I've worked in Public Health and seen many instances of welfare abuse - taxpayers dollars intended to support those who for whatever reasons are unable to support themselves are squandered on alcohol, cigarettes, illicit drugs, gambling while dependents, particularly children, go hungry, neglected, don't attend school etc. I can't follow any logic which opposes constraints on such individuals so a mere 50% of their welfare payment is held in trust to provide the barest basics for the family.

Coghlan is scathing of the "failed policies" of the current and previous govts but hey - "self- determination" in many of the remote communities has been an abject failure. Whether she likes it or not, some Aboriginals are just plain bad. At best useless and parasitic, at worst downright dangerous to the people around them - particularly their own. It always occurred to me that severity of violence and abuse one encountered perpetrated by aboriginal on aboriginal was greater than that seen in cases involving other racial/cultural groups. Then again, if one observes the casual cruelty employed in hunting, where there is no general compulsion to achieve a quick, humane kill or the way domestic animals are treated, that might explain something. We white-fellas aren't supposed to mind this - it's their culture after all ...

In short - all we can do is try to give the kids some chance beyond survival. Those that do get an education, jobs, in other words move into mainstream Australia are the ones doing OK. Most of the rest - without intervention are consigned to a bleak future.

What I'd like to know is what does Ms Coghlan suggest should be done to fix the problem? Aboriginal, whitefella or whatever - there is an obligation to provide for the family with money provided. If recipients show no responsibility then they lose the privilege of full management. Sounds fair to me!