The belief that we have always had cultural practices that are abusive of children is wrong and misguided.

I would be interested in how this conclusion is reached and especially any imperical data or anthropological study that is being relied on.

Without doubt alcohol fueled communities will give rise to child abuse. But this happens everywhere and statistics published by the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission on child abuse showed Victoria had the worse track record of abuse - far worse that the NT.

Rainer,

That abuse was acceptably customarily was an incorrect premise. That this has been realised now is one of the reasons that action is being taken.

All I was saying is that it was a perception of the state and federal governments, not a judgement on my part.

This abuse is a large part due to the lack of law enforcement by a goverment too afraid of causing offence.

Boollshit law is what it is called by Aboriginal people who witnessed abuse of all kinds in the name of custom and tradition.

I know it, seen it myself, had family being the target of it.

I for one believe this is not just a matter of law enforcement by state police but of a gradual breakdown of those customs and traditions that were foundational to the moral underpinnings of community and culture.

Culture is not just the expression of exotica and curio, but the very means by which people know they are part of a system of human knowledge and power that ensures the safety of children is paramount, and ubiquitous.

Cultural safety means no exposure to porn or grog or those influences that can alter the state of a child or an adult’s behaviour to think that immoral acts are 'acceptable' if not expected.

Allowing for and providing the means by which the capacity of Aboriginal communities to rebuild safe and responsible social and cultural norms will deliver longer term benefits. Much longer than anything police and law enforcement can offer.

The social, political and economic history that shaped the establishment of Aboriginal communities must be understood as integral to mapping a future.

This history is largely ignored. The genocide even less so.

That's a good post, rainier.

You say:

Allowing for and providing the means by which the capacity of Aboriginal communities to rebuild safe and responsible social and cultural norms will deliver longer term benefits. Much longer than anything police and law enforcement can offer.

How do you see we get there?

My thinking about this is unformed. I would suggest a treaty recognising prior sovereignty and ownership and some form of self determination, but I am not clear how that would work in practice.

Passy wrote "I would suggest a treaty recognising prior sovereignty and ownership and some form of self determination, but I am not clear how that would work in practice"

Yes I agree. Without resolving in law our status as Indigenous people we will endure much the same as before. The non recognition of our status coupled with a system of liberal democracy since federation has not delivered unto us the same rights or access to rights as others. These are institutional as well as political impediments and a reparations process should run parrallell alongside any such approach of restorative justice.

How would this work in practice? I think there would be a variety of responses and varied success across the broad and diverse economic, political and cultural demography of where Indigenous people live.

Many are already practicing some form self determination, but must often adhere to governance structures imposed on them as well - And this duality is creating many of the problems.

Governments insist on imposing managerialism and only supporting a decision making capacity firmly connected to and inside these structures.

However, legislating a framework for the realisation of a degree of political autonomy does not guarantee the achievement of conditions of self-determination and autonomy. Economic self sufficiency is key to developing political self suffiency. But for many remote community councils this is impossibility as they are already in a state of poverty.

Nonetheless this does not mean there should not be investment into developing and positioning 'community decision making' at the centre, not at the edges of community governance.

Instead, what we witness are managerial structures of corporate bodies deciding the terms of reference by which local decision making is circumscribed.

Government have for too long been "dependent" (even fixated) with governing Indigenous people and affairs.

It very hard to ween them off!

Rainier

You say:

"However, legislating a framework for the realisation of a degree of political autonomy does not guarantee the achievement of conditions of self-determination and autonomy. Economic self sufficiency is key to developing political self sufficiency. But for many remote community councils this is impossibility as they are already in a state of poverty.

"Nonetheless this does not mean there should not be investment into developing and positioning 'community decision making' at the centre, not at the edges of community governance."

I agree. But the problem of economic self sufficiency is not one that can be overcome overnight or even perhaps in one generation.

There's the rub. How to achieve that? Community decision making is at the core, but that doesn't of itself create economic self sufficiency.

And such self sufficiency must recognise the present economic arrangements and system, otherwise the poverty remains the same. But the problem then is, how to break out, how to create jobs, and education and health and housing all in the context of devolved decision making?