a WHITE South African supporter of apartheid, you have obviously completely misinterpreted my perspective!The point of my last post was simply that my people should be allowed to practice our culture. This would mean finding innovative ways to integrate it into mainstream culture. This would have benefits not only for indigenous people, but for non-indigenous people, the environment and the economy. Further, I dont believe that during the apartheid era in South Africa there was any such thing as the development of separate cultureS as you suggest…just the dominance and development of one!
Since past efforts to assimilate and integrate indigenous people into non-indigenous Australia has failed so miserably, its time to be innovative and find ways mainstream culture can accommodate indigenous culture. Its worth a try!
Jun 30th, 2007
CORAL
Mel:
You’re entitled to your opinion, but you don’t “own” the country any more than anyone else of any colour does.
To live according to the traditional aboriginal culture is to break Australian laws.
Jun 30th, 2007
doctor victor kacala
can u DEFINE culture for any SOCIAL group or any person.
the word “culture” is used like an umbrella to hide the hidden culture, to hide unfair acts of violence.
take the POS aspects of the past & cut the idea that primitive is PRIME in a ‘fair’ society.
is oz fair? no. so, what do u suggest to make it fair?
i have my own identity that is my culture or SOUL.
i used speech & the written word to define who i am & what guides my actions & in-action.
thus, i have ONE religion that i define as my soul with any errors in speech or my taPESTry on this & other web-sites.
i just went to a speech by a official from venezuela – i gave him a book to give to chavez called “elements of justice”, with a big bunch of comments inside [plus a photo].
i asked him to help me claim polly asylum in russia, cuba or vene’.
like i said, i do not think that the west can get rid of the fascists we have in power.
of course, if u kiss the right butts, u will get u feed, but u have lost u freedom.
Jun 30th, 2007
Donna
Honestly Andrew
I wish at times you’d delete Coral’s posts.
They’re just so redneck that I feel like not participating, and I bet a lot of posters go away because of her repugnant communication style.
Jul 1st, 2007
ken
With the greatest respect Donna – that a bit rich coming from someone who claimed the objective of basically all government policy is to steal all black kids followed by all other kids, which Coral very sensitiveleey pointed out was a tad over the top.
Jul 3rd, 2007
Evil Pundit
Don’t be silly, Madd. The culture war isn’t going to be put aside for this issue. Especially since the cultural assault by the Left is a large part of the cause of this problem.
The failed attempt to preserve a Stone Age society in the midst of the 21st century should be given up. Other Australian communities don’t have the problems that Aboriginal communities do — and if Aboriginal communities were treated the same way as the rest, they wouldn’t have those problems either.
Separatism has failed, and it’s time to work on integration.
Jul 3rd, 2007
Donna
Expecting you Ken
Jumping to Coral’s defense.
Jul 3rd, 2007
ken
As expected Donna? That’s odd a bit of research might show post 12 Unemployment figures, sarcastic criticism of Coral re red neck posts, mixed with paternalism and protectionism only in QLD, pervious posts noting the enormous array of friends relos and various acquaintances Coral has with knowledge of every subject known to mankind?
Yes – supported Coral from bullying, who wouldn’t. So in nomenclature you understand a score of “D”.
Any reasonable person might find this repugnant “They’re motive is to steal those Indigenous children from their Mothers, purely to establish the pathway to move into the white community and do the same there” – but well one can hold a view.
What’s really stifling this blog is the hijacking of posts by long winded incoherent stream of consciousness type rambles at best related but more often unrelated to the post. I’m sure Andrew is trying to work out a way to deal with that within his Democrats framework of tolerance and freedom of speech.
Jul 4th, 2007
Donna
Ken
Why not do the same for Coral’s posts to others?
Then do the same for your own posts to other female posters.
Jul 4th, 2007
Donna
… and I stand by my comments on what the Federal Government are intending.
Removing welfare is the beginning. The intention is to impoverish women further, so that cases of ‘neglect’ will increase, and the children will be removed.
Hopefully Deborah or Marilyn won’t leave you waiting too long before providing you with another opportunity for a self-righteous rant.
Jul 4th, 2007
red crab
you have all missed the point .
if the current govt was fare dinkum it would have tried to do something to resolve the problem of abuse in the community a long time ago its not as if they have not had enough time to try.
Jul 5th, 2007
Donna
I do agree with you Red Crab
The other part of my post that Ken cut and paste had the following comment:
‘They were voted in in 1996 and they NOW choose to act with these ‘emergency’ measures?’
Jul 5th, 2007
ken
No one is missing the point at all red or Donna -everyone knows the motives for the action are political (well apart from Donna’s secondary motive) – Anderw’s post have been precisley about that, and the conundrum that is involved in acknowledging that we all know the motive, versus at least accepting soemthing is happening.
But why is everyone so shocked, its actually the democratic process that forces action, forces policy, precisely becasue ALL parties wnat to be elected. Remember medicare gold, Super chnages, the education fund from the budget this year, and dont you think there wont be many more to come from ALL politicians including Andrew Bartlett. Why do you think affordable housing is starting to get a run, becasue its something new, of course not, its about timing policy and announcements with an election cycel.
its actually showing democracy works, maybe not to everyones liking, but thats the way it is.
Jul 6th, 2007
KK
Surprise, surprise….this is another example of John Howards 1950’s approach to dealing with issues in the 21st century…..
Does anybody seriously think this “intervention” is going to make any real difference to improve the lives of our indigenous people?
Is this yet another can of worms that Howard wants to open….? (remember Iraq, GST and Workchoices!!)
Aborginal people have to be the masters of their own destiny….not have a paternalistic government dictate how they should live their lives.
There’s no doubt there are serious problems in these remote places….in a country this wealthy
no one regardless of ethnicity should have to tolerate living in third world conditions
remember though our aboriginal people have been here for 40,000 years and europeans for just over 200 years
the aborigines i have known over the years are resourceful and respectful despite the imposition of european society on them
they have the right to choose to live where they want just like any other person in australia
perhaps the resource companies that get rich off mining these remote places should get off their backsides and help the aboriginal people….give them some jobs/training and some hope for the future….it should not be up to the government to dictate how aboriginal people live their lives, thats half the problem when it comes to aboriginal problems it seems that the only source of help has to come from the government…..that simply doesnt work…..
for far too long these big multinational resource companies have “shirked” their responsibility to the custodians of their land….maybe the government should make them pull their weight….remember the aboriginal people were here long before any mining/resource boom
thats my message to the PM make corporate australia meet their mutual obligation instead of belting people who are a victim of circumstance.
perhaps then there might be some real social justice the aboriginal people
Jul 6th, 2007
The Feral Abacus
ken, couldn’t one equally argue that the Federal Govt’s sudden rediscovery of this issue after a decade of wilful neglect demonstrates a failure of democracy?
After all, isn’t democracy supposed to be about government for ALL of the people, and not just the ones who will get you re-elected? Or am I simultaneously being more idealistic and cynical than thou?
Jul 6th, 2007
ken
Ah Feral – as ever an intellignet contribution – A reasonable question – but maybe you are confusing the process of democracy with the outocme.
The Governments actions or inactions in this area, are not a failure of the democractic process, becasue they have not been principally a major consideration in the electroal process.
This time that is different becasue they are very much part of this electroal cycle, and should be watched accordinlgy.
Jul 9th, 2007
The Feral Abacus
Hi ken – you said `maybe you are confusing the process of democracy with the outocme’
Quite possibly – I’d like to ponder that a while. I’ll get back to you later in the week.
As for aboriginal issues not being a major consideration in recent elections (apart from land rights, I guess) I suppose that raises the matter of why it has taken so long to gain political traction. If there’s a section of the community that is so desparately in need of support/intervention, then why have they been unable to raise their voices?
BTW I’m keeping out of thread IV for a while – think that’s judicious.
Jul 9th, 2007