It would be great to protect people from all the "good intentions", but that in itself is paternalistic I guess.

The way things are going, the outback aborigines will end up as zoo exhibits, while the urban aborigines, whose identity is becoming quite different to outback aborigines may as well be white fellas.

Many howl that assimilation is abhorrent, but never seem to say why, but love to scream all the usual insults to anyone who mentions it.

It is self evident that the status quo is unworkable, and is never going anywhere.

Do them all a favor, even if it means wiping out their so called "culture" and help them become part of mainstream Australia, it is racist and completely unfair to keep these people segregated, poor and at the mercy of the aboriginal industry, who all seem to be urban academics these days.

I'll draw the usual crowd of haters who squeal anytime anyone mentions the obvious, though none of them ever have solutions or recommendations.

We have to be paternalistic and ignore all the regular people who benefit from the misery, the ones who cry about the "culture", ignore the UN who only have their own careers to protect, and do something positive for the people, not for all the parasites.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't Sara ....

Aboriginals and their advocates are largely responsible for the situations and outcomes the author describes.

As for 'culture' - it's a long way removed from the forefathers in too many of those communities. The real culture is idolence, filth, substance abuse, violence, child abuse and neglect, family dysfunction and blatant waste.

Despite the almost 'bottomless pit' funding and all the self determination these communities cannot get it right. Then when the truth about some of the conditions finally reaches daylight and Governments intervene to protect the most vulnerable, the screaming of 'paternalistic interference' begins.

I guess evolution or devolution will eventually sort things out. Those that assimilate will survive and thrive and those that don't will almost certainly 'die out'. Certainly if the children were removed from these communities, fostered and educated in 'white mans world' there would be howls of 'stolen generation' all over again. I believe that in 10 - 20 years we may well be experiencing another 'aboriginal scandal' - this time the 'children' who were left in appalling conditions and deprived of opportunity - simply because they were aboriginal. Political correctness at it's most stupid and destructive level and so it goes ....

I don't know how many outback aboriginies we have, but it seems to me that it would be cheaper and infinitly more cost effective, if we rounded up all the kids and put them and their mothers in some boarding schools somewhere for a few years. As an example, there are some good facilities at Woomera going to waste and probably Batchelor in the N.T. could be turned into something useful instead of what it seems to be at present It had a good school once, but I see it is no longer there.

The first thing of course, would be to educate them into how they should behave whilst living a proper town. For example, they need to be shown that maintenance of their surroundings is necessary, toilets should be kept clean, windows and doors should not be broken. Noel Pearson seems to know what he is doing, so perhaps some advice from him would be helpful. There certainly isn't a shortage of money. it is just that what there is, is being wasted, particularly when you see that at least ninety percent of the patrons in the Alice Springs casino are blacks.

Now that the government is going to be sending refugees to other countries for processing, there should be a surplus of immigration detention centres which could be converted in more user friendly places fo educating aboriginies closer to their own communities. The facility at Port Augusta springs to mind, Broome also.

I'm sure that most of the kids from the so called "stolen generation" look back with some thankfullness that they were given the opportunities that the current batch of outback ones are so sadly lacking.

David

Sara, You seem like a a nice person and I have have no doubt you “mean well”

but this continuous “Aboriginal Victim Industry” ( AVI ) rhetoric ?

CRAP !

You bring “Nothing New” to the debate.

And for the sake of the rest of us "Black and White Aussies"

“Have ( give us ) a Break” for a “few years” !!

Arthur Bell. aka bully.

One element that was noticeably absent from the article was any suggestion as to how to do it better. And a quick glance at the long list of "reports" against the author's name shows a consistent pattern - long on complaint, extremely short on proposals of how to achieve a better "outcome".

In fact, it is difficult to determine what sort of "outcome" Ms Hudson favours. Does she want the aboriginal population to be educated in the same way as the rest of the country? Or would she prefer they retain their own culture?

If I were the CIS I would look for a little more discipline and rigour in the work of research fellows. But maybe that's just me.

Amicus
“Do them all a favor, even if it means wiping out their so called "culture" and help them become part of mainstream Australia, it is racist and completely unfair to keep these people segregated, poor and at the mercy of the aboriginal industry, who all seem to be urban academics these days”.

Amicus, we pay the salaries of the urban academics, the providers of ‘words’; the sharks who take advantage of the present conditions are to be found among the entrepreneurs who set up shadowy Charities with the sole aim of cashing on government’s grants and tax exemptions.

The number of charities I have been able to count, to the end of last financial year was six hundred and thirty three and, helped by lawyers’ expert in trust laws, this number is growing every day.

In May 2011 Americans, set another shop here. It goes under the name of Yalari. You can find them at www.yalari.org

Amicus, there is no other way for the Aborigine but the worship of their culture while embracing ‘modernity’, as you clearly suggest.

The problem of what you or I intend with modernity though, unfortunately remains

Thank you, Sara, what you write is long overdue and I hope your article provokes thorough debate and argument, but I'm not holding my breath.

Let's remember something: nearly half of the Indigenous population now lives in metropolitan areas, and most of the rest live in urban areas, large cities, smaller cities, large towns. And it's been moving in that direction for more than sixty years now.

Two-thirds or more of the Indigenous population are working alongside other Australians. They have not 'assimilated', they are Indigenous people living urban lives, and doing it willingly. It is not a matter of either-or, either segregation or assimilation: I don't know many Aboriginal people here in Adelaide who have 'assimilated', but I know plenty of Aboriginal people who are comfortable - as Aboriginal people - living in the city.

Pericles,
I have great respect for your contributions to OLO but to your question: " ... it is difficult to determine what sort of "outcome" Ms Hudson favours. Does she want the aboriginal population to be educated in the same way as the rest of the country?" - from her article, and from her other writings, the answer is surely yes, yes, yes ! Do you have a problem with that ?

More than twenty six thousand Indigenous people have graduated from universities around Australia - by the end of next year, the total may exceed thirty thousand. Fifty thousand by 2020. Getusedtoit.

Indigenous enrolments at universities are at record levels, year after year. The participation rate of Indigenous women is two-thirds that of non-Indigenous women - with one third of the Indigenous population mired in lifelong welfare dependence, what more could you ask ?

"Culturally adapted education" was the standard colonial form of low-level education in Africa and other colonies, implemented by all colonial powers, after about 1905. It was violently opposed in most colonies, and provoked many liberation struggles. It is grotesque to hear people who think they are progressive, or radical, supporting it. How easily we forget our history, or never learn it in the first place.

Joe

Joe, it might be germaine (I like that word) to point out, that a large percentage of these 'indigenous' people you speak so highly of, are not 'indigenous'. They are the product of in many cases, several, unions between an aboriginal and a white person, therefore not really indigenous at all. I have two Irish grandfathers, but I make no claims to being Irish, even though I am eligible to obtain Irish citizenship.

If we follow the lead of the Maoris who arrived in New Zealand early in the previous millenium, in another several hundred years our descendants will all be able to claim that they are indigenous, regardless of their colour or parentage.

David

Thanks for your comment VK3AUU,

When my wife and I got married, her being classed as 'Aboriginal', born on a mission station, we were supposed to get permission from the Aborigines' Department. When we moved to Victoria, we were supposed to get permission from the Aborigines' Department. When we moved over to New Zealand for a couple of years, we were supposed to get permission from the Aborigines' Department. Little did we know :)

My wife was raised, along with nine other kids, by her mother who was Aboriginal. SHE was raised by her mother who was Aboriginal (and who could never vote). She was raised by HER mother who was Aboriginal. And so on - all born on the mission, by the way. At what point should somebody have stepped in and told them that they weren't Aboriginal ? What do you think your chances might be these days of doing that and getting away with anything less than a fat lip ?

The great majority of Aboriginal people that I know take for granted that they are Aboriginal, they don't have to make it up, or hum and ha about it: whatever and wherever they are, whatever job or education they have, they are Aboriginal.

Not too many people fractionise themselves, VK3AUU, and usually if they do, it's because ethnicity doesn't have any particular significance. But even most Irish-Australians would probably be happy to assert their Irish ancestry, even if it is mixed up a bit with others, even with English.

I agree that some people mayhave made capital from claiming some distant 'part-Aboriginal' ancestor: by the way, many whites in the late nineteenth century had 'Australian Native' on their papers, i.e. whites born in Australia, not shoe-horned into good jobs in Australia from the imperial home-country, exiled drop-kicks. I suspect that many 'Aboriginal' people have taken up good jobs on the strength of this 'ancestry'.

But the great majority of people who assert their Aboriginality are not in it for the money, or position: they have lived it, they don't have to scratch around for a 'part'-Aboriginalgreat-grand-mother.

Joe - I suggest your situation is not uncommon but then again certainly not 'typical'. Having worked in the public health sector where one encounters a large number and diversity of people I have observed a many people of aboriginal and islander heritage both as clients/patients and fellow health workers.

Although no longer working in health, my past experience was the vast majority of those with education beyond year 10 were predominately 'white'. By this I mean they might have acknowledged/claimed indigenous heritage and had some of the appearance but genetically were predominately caucasian - with the occasional asian or other racial mix thrown in. They also tended to lead pretty 'typical aussie' lifestyles.

Don't get me wrong - I believe this is a good thing AND the way of the future but it does amuse me when someone with lighter skin tones than myself, fair hair AND blue eyes proclaims they are aboriginal. Now my Great-grandfather (mothers mothers father) was a Cantonese gold miner. I am not very tall, have dark eyes, had very dark very straight hair (before the grey) but I don't go claiming to be CHINESE. Daresay if I decided to try I would be laughed at - at the least.

In essence the 'Australian Aboriginal' now comes in a huge and confusing assortment of packages with the 'wrapping' becoming paler and paler with each generation. Hopefully in another 50 or so years it will be a bit of novelty to say that there's a bit of native in the family mix and that will be about it.

With respect, divine Ms_n, you don't know what you are talking about. Perhaps it is the case that mothers, rather than absent fathers, raise their kids and that their kids take their identity cues from their mother rather than their father, but there are many other factors, mostly social and political:

* Aboriginal kids, no matter how pale, tend to have only Aboriginal relations (that they know of, or have contact with);

* in country towns, the 'Aboriginal family' is not fractionised by non-Aboriginal neighbours, but considered to be 100 % Aboriginal;

* government agencies, at least in the past, considered people to be Aboriginal if they had any Aboriginal ancestry, no matter how pale they might have been.

With those factors, how could, or why would, Aboriginal people consider themselves to be anything but Aboriginal ? Run your slide rule over them all you like, that's how it is.

Of course, with far more intermarriage in the towns and cities than a generation or two ago, much of the antipathy from non-Aboriginal people - which facilitated the development of a strong in-group, in-family, Aboriginal identity - has evaporated. But it is still up to people themselves to work out their own allegiances, it is not up to somebody with a colour or DNA chart. In short, it is not up to whites to tell Blackfellas whether they are or aren't Blackfellas.

One day, I hope that whites can get that through their heads. I guess superiority and power impulses die hard.

Joe

Whatever Joe. You have your experience and observations and I have mine.

You talk about all the 'aboriginal' uni students/graduates. Many have taken advantage - and power to them for making the most of an opportunity - of their heritage to recieve assistance to reach educational goals but 'aboriginality' means little to them. That's mainly because their backgrounds are predominately other racial groups, mainly caucasian and they live a typical 'aussie' lifestyle.

Yes there are also plenty who 'identify' as 'aboriginal' in an urban sense. Not too many of the outstation kids among their numbers though, eh! Alice Springs grads pretty sparse on the ground too?

I want to see 'aboriginal' australians living healthy productive happy lives and the only way I see that happening is integration. And it is an undeniable fact that the population is becoming increasingly 'white' through interbreeding. The 'outback aboriginal' is likely nearing extinction. Another 50 years max ... Another undeniable fact is that when someone of aboriginal heritage is seen to be living a good life they are generally held in the same regard and respect as any other member of the community. Sure there will be some individuals who would express a racist viewpoint but likewise there are aboriginal individuals with exactly the same attitude.

The sooner we become one society with the same basic expectations obligations and rights for all the better. That's not just a reference to aboriginals either.

Thank you, Divine Ms_n, but I don't understand what you are getting at (or perhaps I don't want to understand?) - if you are suggesting that some of the fifteen hundred Indigenous university graduates this year are not Indigenous, or not 'sufficiently' Indigenous for your liking, or are not sufficiently politically ra-ra Indigenous for your liking, then may I suggest that that is not really your business ?

As for Alice Springs graduates, there are plenty, many of whom have graduated in every other major city in Australia, even from the Launceston Maritime College ('What!', you say, 'an Indigenous person from Alice Springs graduating from a maritime college ? How dare they ! Where are the oceans around Alice Springs ? Why aren't they confining themselves to Arid Lands Conservation, or Indigenous Health?' you may say.) They may answer: 'Go to buggery, we will study whatever the hell we like'.

It's called integration, Divine Ms_n. Integration with attitude, otherwise known as 'identity'.

And yes, policies over the last forty years have condemned outstation kids to be barred from higher education. Should the rest of the Indigenous population fall in a heap and cry in their beer ? Or should they say, bugger it, outstation life is not for us, we want decent careers and we have the right to them. And what would you say to that ?

Yes, develop all manner of pathways that will assist outstation kids to get some basic skills, and trade skills, and untimately professional skills through tertiary education - if not in this generation, then for their children. It's been a long, slow process for the Indigenous people who are making it now in 2011, they haven't had it given to them on a plate. But the pathways should be there too for their segregated cousins, condemned by policy to short, empty, blighted lives.

Joe Lane

I'm saying that there's no such thing as "Generic Aboriginality". Some people with indigenous heritage wish to wear it as a badge, some basically ignore or hide it and others anywhere in between.

I find it ludicrous when a person with an aboriginal ancestor 3 or 4 or more generations back whose genetic make-up is predominately another racial group or groups proclaims they are "aboriginal". I could understand if such individuals were reared in a tribal setting but this is rare - especially since most are now urbanised. Just like I would look a fool claiming to be an asian because great-grandpa was a chinaman. That's my POV. I'm not the only one ...

On all other fronts we agree. Education and training for indigenous kids and all ages who want it. Helping them to help themselves and their families. Real jobs - jeez we are singing off the same page there, and opportunities to thrive. Integration for better or worse because that's the only viable future.

Dear Divine Ms_n,

Thank you. You are missing the point: regardless of how dark or pale some Aboriginal people may be, they - or at least their parents and grandparents - had to put up with discriminatory policies for generations, policies which barred them from opportunities by virtue of just that factor that you complain about, the inheritance of some Aboriginal ancestry. As well, who raised the kids ? Usually the Aboriginal mothers, with any white fathers nowhere to be seen. After all, it was illegal, until the early sixties, for white men to associate with Aboriginal women (not that that stopped either party).

So I have no problem with people claiming Aboriginality, no matter how pale they might be. On the other hand, this does open the door to non-Aboriginal people purporting to claim benefits - people with not the slightest trace of Aboriginality or political/historical heritage ('culture') - but usually, Aboriginal people can pick these ring-ins pretty quickly. When I was working at the Uni of SA, I had quite a few of these and even I could pick most of them: I used to give them a 'Family Tree' form to fill out, with a big friendly smile, and usually never saw them again. They often got into another notoriously incompetent and lax program instead: one even was named their 'Aboriginal Scholar of the Year'.

Divine Ms_n, please remember that 'race', history and culture are not synonymous: Aboriginal people in the south or 'settled' areas have been immersed in a Western-type social and political environment for 150-200 years: their ancestors more or less abandoned traditional cultural practices many generations ago, when it was no longer feasible to engage in them. The key factor, the upshot of policy, history and social forces, is that Aboriginal people do not see themselves as non-Aboriginal: they've 'learnt' that they AREN'T Non-Aboriginal, and that lesson stays with them for life. Give them a break.

Joe

Divine Ms_n,

I'm concerned that you, and probably many others, find it difficult to conceive of Aboriginal people who have moved to the cities - who have urbanised themselves, to use the active voice for a bloody change - somehow are no longer Aboriginal.

It reminds me of the difficulties in recent times of newly-graduated Aboriginal secondary teachers getting employment - the bureaucratic turd at the other end of the phone would say, 'What, Aboriginal and a teacher ? Hmmm, an Aboriginal teacher, okay, we'll find you a primary school position.' The graduate would say, 'But I'm secondary-trained'. 'Well, we don't have any positions for education workers at secondary schools at the moment, but try later'. 'But I'm a qualified teacher, a secondary teacher, not an education worker'. 'What ? An Aboriginal qualified secondary teacher ? Well, I'm sorry, dear, we don't have any Aboriginal secondary schools'. And round and round they'd go. So, big surprise, with maybe forty Aboriginal people qualified as secondary teachers in SA, there are only two or three actually working in the system, usually (no, all of them) working mostly with Aboriginal kids.

So yes, there is still a lot of racism around. How hard it seems to be for whites to hold the thoughts of 'Aboriginal' and 'urban' in their heads at the same time, let alone 'Aboriginal' and 'qualified'. 'Aboriginal', 'urban' and 'qualified' must just about fry their brains. No offence, Divine Ms_n, but it is possible to be all three :)

Joe

Jeez - are the chips on your shoulder heavy to carry around or what? Can I remind you that Australian history isn't entirely based on 'persecution of the unfortunate aboriginal'?

The Chinese were persecuted mainly by whites, but plenty of instances of attack by natives and some were allegedly eaten. The white australia policy saw many of those who had migrated, mainly to chase gold, forcibly repatriated. This is said to have been the fate of my great-grandfather, although details are somewhat sketchy. The alliance with my great-grandmother which produced one child was considered absolutely scandalous and a blight on the family reputation. Apart from the fact this female child had quite exceptional intelligence, an iron disposition with a work ethic to match and built quite a nice little empire - despite the times, her sex and the prejudice she encountered as an Eurasian, her story would have been hushed up as much as possible. As it was, mentioning the chinaman was verboten.

So Joe - like me I suggest you live in the present. The time is now. Opportunities exist for people who may have no more than a smidgeon of aboriginal genetics through to 100% that are not available for others. Now that's fine by me if it helps people help themselves plus the flow on effect is usually very powerful. The increasing number of young people reaching higher levels of education is very encouraging. In other areas there are some terrible 'indigenous statistics' which need to be addressed. Like it or not - much of the trouble is from within and despite bad policy throwing money and proclaiming go forth and self determine, problems have steadily worsened.

So it seems one level of the indigenous population - the increasingly 'white' one (sorry for want of a better description)is moving forward and the other is headed for oblivion.

Thank you Divine Ms_n,

I agree with pretty much everything you write in your last post. Yes, there is a rapidly growing 'Gap' between Indigenous people who have seized opportunities, taken risks, and put effort into their lives, and those who seek to fall back onto lifelong welfare - extreme welfare, one could call it. My wife wrote a key paper on this very theme some years ago for Noel Pearson.

But what are the people who have made the jump supposed to do ? Isn't it up to the 'welfare mob' to get off their backsides and seek out opportunities as well ? Of course, there should be effective pathways to facilitate any such efforts, but effort is what it needs. Countless times, around our kitchen table, we used to enthusiastically propose what might be done in this or that situation, and our son would laugh and say "Yeah, sure, just add the miracle ingredient: effort." That usually cooled us down a bit.

But those 26,000 Indigenous graduates - one in nine adults - have shown that it is possible, if incredibly difficult. Nobody can fall back on the racist lie that Indigenous people are incapable and therefore need our constant sympathy in an alien world. And in the next decade, those graduate numbers could double. What then, for the 'welfare mob' ? Will they still be living useless lives, abusing their women and kids, beating the sh!t out of each other, boozing, burgling and car-jacking at will ? With their kids suiciding at ten times the national rate, and committing offences at twenty times the national rate ? What is the point ?

Meanwhile, the effort-oriented population will stream ahead. They don't have to wait for their welfare-oriented relations to catch up - that's the obligation of those relations, as long as there are sensible, effective and hard-working pathways for them to get from one side of the Gap to the other. Dark or pale, the working, effort-oriented population will build secure, productive lives, alongside other Australians, shaping new versions of Indigenous identity as they wish.

Joe Lane

Well expressed Joe. I agree.

It is just so sad that political correctness has already destroyed the chances of many young people by consigning them to remain in toxic situations simply because policy decrees they must be kept within their 'culture'. Things have to change so that children trapped in dysfunctional situations are given the chance to receive a half decent education along with adequate nutrition and other care. If the parents or extended family can't or won't provide then those kids really need to be given to someone else - regardless of race or creed if insufficient indigenous carers, who will give them a stable secure long term home.

Thanks, Jennifer. I'm not so sure that it's a matter of political correctness, insidious as that may be. If anything, so it appears to me, Indigenous people are very fragmented, leaderless, and with very different historical and geographical backgrounds, and so are at least as likely to think for themselves, and to make their own choices over identity.

But to cautiously agree partly with one of your earlier observations, this current generation (born, say, after 1985) may be far more likely to wear their Aboriginal identity much more lightly, for a number of reasons:

* they are much more likely than before to have a non-Aboriginal parent, and have both parents working, not to mention growing up in an urban environment;

* they are much more likely to have predominantly non-Aboriginal friends, mates, lovers, by virtue of being a 4 % minority;

* they are much more likely to be going right through secondary school and on to university;

* most significantly, they would have far less knowledge of, and exposure to, the discrimination and poverty that ruled the lives of their parents and grandparents.

So, as you suggest, they may develop a sense of identity which is similar to yours. On the other hand, in my experience, Aboriginal graduates tend to become more, not less, aware, of their Aboriginal identity after they graduate, more confident of it, and perhaps to pass it more consciously and explicitly onto their children.

As well, don't forget that many non-Aboriginal people who marry into the Aboriginal community (that's how it seems) become very committed to the Aboriginal side of issues (I don't mean scams like the Hindmarsh Island Bridge and others) and are a sort of de facto addition to the Aboriginal population. You'd be amazed how many that adds up to.

So it can get pretty complicated :)

Joe

Dear Divine Ms_n,

Ah, sorry, I read 'political correctness' and went off.

Yes, you are right about toxic environments for some Aboriginal children - there's those two populations again ! I'll always be on the Left, I think, but I'm appalled at what pseudo-Left policies have done to people in remote areas, and how brainless and ham-fisted policy-makers have been about welfare policies in general: surely, the aim should be to get people off welfare as quickly as possible by providing pathways through training and education, and relocation assistance, to get back into work ? Thankfully, Aboriginal people themselves, to a large extent, have circumvented those policies and gone on to higher study and professional careers, no thanks to the Left who would consign them back to the settlements, learning their dead languages and trying to resurrect their long-gone cultural practices, in the modern world.

Another angle: if it had been your great-grandmother who was Chinese, and her husband had shot through, leaving her to raise a handful of daughters, who each in turn married whitefellas, who each in turn shot through, it may be that a sense of Chinese identity would have been much stronger, more keenly felt, with your grandmother and mother being much more aware of who they WEREN'T, i.e. they weren't considered to be pure-white. In a racist society, after all, one must be pure-white in order to be white.

I look forward to the day when people feel free and easy enough to claim any number of ancestries, as long as there is no financial benefit in it. I'm happy to claim Irish and Scottish ancestry, and perhaps others as well - even English (northern, of course). That's probably how our descendants will view their own ancestors, as Australia becomes an ethnically richer country and inter-marriage increases rapidly, over the next couple of generations. I look forward to younger generations developing identities which are not forged/forced by inequality, discrimination and racism, but are borne lightly, with ease and pride.

Cheers, Jennifer,

Joe

Loudmouth "I look forward to the day when people feel free and easy enough to claim any number of ancestries, as long as there is no financial benefit in it."

That is what I bitch about. The so called aboriginals who live hereabouts generally are no worse off than the working class whites, but they do get a financial benefit if they wish to attend classes at the local TAFE. The whites have to pay fees which the aboriginals do not.

David

"I'm not so sure that it's a matter of political correctness, insidious as that may be. If anything, so it appears to me, Indigenous people are very fragmented, leaderless, and with very different historical and geographical backgrounds, and so are at least as likely to think for themselves, and to make their own choices over identity."

Of course you are correct about historical and geographical backgrounds. My direct experience is restricted to Qld. 200 years ago if a SE Qld aborigine was transported to the top end and left there he would unlikely speak the same language as the locals. Also no guarantee he'd be treated in a friendly fashion. Forced close habitation of different tribal groups remains a source of conflict in some areas today. The one advantage - with few exceptions they speak a common language.

BTW I'm not "Jennifer" whoever she or he may be. Barking up the wrong tree "Joe"

David,

Yes, I do look forward to the day.

Divine Ms_n, Sorry, I wonder who Jennifer is then .... I'm still Joe, though :)

In the 'settled' parts of Australia, the invasion/settlement was so fast - fifty years in parts of NSW, five and ten years in most of SA - occupation was so total and the economic, political and technological influences of the arrivals so comprehensive, that traditional cultural practices soon became unfeasible and, in any case, supplanted or abandonned and replaced very rapidly. The last full speaker of Ngarrindjeri, around the lower Murray and Lakes, was born barely forty years after 'settlement', the last men initiated ten years earlier, and even then in a very abbreviated ceremony.

Yes, you're right about speaking a common language, and that language, for good or ill, was and is English. The Protector down here was reporting as early as 1845 ('settlement' commencing in 1836-1837) that Aboriginal people from different groups already tended to speak to each other in English, with much increased mobility across much greater spaces, using introduced forms of travel, horse, ship and, within another ten years, rail.

To get back to Sara's point, having different Census forms endangers the integrity of any data collected, and makes analysis that much more difficult, and really isn't necessary in 2011. Personnel could have been trained up to guide people through the standard form, to maintain that data integrity. There seems to be a never-ending desire to treat people as fundamentally and forever different on the one hand, and any data collected concerning them to be of no real consequence or value. I hope that this discriminatory practice won't be implemented in the next Census.

Joe