The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > A 'sorry' budget - about $3 billion > Comments

A 'sorry' budget - about $3 billion : Comments

By Stephen Hagan, published 11/12/2007

What is the magical dollar figure that would go a long way to putting closure to the dark and disturbing chapter of the Stolen Generation?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
I had already thought, “What a gloater”, before I got to Stephen’s, “I know it’s not chivalrous to gloat.” I hope that doesn’t mean I have an ESP relationship with him!

Chivalry is a long outdated word; so is the action or concept itself. So, it’s probably fine to gloat these days.

What surprises me is that Stephen actually seems to believe the new Government will be better for his aboriginal cause. Sure, Rudd will say ‘sorry’ for something he has no need to be sorry for, but so what? It will not make any personal difference to Stephen judging by this: “I’m not sure of the demographics of the street I live in but gauging by the lack of proportionate excitement I gathered they may have had their money on the losing team.”

Stephen is telling us he lives among dreadful Coalition voters who, according to most OLO posters, are wealthy and don’t care about aborigines or anyone else. No wurley or wrecked public housing on a reserve for Stephen. He is a university lecturer, and is about as remote from the people he purports to champion as most of the Australian population. He should not be listened to any more than a white do-gooder should be listened to. The fact that he continually laments the demise of ATSIC, a remote (from real aborigines) and corrupt organization is a whopping black mark against him in itself.

Stephen reckons that Howard’s ‘promise’ on aborigines didn’t have the “charismatic ring” that Keating’s had in 2003. Well, stuff charisma, but what did Keating do for aborigines? Keating did Jack for aborigines, unless you call increased handouts, more reliance and positive discrimination, good for people’s self esteem and advancement.

Incidentally, but importantly, I wonder how many aborigines out in the remote lands watched the election telecast.

Continued....
Posted by Leigh, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 10:14:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
….continued

But, the silliest thing about this article is that, by the half way mark, Stephen Hagan doesn’t really trust Rudd to say ‘sorry’; he just thinks he should. Maybe it was Stephen, not his neighbours who really backed the wrong horse. Howard said that he would give us a referendum to deal with aboriginal questions. That way, all Australians would have made it clear what they thought, not just a few politicians like Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard with her girlish, “…(It is) Labor policy to say ‘sorry’”.

To give Stephen Hagan his due, he does actually mention the cost to taxpayers of this futile, grandstanding exercise. Finally, it is admitted that it is really about money, no matter what the hordes of aboriginal ‘leaders’ have been saying for years.

However, Stephen is still not satisfied, and wants a further $5 billion put aside for “victims of the stolen generation”. Will that make them ‘unstolen’?

Note the little slip: “Victims of the stolen generation”. I’m sure Stephen meant victims of the actual ‘stealing’.

However, he inadvertently highlights one, big truth. Australian taxpayers will certainly be victims of the stolen generation when that nice young Mr. Rudd says sorry. And, like so many things decided on by politicians without public consultation, they won’t be able to a thing about it
Posted by Leigh, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 10:17:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In all of my years in the Northern Territory I have known hundreds of people who, during the period of Government policy when children of mixed heritage were 'taken'and placed in institutions.

I remarked to a Barrister who was involved in the Cubillo / Gunner test case in 2002 that you cannot generalise the effect of being taken . I offered to introduce him to people I knew who had told me
"Thank god I was taken. If I hadn't been taken I would have died."

There is no doubt others suffered extreme trauma, mostly due to the manner in which they were forcibly taken and when Government Policy changed, made every effort to find their mothers. Sadly,many arrived too late to find their mothers deceased but pleased to meet other relatives. Some chose to return to their roots and have become articulate spokesmen and women

The Retta Dixon home on Bagot Road has been demolished but the children who were raised there have a unique bond who still identify as the 'Retta Dixon Mob' as they became a 'family' . Most got on with their lives and have raised their own families. To them ,having the Prime Minister simply say 'Sorry' on behalf of past Governments is an important symbol.

I don't think the payment of conscience money will make them pleased they were taken. It should also be recognised that for years, there has been positive discrimination in favour of children with Indigenous ancestry through such programmes as Abschol which enables access to higher education on scholarships that are not available to the non-indigenous population.

When are we going to get on with reconciliation and put the black armbands away.
Posted by maracas, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 10:38:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alms, just $3 billion this time.

When will some people get to understand, there is no dignity to be found in continually looking for handouts.

I like the notion of quoting Margaret Mead, good move Stephen, however, I prefer something else which is attributed to her

“I learned the value of hard work by working hard.”

That is were anyone who needs to bolster their self esteem and self worth will find real reward.

Relying on government to “provide” is similar to those who purposely cut themselves,

it is a self harming process which fails to produce any beneficial outcomes and longterm only scars the practitioner..
Posted by Col Rouge, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 10:49:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And just who are the victims of the "stolen generation"?

The most recent victim is fairly clearly the ten year old girl who was returned to her family in Aurukun because there were too many people who could, and should, have kept her away from her family but who failed to do so for fear of being accused of repeating the stolen generation.

In our society, children are commonly removed from their parents if the children are at risk. It is a reasonable expectation that a substantial proportion of those children who in past times were removed - stolen, some would claim - were saved from a similar or worse fate. While the process was clumsy, mismanaged, and at times abused the thought behind it was for the general good.
Posted by Reynard, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 11:24:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stephen, I have to say that most people in southeastern Australia think it was a good thing for the Army to march into aboriginal communities to protect the little children from peadophiles.

Southerners do not know or care about the axing of CDEP or CHIP. They don't have any idea about the appalling conditions the stolen generation grew up after being removed from their mothers.
Posted by billie, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 11:54:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
While i sympathise with the stolen generation i do not think they are more entitled to an apology than the 500,000 "Forgotten Australians".Apologies are just words and really are quite meaningless,especially when the apology is for what another generation has done.
I am part aboriginal and i don't give a damn if someone apologises or notIt makes no difference to me.I am and always have been me,REGARDLESS of heritage.
When i was made a state ward no one had any idea of my heritage and i will testify that we were all MISTREATED the same.
I have also spoken to aboriginal people who said"being taken from their natural parents,probably saved their lives".
Isn't it time we became Australians without feeling the need to be treated differently because we are of a different colour or religion?
The Forgotten Australians are still fighting for the right to be heard
and an aboriginal man was recently awarded over $500,000.
Forget your colour and stop the handouts,just get on with leading a decent life.
Posted by haygirl, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 12:05:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am shocked and concerned by the posts above.

In our society you get compensation for a broken nail yet you all want to deny fair and reasonable remedy for what has been endured.

There is a need to say Sorry.

Sit on the fence for 5 mintutes and there is no denying it.

It means more to hear it than it does to say it, and it will be the first bridge spanning between us that both mainstram Australia and Indigenous Australia can benefit from.

To say sorry for what has happenned is vitally important, and those that cannot comprehend why the government of Australia should say sorry for the sytematic mistreatment and countless horrors endured for 200 years must be one eyed.

Financial compensation for the stolen generation is far more complex but any monies given should be given in the way of appreciating assets that provide an income, such as properties unencumbered with a rental return that can be used as income stream.

Being impartial, places of little economic hope and with no services or employment we realy should look at ways and means of either making the community viable, or bite the bullet and realise that there is no use being here pouring money into a community that survives on government assistance.

It is traditional land and the home for these people for thousands of years, it should be a sanctuary for them rather than the only hope of a future if it is not there. there needs to be easy pathways out of these communites on offer.

Coming from the bush, my community was never going to provide me with what I wanted out of life. It was impossible with population base, employment options and services to acheive anything in this community for most children. It is great to have a place to come back to and call home, but even better go back home knowing you are making a good life for yourself, and lack of opportunity and percieved hope is the driving force of problems in these communities.
Posted by Realist, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 12:13:48 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, well, if Prime Minister Rudd does say "sorry", "God save Australia" from the greedy palates of libertarian and humanitarian lawyers who will deliver, at a high fee, a rich feast of compensation to the "stolen generations" through "activists" judges at taxpayers' expense.

See more--http://kotzabasis3.wordpress.com
Posted by Themistocles, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 1:38:16 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There was an interesting program on Landline last weekend where a white husband and wife couple set up a bushtucker farming program called Outback Pride http://www.outbackpride.com.au. It farms native foods in about 20 places around the country for selling in gourmet shops. What they did was to staff it exclusively with Aboriginals to give them a chance to both make a quid and be a part of the mainstream economy.

This seems like a good way to go: give people an genuine opportunity to make a go of it for themselves. As Col rightly says, too much handout money is not good for people.
Posted by RobP, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 3:05:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"it just didn’t have that charismatic ring to it that matched the Paul Keating acceptance speech back in 2003.

Keating announced at 11.30pm on the close of polls on that famous night: "This is the sweetest victory of all. This is a victory for the true believers" - to celebrate a win achieved primarily because of John Hewson's proposal to introduce a goods and services tax."

Unless I was really on another planer Paul Keating was not Prime Minister in 2003!

What a scam artist this author is, sure children were removed from their parents. They were removed because they were at risk! and this was according to the ethos of that period of time, where not only black, but white children as well were removed from their parents and place in institutions.

To claim money simply because people who are no longer alive, made decisions to try and improve the life expectancy of aborignal children is pure fraud.

My ex-mother in law is aboriginal and she dosen't beleive in the mythical 'stolen generation.'
Posted by JamesH, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 3:08:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Reynard wrote:
While the process was clumsy, mismanaged, and at times abused the thought behind it was for the general good.

The thought behind the "policy" was not "good"
Please read about the "Aboriginal Protection Act" and learn about its purpose!
Posted by Ron H, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 3:30:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
James H wrote:
They were removed because they were at risk!

This is not true.
The thought behind the "policy" was to deliberately remove all "half-caste" children.
Please read about the "Aboriginal Protection Act" and learn about its purpose!
Posted by Ron H, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 3:38:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Most on here are concerned about compensation, money "Handouts".

Could it be your jumping the gun here, as those I know of the stolen generation (One being a mate), have moved on and got over the pain of the experience,though still remember.

To the most on here, where you not taught as a child when you had done wrong to say Sorry!

Talking of Money Col Rouge takes the biscuit. An economic refugee from the UK!
Posted by Kipp, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 4:16:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ron H,

Particularly to remove the half-caste children, yes! Because they were the ones most at risk. They were the ones first left to starve in the hard times.

The society from which they were removed was, and is, far more racist than ours. The society from which they were removed was not above a bit of ethnic cleansing.
Posted by Reynard, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 4:34:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How long will it be before the Howard period (1996-2007) is regarded as the Golden Age?
Posted by plerdsus, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 4:54:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ah! yes the Howard golden age! Lies, Lies and Lies.

Get over it! You Lost!

Now calm, reality and common sense has returned to Australia.

We are now once again Australians, and not being treated as subjects of manipulation.
Posted by Kipp, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 5:53:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I wonder if Steven will put his hand up for a slice of 'compo'.....

From his well educated position.. which of course was one of the 'awful results' of being removed from a situation of questionable circumstances?

Sorry old son.. there is no such thing as the politicized 'stolen' generation.. where was a PERIOD when government policy was aimed at preventing the social marginalization of mixed blood children... and apparently also a policy of affirmative assimilation, the extent of which I don't know.

The point is... there is not "a" STOLEN generation.. that is an outright politicized term, which was used to considerable effect to get Labor elected..and now you are already seeing just HOW much of a politicized idea it is, as Rudd the dudd pulls back from some aspects of that politicization.

Never..NEVER believe politicians when they tell you what you want to hear :)

Finally.. SUDDENLY...it IS about money? shock horror.. I did NOT see that coming.. even though many many voices predicted it..and many other indigenous voices denied it.. welllllll.. now.. *voila* suddenly out of the blue.. THREE BILLION ?

I don't have a problem with paying unpaid wages with interest.. to indigenous workers.. but this idea of "compensation for the 'stolen' generation" is just a cash grab.

1/ Invent a political term u can use.
2/ When you have fully developed it... then cash in.

yep.. I think that's how it goes.

Tell u what Steven.. lets put 3 billion into Indigenous HEALTH aah.. then I'll agree.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 9:04:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
$3,000,000,000.00

More of the same that brought us multiculturalism, white guilt and other moonbat policy.

I think this 3 billion dollars paid to Aboriginals will be an absolute bonanza for the bush.

Just think, holden and toyota dealerships will be selling thousands of utes.

Pubs and bottlo's will employ more staff selling grog and smokes.

TAB will have to put in more terminals.

They will then be able to build thier own houses so we will save a fortune on fixing them.

The government will get it all back anyway, so go on I say give em $5B

RUDD, say sorry but just make sure you tell em I'm not sorry because I didnt do anything to them, if thats what your white guilt tells you then go ahead.
Posted by SCOTTY, Tuesday, 11 December 2007 11:53:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Saying sorry may be important for Indigenous Australians - it is more important for mainstream Australians - it is we, the mainstream, that need to remove the regrets of the past.
Posted by rivergum, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 7:48:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Boazy: " ...lets put 3 billion into Indigenous HEALTH... "

Despite the blather that preceded it, I actually agree with this part of Boazy's rant. Throwing cash at individuals who suffered under the appalling policy of removal of "half-caste" children from Aboriginal communities seems unlikely to bring about any lasting improvement in their lives, while a complete overhaul of Indigenous health services might.

Of course, the 'stolen wages' issue to which Boazy refers in passing is quite different. It is entirely appropriate for Aboriginal workers who had their wages ripped off by governments to have them repaid, with interest.

I also think that the formal apology being formulated now by the Rudd government should extend beyond the recommendation of the 'Bringing Them Home' report, and should constitute a general apology to Australia's Indigenous people for the various acts of dispossession, genocide and bureaucratic bastardry that were the basis of the contemporary Australian society from which all non-Indigenous Australians benefit directly.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 8:11:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Marion Scrymgour, Charles Perkins Oration 2007
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/awaye/stories/2007/2068672.htm

"The first [orphanage] was established near the Police Station in Alice Springs, and it attracted critical comment from journalists and other concerned citizens. With a view to trying to reduce the Commonwealth's administrative burden, then Prime Minister Stanley Bruce wrote in 1927 to his South Australian counterpart to see whether South Australia would take the lighter skinned mixed race children slated for removal-'quadroons' and 'octroons' as the language had it then. He said:

"They could hardly be distinguished from ordinary white children ...If these babies were removed, at their present early age, from their present environment to homes in South Australia, they would not know in later life that they had Aboriginal blood and would probably be absorbed into the white population and become useful citizens".

"The accommodation provided for them exhausts my power to paint adequately. A rough floor of burnt lime and sand to make a form of cement has been laid down. A very rough framework of wood was put up, and some dilapidated sheets of corrugated iron roughly thrown over it. There are no doors or windows. A more draughty, ugly, dilapidated place one could hardly imagine. I think the children would be less liable to colds in the open than in the disgraceful accommodation provided for them. And that is not the worst. Boys and girls of all ages from one year old to sixteen are herded in this so-called room whose dimensions are about 24 feet by 50 feet. At present there are 48 children in the institution. The girls and boys are mixed indiscriminately. The children are issued with two blankets and lie on the floor. One small stove has to cook bread for over fifty people. They apparently have never had fruit or vegetables. The ration scale has been deplorable ...the scale is meagre in the extreme. The only lighting is two hurricane lamps. The children have no games or amusements of any description. Cooking utensils are practically nil. There are six bowls and twenty towels to serve everybody".
Posted by billie, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 9:27:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Billie,
It would be educational for some of the redneck contributors to utilise your link to Marion Scrymjour's lecture.
I knew her father during his adult life as a worker in Darwin and it is to his credit that being one of the stolen generation, he managed to overcome his traumatic childhood and raise a daughter of Marion's intellect who is now a senior minister in the Northern Territory Government.
It is also worth noting that although many white Australians welcomed the Howard / Brough intervention in the Northern Territory in the mistaken belief that such intervention was in the best interests of Aboriginal Communities, The real reasons for the intervention were a part of Howard's election strategy.

Hopefully, Jenny Macklin will consult with Marion scrymjour and in consultation with Aboriginal Communities, retain those aspects of the intervention which are beneficial and reject that which dis-empowers the people.

Conscience money handouts should not be on the agenda but as CJ Morgan pointed out, Wages witheld by governments plus interest is another matter which must be remitted in full.
Posted by maracas, Wednesday, 12 December 2007 12:07:29 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Kipp “Talking of Money Col Rouge takes the biscuit. An economic refugee from the UK!”

Hardly, when in came to Australia, I did so after considering several other potential destinations, (Canada, USA, SA, NZ etc) (I have since also held a US green card). I am settled on Aus but I still had to prove my “worthiness” to the community by having both credentials and attitude which would ensure I was valuable to the Australian community.

And when I arrived in Australia with my wife and daughter, "residence visa" in passport, I recall the words of the migration officer, something which has stuck with me ever since “Ah some of the chosen people”.

So I guess, Kipp, you were born here, your Australian citizenship is simply “an accident of birth”, neither tested nor selected.

Before you go around suggesting I am some “economic refugee” I would check out whether you would actually be able to jump the hurdles which I had to do to get here or would you be one of the many failures whose dreams and aspirations litter the offices of Aussie Consulates around the globe.

Likely you cannot, so you can just live with the knowledge that you are not worthy to walk in the shadow of anyone who migrated at the time I did (1983) and who had to pass the tests which I had to pass.

As for “We are now once again Australians, and not being treated as subjects of manipulation.”

In your case, only by default. As for “manipulation”, I doubt you have the wit to know when and if you are being manipulated, unless you are doing it to yourself (check the hairs on the palms of your hands).
Posted by Col Rouge, Thursday, 13 December 2007 4:09:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This debate about the alleged "Stolen Generation" is getting more and more interesting.

If I recall correctly firstly it began about getting the government to say sorry and not talk about compensation.

Now there is talk about compensation, varying between 1-3 billion dollars. However I suspect the compensation bill may not even be covered by the 15 billion surplus.

Now in todays The Australian the words 'evil' and 'cruel' are trying to be inserted into the apology.

I however do agree that wages that were withheld be paid.

As an interesting bit of insight, stories told to me about my grandfather who did employ aboriginal labour. From what I can recall when he first did this, the people he employed would disappear once they had been paid and return when they needed more money.

Apparently he eventually countered this, by giving them enough money to live on, until the work was finished and then paid them what was owing.
Posted by JamesH, Monday, 17 December 2007 6:55:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
James H, What your grandfather would not have understood was that Aborigines were not conditioned to the 'work ethic' as they were initially hunter gatherers who 'worked' at obtaining their sustenance without the use of money.
They did not have a word in their languages for money until their contact in the top-end with Macassans prior to white invasion when they adopted the malay word 'rupiah'
Posted by maracas, Monday, 17 December 2007 10:51:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Steven,

Are you a mate os Mansell's who wants $1 billion for the stolen Generation?

I find with-in your argument and the Government's stance, how both fail to understand democracy at work. Why is it that you fail to see the Stolen Generation issues as a tool to reflect away from the truth, a leftist view indeed.

Why not canvass the view,s of those directly effected and pressure Government to provide Legal Aid to those in need, not activist's with a hiden agenda's that protect corrupt Governments.

Your view's are mamifestly disturbing in-that they reflex the views of misfitts, bigots and fack Aborigines who have controled Government policy on Aboriginal affairs for the passed generation, and then in turn feed off the weak and oppressed placed in those position as a result of such policies.
Posted by Toto, Monday, 17 December 2007 7:31:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Posted by maracas, Monday, 17 December 2007 10:51:50 AM

Some of the stories were fascinating, and I think in the period of my grandfather that there was not much in the way of cultural understanding.

My grandparents also had a shop and I remember being told that the women never entered the shop until the men had left.

This may sound cultural inappriopriate today, but it was deemed appropriate behaviour back then.

I understand that my grand parents would give the aboriginals a lift and one story I partially remember is that my grand mother gave a aboriginal woman a lift to Denny.

One of the problems is judging behaviour or policies that were deemed appropriate 50-60 years ago by todays standard.

Perhaps in another 50-60 years the behaviour and policies deemed appropriate today will be seen as being highly inappropriate.

Maybe in another 50-60 years someone might develop another sorry day, and claim compenstation for wrongs committed by the government for trying to develop social policy?
Posted by JamesH, Monday, 17 December 2007 10:09:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
In 1937, the Commonwealth Government held a national conference on Aboriginal affairs which agreed that Aboriginal people 'not of full blood' should be absorbed or 'assimilated' into the wider population. The aim of assimilation was to make the 'Aboriginal problem' gradually disappear so that Aboriginal people would lose their identity in the wider community.

Protection and assimilation policies which impacted harshly on Indigenous people included separate education for Aboriginal children, town curfews, alcohol bans, no social security, lower wages, State guardianship of all Aboriginal children and laws that segregated Indigenous people into separate living areas, mainly on special reserves outside towns or in remote areas.

This led to what is known as the “Stolen Generation”. This practise was finally stopped in 1971. That was ONLY 36 years ago. Not only are the victims still suffering today, but the perpatrators who committed some awful crimes to these children are still alive. As far as im concerned, that makes it an issue for todays Governments.

Im tired of hearing people say that at the time the Government thought they were doing the right thing so that makes it ok. Do you think Jewish people feel the same way about Hitler? He thought he was doing the right thing too.

On a personal level, no money compensation will ever take away my mothers nightmares or memories from that terrible time in her life.
Posted by CoogeeGal, Thursday, 20 December 2007 3:02:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy