Former NT chief justice Brian Martin has resigned from his post just days after being appointed, after a four corners program highlighted child abuse. He will be replaced by two co-commissioners: Indigenous leader Mick Gooda, and former Supreme Court judge Margaret White, who was involved in the Mabo case.

Mr Gooda's appointment came from some community and political pressure to appoint an Indigenous representative and concern's about 'bias' re Mr Martin's involvement in legal affairs.

There are many Aboriginal people angry over what they consider to be the invasion of their country and the harsh treatment of their people, in terms of the stolen generation.

To put this in perspective, myself being vegetarian, I am very biased on the matter. I don't like the meat industry at all, and some of the information that gets put out by the sector, is misinformed, cheap and make jokes about those who have chosen to live a vegetarian lifestyle.

Why has there been such a short turnaround, will the community end up with a one sided report from a 'biased' royal commission? Doesn't this show the need for Federal Government action and no royal commission at all?

Hi Nathan,

Are you suggesting a 'whole-of-community' approach ? i.e. of each 'community' which keeps producing these destroyed children ? Are you suggesting that, somehow, perhaps even parents may be, in some sort of way, involved ? What, do you mean that parents should put their own kids before themselves ?

Are you implying, that, somehow, patents may have something to do with how their kids turn out ? That parents should feed their kids, clothe their kids, make sure they are safe every night and have a clean bed to sleep in, that parents should protect their children from any potential abuser (no matter how closely related), and should keep them away from grog and drugs ? That they should LOVE their kids ?!

Do you mean that, if fathers looked for and found work, no matter where and doing what, to put food on their kids' table and provide a role model of effort, and if mothers tried to maintain a tidy house in order to provide some sort of role model of effort, this might have some positive effect on kids' attitudes ?

Surely you're not expecting to get a job in Aboriginal organisations, are you ? If you are, don't mention these facets, just talk about colonialism instead.

Cheers,

Joe

Too right Joe, not a word mentioned about how and why these kids are there in the first place, they would rather just blame someone else.

The truth is we are now caught between a rock and a hard place, because apologising for the stolen generation is admitting guilt, so there is no turning back from here. Of cause the authorities of the day were doing what they thought was the right thing at the time.

The media would have us believe these are harmless kids, the 'butter wouldn't melt in their mouths' types, but in reality the majority are extremely violent thugs.

I think these indigenous activists, mostly cross breeds, should be thanking their lucky stars the Dutch, or the French, or even the Arabs didn't discover Australia, because had they, Aboriginal history would not exist, other than the mass slaughter that would have occurred.

Hi Butch,

Yes, my bet is that the Royal Commission will not get out of the gates of Don Dale.

And so it will keep going.

Cheers,

Joe

http://nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/362699/letters-patent-royal-commission.pdf

In resigning, Chief Justice Martin spoke of the disingenuous and misinformation behind the sledging against him and his family. That vicious sledging of a man who has served Australia should be abhorrent to all.

Although it is self-evident that the slurs against Chief Justice Martin were ill-deserved, scurrilous and entirely without basis. Now Warren Mundine, who previously spoke of his support for Martin has unloaded on him, alleging the Chief Justice lacks 'courage'(!).

<Martin 'wimped out', Mundine claims

The head of the Prime Minister's Indigenous Advisory Council, Warren Mundine, told triple j's Hack that Mr Martin "wimped out."

"To be a royal commissioner you've got to be tough, you're going to deal with some very serious issues … You're looking at criminality, there could be charges, there's going to be whole range of things come out of this royal commission," Mr Mundine said.

"There's going to be people not happy, people abusing him, and it's going to be a tough job."

However, he said Mr Martin did not need to resign.

"He just needed to work with the Government and move forward. But that's his call," Mr Mundine said.>

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-01/brian-martin-stands-down-from-royal-commission/7677400

However many will be left wondering if indigenous advocates and Aborigines themselves wouldn't rather they always had an excuse in their pocket for trashing the RC and and its findings to come.

The Chief Justice was right to resign and block that favourite 'out' whenever indigenous are called upon to accept responsibility for their own decisions.

With hindsight it is obvious the government acted with undue haste in setting up the Royal Commission and appointing Brian Martin, whom on the face of it seemed a good choice. Not only does the commissioner need to be seen as unbiased, there must also be no perception of possible bias. Turnbull and co, failed to apply due diligence and failed to consult all stakeholder. The government should have also made greater efforts to obtain bipartisan support from the Labor Party and left the NT government at arms length as it will be a key player in the proceeding.
For some there was a perception that the RC would be another white mans colonial court, with Aboriginal people, a major stakeholder being left on the outside looking in, as whitey once more determined matters concerning him. After this initial kerfuffle lets hope things now move on in a positive manner.

Hi Paul,

Yes, you're right: " .... whitey once more determined matters concerning him. ... "

if you mean that it is up to Aboriginal people, parents, themselves, to take responsibility for their children, guide them properly, so as to avoid idiot and criminal behaviour that gets them into places like Don Dale. Is that what you meant ?

It must be very difficult for people moving from a hunter-gatherer ethic to a 'community' sit-down ethic: in one type of society, boom and bust, people were constantly on the move, especially women (of course), looking, looking, looking for food for the day: if they didn't find enough, they went hungry (including the kids); if they found plenty, they 'sat down' until it was gone, then on the move again.

Then along comes those bastard missionaries and others with, effectively, unlimited rations. What do people do ? They 'sit down', and stay, especially in drought times when traditionally they would have scattered. And died.

So two things happened with the ration system: an assured supply of food; and no effort required. Meanwhile, the child-rearing practices of a foraging society were easily transferred to a welfare-oriented society - leave kids to themselves: as if a parent's duties finish - in a transformed society - once a kid can feed himself. Piss off.

Well, no. If Aboriginal people are living, and want to live, in effectively a modern society, with all the trappings, steady income, houses, AC, running water, Toyotas - then they take on the obligations of that society. They can't have it both ways: the sweet life on welfare AND not have to look after their kids.

[TBC]

[continued]

It's possible that people honestly don't see the changes in how they are now living, and what they might mean in relation to child-rearing (among other things, of course). Certainly, people in remote 'communities' don't see whitefellas ever working (well, not that what they do is perceived as 'work'), so it's reasonable for them to think that no whitefellas really work anywhere in Australia, and that they too get buckets of money from Canberra - that whitefellas might even get more than they do, free houses (and somebody to look after them: seriously), free cars and petrol, etc., in a gigantic Cargo Cult which favours whites.

So, as you say, how to get across to people what 'self-determination' means ? That it means obligations, duties, responsibilities, as well as bounty. In all societies, there is a trade-off between effort and benefits, and the society that people are in, at remote 'communities', is no different.

Thanks again, Paul. I'm relieved that you have started to understand some of the complexities of this syndrome.

Joe

this is what happens when you allow the abc to have their captains pick as pm.

The ABC's Media Watch was even more shameless than usual in buffing up and justifying the ABC's 'expose' of the alleged bad treatment of the 'boys'.

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s4511291.htm

No-one plays the racism card as often or as obviously as 'their' ABC.

The publicly-funded ABC, the unelected alternative federal government, is working very hard to spin for all of the minorities that it sees as guaranteeing its future in a world where mainstream media is being replaced by other internet sources.

Media Watch spent minutes worrying about other media outlets, a paper in particular, being sent to the wall through eroded audience as social and demographic changes result in young viewers especially deserting newspapers and The Box, or at least its mainstream/traditional channels.

It does seem as though the ABC is feeling it is getting the tap on the shoulder from youth that it is surplus to their needs. The ABC's response is to position itself as further left and radical with short attention grabbing dumbed-down sensationalism. 'Shock, horror', rather than trying to keep its audience with depth in its journalism.

However some newspapers have already become tabloid shadows of their previous broadsheet reputation, but that hasn't helped to stem the gathering flow of audiences to the new kids on the block, where the block is the internet.

There is a high degree of cynicism and negativity towards Aboriginal people in general by some on forum, and in the broader community as well. There are those who stereotype the dysfunctional failings of some as the norm, when that is blatantly untrue. There are many successful Aboriginal people in our modern European style society. I say good on those who have succeeded, despite the obstacles and adversities. As for others, much of a positive nature is still required to make those people also inclusive in our modern European society.

"if you mean that it is up to Aboriginal people, parents, themselves, to take responsibility for their children, guide them properly, so as to avoid idiot and criminal behaviour that gets them into places like Don Dale. Is that what you meant?"

In this case I was talking in the context of this particular Royal Commission. As a desirable objective what you say is most defiantly reasonable. That of course will require change in circumstance, not the least for some Aboriginal people themselves. It is easy to say "You are now responsible" but when you don't have the basic skills to be responsible then it is somewhat difficult to achieve.

'There are many successful Aboriginal people in our modern European style society. I say good on those who have succeeded,'

yeah for sure Paul. The obstacles they have had to overcome mainly due to idiotic leftist ideology makes their success even more amazing. The patronising welfare system is certainly the greatest obstacle to success. Much of the success dare I say have come from what leftist call the 'stolen ' generation.

Paul1405, "There is a high degree of cynicism and negativity towards Aboriginal people in general by some on forum, and in the broader community as well"

False and you know it. Dirty tricks aimed at muddying the waters and playing the race card.

In fact the Australian public is overwhelmingly and very generously supportive of Aborigines as evidenced by the billions of taxpayers' dollars set aside for their education, counselling, welfare, housing and advancement. Here are the facts,

2014 Indigenous Expenditure Report of the Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision
http://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/indigenous-expenditure-report/indigenous-expenditure-report-2014/indigenous-expenditure-report-2014.pdf

"• Total direct expenditure on services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians in 2012-13 was estimated to be $30.3 billion, accounting for 6.1 per cent of total direct general government expenditure. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians made up
3.0 per cent of the population in 2013.

• Indigenous expenditure increased in real terms by $5.0 billion (19.9 per cent) from 2008-09
to 2012-13, while non-Indigenous expenditure increased by 9.0 per cent. Expenditure per
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander person increased by 10.3 per cent, and expenditure per
non-Indigenous person increased by 2.2 per cent.

• Estimated expenditure per person in 2012-13 was $43 449 for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Australians, compared with $20 900 for other Australians (a ratio of 2.08 to 1 — an
increase from a ratio of 1.93 to 1 in 2008-09)."

What the public are concerned about however, is reports such as from Marcia Langton of a ‘national crisis’ that Indigenous women are 34 times more likely to be hospitalised as a result of domestic violence than their non-Indigenous counterparts.

There have been numerous reports, recommendations, advice and best practice guides over decades State government and federal auditors, eg ANAO, that have identified large scale wastage, misappropriation, misdirection and fraud affecting the huge sums allocated to indigenous, to indigenous communities and to their representative organisations, and for very little discernible positive effect.

Self management? Tried time and time again and the rorts are immediate and wholesale.

Hi Paul,

Runner beat me to it :)

"There are many successful Aboriginal people in our modern European style society."

And how many of their kids end up in Don Dale etc. ? None ? My bet is that not too many of the Aboriginal kids who end up in Don Dale are actually from urban, working families, but a very high proportion are from remote 'communities', and have been the subjects of social work notifications, time and again.

We all seem to be agreed that kids who end up in Don Dale have committed offences, sufficiently serious enough to warrant their incarceration. 97 % of kids there are Indigenous, 3 % are not Indigenous. 65 % of the Territory's population is not Indigenous. If the Indigenous kids there committed as few offences as non-Indigenous kids, there would be only a tiny fraction, a twenty-fifth, as many kids in Don Dale as there are.

So it's a bit disingenuous (look it up) for you to claim some sort of mitigation of the problem by citing children of working and urban families. You know very well, if you know anything, that NOBODY is suggesting that ALL Indigenous children from ANY background are equally likely to end up in care, or detention. You know very well that the problems lie elsewhere. But clearly you don't want any of these problems ever resolved. Not while they can provide an endless supply of sticks to shove up the arse of the 'system', whites, colonialism, whatever works.

Here's a suggestion: that the parents of any kids in detention, or care, lose any relevant benefits for the duration.

Joe

In another, concurrent thread, 'Australia's Shame' I posted a link to a video documentary on juvenile offenders, specifically juvenile sexual offenders, although the delivery system would be the same for juvenile offenders generally. The URL again,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUAljuxNUu0

One of the reasons I am posting it again here is to challenge the default fatalist position of the compo lawyers and other apologists for the 'Boys' that they had no control over their own actions and society is to blame. That is of course the usual refrain of convicts.

In the video linked to above, one of the very clever manipulative juvenile offenders boasts that he "knows the difference between right and wrong, but he chooses to do wrong".

A comment not to be forgotten in the present debate in Oz. Or that juvenile offenders like their adult counterparts can be highly skilled in manipulation. -As evidenced by the number of warders, counsellors and others who are taken in by them.

Beach, I fail to see the relationship between child sex offenders in the US and Aboriginal children incarcerated in the North Territory of Australia, I am sure you will be able to establish the relationship very shortly, and post it for all to see. Just to note, I'm not suggesting young offenders in the NT did not at any stage know they were not doing wrong.

Not since the time of the Whitlam Government some 40 years ago can anyone seriously claim that federal government funding in the area of Aboriginal affairs is insufficient, or an issue, I don't. As for the funding provided by the MT government in the area of juvenile justice that may be questionable.

"that NOBODY is suggesting that ALL Indigenous children" I never used the word "ALL" I used the word "some". Unlike you Joe I do not claim to be the forums guru (your use of the word "disingenuous") on all matters Aboriginal. I do have knowledge of matters Aboriginal, particularly the inner city of Sydney and surrounds. I see good people, I see bad people, and yes some are Aboriginal.

"Here's a suggestion: that the parents of any kids in detention, or care, lose any relevant benefits for the duration."

Can I put this to you. Mary, a single mum, the father disappeared before the kid was born. Mary has a son Max, now about 30. Max has been an habitual criminal since he was a kid. He has spent more time in jail than out, in jail at the moment. Max has been a non productive drain on society for his whole life. Mary has basically done the best she could for Max over the years, making many sacrifices and suffering a great deal of heartache for her trouble. According to you punitive action in the form of denial of social benefit should have been Mary's lot. BTW both Mary and Max are white.

Hi Paul,

Like you and most posters on OLO, I see " ... I see good people, I see bad people, and yes some are Aboriginal." That's agreed then.

Yeah, my categorical statement was a bit over the top. You're not claiming though that Mary should still be getting benefits for Max ? Is he mentally disabled, and she is his carer ?

If only some on the pseudo-Left could spend a few days in a remote 'community', from say the Tuesday before pay-out day until, say the next Monday: a solid week. You would see starving kids, fat adults, bickering, humbugging galore, everybody bored sh!tless, in the lead-up to the big day, then on the Thursday, splurging, much indulgent love for kids for a cou0le of hours, much grog-smuggling activity, gambling and general merriment and brawling - until about Sunday. Then the starving and neglect begins again. At any time, the kids will be wandering the streets at two and three in the morning, knowing that 'Uncle' is waiting at home. And around and around it goes.

Really, is that a life that anybody should be condemned to live ? For their short thirty or forty years ? Stuck in remote hell-holes where there never will be any genuine work for anybody, certainly not for the fathers of those neglected kids ?

Of course, now that any boom is over, anybody looking for work now has missed the boat. So another generation will 'learn' that there is no point to any schooling. And we'll get some other moron going on about 'strong culture'. Yeah, right.

Maybe one day, someone on the pseudo-Left will have the courage to 'deconstruct' 'culture' too.

Joe

Paul1405,

Your reading comprehension always fails you.

However, since you raised it, from court reports in Australia there is every reason to believe that sex offences among youth offenders and especially aboriginal youth would be as high as among youth in the US.

In Australia, rapes of aboriginal girls is excused by the extreme multiculturalism and political correctness that says that such offences are part of traditional culture. The offences are underreported.

Here is one example where the broader Australian community, in this case Queenslanders, were outraged and forced review,

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/archive/news/child-rape-sentence-pathetic/story-e6frg6oo-1111115072997

On a recent Late Night Live, Indigenous academic Marcia Langton declared it was a national crisis that indigenous women are 34 times more likely to be hospitalised as a result of domestic violence than their non-Indigenous counterparts.

Why would you and the NSW 'Watermelon' Greens be wanting to conceal sexual offences committed against indigenous girls and women? Your extreme multicultural political correctness traps indigenous girls and women and denies them the right to the full protection and remedies of Australian law.

Hi OTB,

You're forgetting that, to some on the reactionary 'Left', human rights are doled out in accordance with, and grovelling respect for, the culture into which the victim is condemned: if an Australian woman is Moslem, then she should be afforded only those rights which Muslim men decide. Presumably, Australian women who are Hindu are subject to Hindu rules about suttee. And nine-year-old Aboriginal girls can be married off to, and beaten, even to death, by, much older men. After all, it's their culture.

Such a craven approach has a long feudal history: it was common in pre-modern societies for each group to be fenced off and to be allowed to mete out rights according to their own backward rules. Under the ottomans, this was called the 'milayet' or 'milet' system: respective groups in Constantinople would be locked up in their own quarters each night, but controlled their own populations in their own way. Equal rights ? Feh !

Since the 'Left' here doesn't have the courage to evaluate what this might mean for non-Anglo Australians, particularly women, they capitulate to the reactionaries, almost invariably men, in those ethnic groups to which those women are condemned: they are, after all, not 'really', 'fully', Australian, are they ?

As an aside, OTB, you have to admire Paul for his Stand on the Bridge Against the Barbarians, his allies having retired, greviously offended.

Many more battles to come :)

Cheers,

Joe

Beach, you site one case from 2005 in Queensland, as "evidence" that juvenile offenders in the NT know what they are doing is wrong. I do not dispute that many juvenile offenders in the NT do know at the time of committing an offence. what they are doing is wrong.

Joe, thanks for your colorful view of life in 'remote community' I am not sure if it can be extrapolated to cover all remote communities, all of the time. or some of the communities some of the time. The numbers of people living in remote commutes. although significant, is in no way the majorly, in fact well short of that.

From some on the forum, and from many in the wider community, when it comes to matters of juvenile justice, like in the NT they paint a horrible picture, and then place the emphasis on some form of punitive punishment of offenders and little else. They never make reference, or see value in reform, that to them being seen as some kind of useless lefty ideal.

Hi Paul,

I'm glad you mentioned reform - please be careful, such talk can get you expelled from the ranks of the revolution.

In fact, to simultaneously reform, or remedy, many of the factors from A, B, C. ..... to Z, would be a revolution. It's those who look only at one single factor and one well down the cascade of causation, especially at the one factor most visible, who are the anti-revolutionaries.

Yes, there surely must be remote communities where people are treating each other properly, where able-bodied people are working or contributing, and where children are safe. And I'll bet that very few of their kids end up in Don Dale.

And yes, Indigenous remote population is very much a minority - although for this very reason, every aspect of the A, B, C ..... Z problem should be that much easier to remedy. Unless Paul, you meant that, as Chamberlain said about Czechoslovakia in 1938, we shouldn't worry about a small number of people, a long way away, about whom we know little and care less. You didn't mean that ?

Meanwhile, Indigenous university stats for 2015 are about to be published - I'm anticipating 6-8 % lift in commencements and graduations, to 6,000 commencements (a relevant age-group numbers around 11,000), and 2,200 more graduates, to take the total up to around 40,000. I'm sure that will warm your heart.

Cheers,

Joe

Paul1405, 'you site one case from 2005 in Queensland, as "evidence"..'

It is a perfect example, well representative of many being reported all of the time. While the greatest bulk go unreported to authorities. Because to do so would result in immediate retribution - reoffending by the original persecutors and their mates.

The thoughtful journalist and editor have been careful to include the judge's reasons for decision. Those reasons and other evidence reveal the multicultural political correctness that excuses sexual offences (and DV) committed by aboriginal men and 'boys'.

Yet you, your Greens and 'Progressive' leftists have been concealing and ducking the obvious, myriad instances of sexual abuse and extremes of sexual and other violence being committed every day against indigenous children, girls and boys, but girls especially and women.

What do you say about the the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases (STD) in aboriginal girls? Again there is underreporting, with the STD numbers being identified as a consequence of hospital visits for other conditions, often injuries from violent assault. Here are the general population numbers,

ABS, Australian Social Trends, Jun 2012
ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER PEOPLE

In 2010, 9% of chlamydia notifications were among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, despite this population representing just 2.5% of the total population (as of 2006). ..

In 2010, more than a third (36%, or 3,604) of all gonorrhoea diagnoses were among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. The rate of diagnosis was more than 26 times that for the non-Indigenous population: 804 per 100,000, compared with 30 per 100,000 respectively...

In the same year, 12% of syphilis notifications were among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people..

It is estimated that the prevalence of genital herpes in the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population is 18%, considerably higher than the 12% estimated for the non-Indigenous population"
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features10Jun+2012#ATSI

Interesting to see that the main concern of 'your' ABC is a question on religion in the forthcoming census. That and playing the race card in the NT.

"It is a perfect example, well representative of many being reported all of the time. While the greatest bulk go unreported to authorities"

Beach, If they are being "reported all of the time". Why do you have to rely on a story more than 10 years old? In one breath, they are being "reported all of the time" in the next its "the greatest bulk go unreported to authorities" If they are "unreported" how then are you privy to this "unreported" information. Do you have a crystal ball, or do you just make it up as you go?

Paul1405,

You obviously believe that the ABS makes up its statistics.

Anyone who denies the violence affecting indigenous women and girls is a complete Jackass and cruelly insensitive to their suffering.

It has historical, cultural roots that need to be challenged,

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/bennelong-papers/2013/05/the-long-bloody-history-of-aboriginal-violence/

"The long history of Aboriginal violence — Part II

It is fashionable to excuse the current and appalling levels of Indigenous violence on dispossession and oppression, but the unpalatable truth is that it has been a feature of Aboriginal culture since long before the First Fleet

It is not polite to say that pre-contact Aboriginal society was abusive to women and generally violent. This would undercut the long-standing official view that current violence in Aboriginal communities reflects colonial dispossession and on-going victimhood..."

"It is not polite to say that pre-contact Aboriginal society was abusive to women and generally violent."
Beach, you make these sweeping statements based on pure supposition, you can say what you like, but producing evidence is another matter. Your posts concerning Indigenous people are always negative, and often unsubstantiated, using one instance of negativity, in one area, to generalize negativity in another.

Hi Paul,

Violence against women is common (no, I didn't say universal) in tribal societies, whether they were/are Scottish, Arab, Yanomamo or Aboriginal Australian.

And OTB is quite right to say that it is not polite in some circles to say so. So what evidence do you need ? ABS statistics ? Anecdotal evidence ? Hospital records ?

In the old documents that I typed up (on www.firstsources.info), there were many, many instances of men's violence towards 'their' women, at least in South Australia, from the earliest days. Admittedly, many men who beat their wives to death honestly didn't realise that in this new imperialist/colonialist system, beating one's wife to death was an offence, so they usually got only a couple of years, sometimes a lot less.

The missionary at Point McLeay was also the local medical attendant and was called out regularly to treat brutally beaten women. One woman with her upper arm bone sticking out after a beating with a fence paling. But of course, that's their culture, I suppose you might say, Paul: we should respect that. No, shove it, it has no place in civilized society anywhere. Call me racist.

Why do men do that these days in remote 'communities' ? Because they can. Because the women are likely to be on their husband's country, and on their own country, men can do what they damn-well like.

'Culture' is usually - argue with me if you think I'm wrong - male-dominated, serving the interests of men rather than women or, of course, children. Culture is thus usually a system of oppression, and a system for 'normalising' that oppression and passing it down to future generations, justifying it, sanctioning it, particularly the oppression of women and children.

Wouldn't you agree ?

Cheers,

Joe

One cartoon sums up the problem more than the millions wasted on a royal commission.

Paul,

On all the metrics the aboriginal on aboriginal violence are not just a little more violent but many times more violent than normal, incl domestic assault, other assaults rape and child abuse. These metrics also extend to breaking and entering, muggings and other criminal activities which results in the jails being swamped with aboriginal youth.

The left whingers solution is not to punish Aboriginal criminals, and not to take aboriginal children away from abusive parents, where reason dictates that reducing aboriginal incarceration should be driven by a reduction in aboriginal offending, and that these children deserve protection from abusive parents just as much as every other child.

You only need to see the outrage at Bleak's cartoon to realise that the left whingers have their heads firmly in the sand. (I was going to say somewhere else)

http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/2a3fde5c3c7e0503bc1a3b7e0be01530?width=1024

Bill Leak's satire is not appreciated in some quarters.

His follow-up is even better,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-05/bill-leak-defends-controversial-cartoon/7693244

There is furious buzzing in the hive.

Joe, Twisting what OTB said to suit, quote; "It is not polite to say that pre-contact Aboriginal society was abusive to women and generally violent."

Your spin "And OTB is quite right to say that it is not polite in some circles to say so. So what evidence do you need ? ABS statistics ? Anecdotal evidence ? Hospital records?"

Have all of the above ABS statistics, Anecdotal evidence, Hospital records,and anything else you've got to back up an unsubstantiated statement by OTB. just to verify that pre-contact Aboriginal society was abusive to women and generally violent.

Paul1405, 'what OTB said.., quote; "It is not polite to say that pre-contact Aboriginal society was abusive to women and generally violent."'

I didn't say that.

Hi Paul,

This is probably neither here nor there, but pretty much every anthropologist, including the most captive, admits that their particular group-of-choice is amazingly violent towards women. Where do you want to start ?

And today, in the twentieth century, not a lot seems to have changed. The ABS data would tell you that: just look it up for yourself.

Joe

"It is not polite to say that pre-contact Aboriginal society was abusive to women and generally violent."

Posted by onthebeach, Friday, 5 August 2016 7:28:33 AM

Of course you didn't say it OTB, It was one of those socialists, watermelon greens trots who said it!

Joe, said "Violence against women is common (no, I didn't say universal) in tribal societies, whether they were/are Scottish, Arab, Yanomamo or Aboriginal Australian.
My partner wants to dispute that, she claims Maori tribalism was rather accommodating of women. She believes the European has a history of violence towards women and violence in general second to none. I agree, were your "ancestors" non tribal violent people as well?

Paul1405,

I used quotation marks and gave the source.

More from the same article,

"..(F)eminist author Stephanie Jarrett, in her introduction to “Liberating Aboriginal People from Violence, says, “It is important to acknowledge [the] link between today’s Aboriginal violence and violent, pre-contact tradition, because until policymakers are honest in their assessment of the causes, Aboriginal people can never be liberated from violence…Deep cultural change is necessary, away from traditional norms and practices of violence.”

Bess Nungarrayi Price, in her foreword to Jarrett’s book, says, “My own body is scarred by domestic violence…We Aboriginal people have to acknowledge the truth. We can’t blame all of our problems on the white man…This is our problem that we can fix ourselves…”

“The Racial Discrimination Act was there to protect us from white racism and we needed that protection. But it has not protected our people from ourselves. We need an act, we need laws that recognize that the problem now is blackfellas killing blackfellas and killing themselves.”

Jarrett says that misogynist violence and child abuse in Aboriginal communities are at “catastrophic” levels. At the same time, Aboriginal culture must not be criticized, as though the violence sits outside the culture. Liberal democracies should welcome diversity, but not customs that violate human rights, she says."

http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/bennelong-papers/2013/05/the-long-bloody-history-of-aboriginal-violence/

I do not dispute that people, including Aboriginal people, have an unacceptably high instances of violence, including violence against women. What I do not accept is that this violent trait is in some way related to their Aboriginality. The "message" from some is you cannot expect anything less from backward tribal people who have been given everything. That view is raciest as it does not take into account the socio-economic conditions of people, and assumes people with a tribal link are animalistic and backward in nature. Given the same conditions, all people, act very much the same, including white people. This is evident by the behavior of some people in public housing estates, both white and black.
Negative attitudes achieve nothing, and that has been clearly demonstrated by the failure of the hard line, negative attitude to juvenile justice in the NT.

Hi Paul,

Are you suggesting that domestic violence is not much higher in Otara and Panmure than in Remuera and St Heliers ?

So, any more straw men ? Is 'race' all you can come up with ? Another of your own projections ?

No, I did NOT suggest that extreme violence is related to Aboriginality, and you know it. I suggested that ALL tribal societies, no matter who and where or on what continent tended to be male-dominated and to 'solve' problems using violence. Yes, that would include my ancestors from different parts of Britain. Although, strangely, none of my convict ancestors were ever up for violent crimes, only for theft. But I suspect that, like other male-dominated societies, the men amongst them resorted to violence against their partners.

Violence is one of the few ways that non-literate societies can maintain order and control. That's simply how it had to be. Look at Galarrwuy Yunupingu's suggestion of a 'makarrata', a notion floated in the late seventies which pretty much died in the arse even then: 'coming together after a fight'. Yes, and a few blokes (and women)getting speared and bashed, often dying. Where does Galarrwuy want to start, I wonder ? With his neighbours ? Do you want to volunteer, Paul ?

Joe

Paul1405, "I do not dispute that people, including Aboriginal people, have an unacceptably high instances of violence, including violence against women"

Six pages where you had to be dragged kicking to even get that far. Yet you still have your weasel words. 'Nek minit' and you will be back to tors.

Indigenous women and children cannot hope for any enlightenment or a lifeline where you and the Greens are concerned. You are too busy playing politics. The Greens 'Protest' Party needs indigenous victimhood as one of the planks of its political platform.

All to put some pear-shaped Trots into the Senate to polish seats and get stuck into those politicians entitlements and beaut golden handshake with super-dooper pollies' superannuation when wanted. Greens know how to live high on the hog,

"Queensland Greens Senator Larissa Waters spent $414,000 on fitout for Paddington office
RENEE VIELLARIS, MATTHEW KILLORAN THE COURIER-MAIL APRIL 19, 2014

GREENS Senator Larissa Waters spent a whopping $414,000 to fit out her trendy Paddington office – more than any of her Queensland political colleagues at the time.

The office, on the top floor of a pristine-condition, split-level building on Given Tce, includes a rooftop patio with timber outdoor furniture and artificial turf."
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-greens-senator-larissa-waters-spent-414000-on-fitout-for-paddington-office/story-fnihsrf2-1226889449998

Meanwhile, it is criminal that indigenous leaders, activists and the horde of nasty urgers that depend on indigenous victimhood for their handsome incomes from the public purse, would be demanding a treaties that would restore the 'self-determination' and 'self-management' (shades of Whitlam and Fraser) that for years resulted in the black curtain of elder-introduced black apartheid descending to conceal the corruption, fraud, brutality and regression that ALWAYS result whenever there is loss of transparency and accountability.

The Greens and others play very cynical politics indeed. Their Senate seats first and then, "Don't you worry about that".

Joe, my above comments are not directed at you, but rather my personal observations, you have not said violent behavior and Aboriginality are one in the same thing. You did say " pretty much every anthropologist, including the most captive, admits that their particular group-of-choice is amazingly violent towards women." Do they? Where is your evidence. Do you dispute what my partner has said that tribal Maori were not particularly violent towards women. Please produce the evidence that they were You dis say "I suggested that ALL tribal societies, no matter who and where or on what continent tended to be male-dominated and to 'solve' problems using violence." No one has been more violent than the European. Do you consider the Spanish or the British of recent centuries were tribal, and that is why there were so violent.
"dominated and to 'solve' problems using violence. Yes, that would include my ancestors from different parts of Britain. Although, strangely, none of my convict ancestors were ever up for violent crimes,: Because if they had been, then they would be hanged or at best flogged to within an inch of their lives in a very violent manor Hanging and flogging were part of "civilized" justice, no dofferent to many tribal societies. .

Hi Paul,

Yes, I said " .... pretty much every anthropologist, including the most captive, admits that their particular group-of-choice is amazingly violent towards women."

You asked: "Do they? Where is your evidence. "

Pick one.

Stanner, Sutton, the Berndts, Daisy Bates, Warner, pretty much every missionary in the earlier days (who doubled as our first anthropologists) .... Yes, some skirt very delicately around and away from the issue, as if drawing a veil over such irrelevancies and moving on to children's games.

Not only traditional, or tribal, societies use violence, as you note. Most imperialisms put any traditional society in the shade for violence: the Mongols up to Timur in the early fourteenth century, were amazingly brutal, murdering entire populations of cities, such as Merv. Even the women. Well, perhaps they murdered them afterwards.

Of course, Maori society was more advanced than others, being mainly cultivators, living settled lives, well-organised, and with other means to sanction breaches. As well, their well-organised warfare techniques meant that hapuu could launch into battle over the mistreatment of their women who had married into other hapuu, so mistreatment would not go unnoticed or unpunished. Women had far higher status in Maori societies that most Aboriginal societies: you may wish to argue that one.

Don't worry, Paul, many of my convict ancestors were sentenced to death initially (it was mandatory until the Peel reforms in the 1820s), then given the option of transportation for life. One of my gr-gr-gr-grandmothers knocked back the offer, saying she got sea-sick. They transported her anyway. Pommy bastards.

Cheers,

Joe

Paul,

The levels of domestic violence, child abuse, child neglect and pretty much every other crime is 30x or higher than that of non aboriginal persons.

I heard on an ABC program, a woman saying how bad it was that aboriginal men were almost immediately released after domestic violence and returned to repeat it.

As there are no records of domestic violence in pre settlement aboriginal culture, the assumption that the abuse of women and children then can only be guessed, however, given that the more remote the settlements from modern Australia the worse the violence, it is a bit of a stretch to blame the violence to the settlement of Aus by the British.

Paul1405,

You should let your partner speak on her own behalf. Or at least try to listen outside of that green left echo chamber.

Then you might find out just how ill-directed the policies of the Greens and leftist 'Progressives' really are.

While Polynesian women and children benefitted from a cultural inheritance that for example ensured that children had many mums and the traditional extended family that offered superior nurturing and protection for children and their young mothers, the trashing of motherhood, family by the western middle class career-oriented, materialistic feminists has introduced chaos and resulting harm to Maori women and children.

Same as the mainstream population, where the leftists refuse to acknowledge the unforeseen negative consequences of their social experimentation.

Just more unforeseen negative consequences of the social engineering of leftists and jack-booted feminists who are continually tossing the baby out with the bathwater.

Now the DV and child neglect and abuse numbers for NZ are said to be appalling.

Hi Joe, I don't dispute much of what you say about Aboriginal people, they are plain and undisputed facts, alcoholism, violence, all the negatives. There is a tendency for some, not you, to extenuate the negatives, whilst never alluding to the positives, and there are positives.
I certainly dispute the notion that violence is only a tribal thing. History shows tribal, non tribal, modern societies, all can be violent. In the context of this debate, what is relevant today is how we deal with the violence affecting both aboriginal and non aboriginal people. I think the "big stick" approach is a failure, and we need a better approach. The ideological finger pointing is counter productive.
What do you think?

Paul,

No, I did NOT write that violence was ONLY a tribal thing, but that it was common in pretty much all traditional societies. And you know it. Why do you keep setting up straw men, only to 'cleverly' demolish them ?

Just on the statistics on violence: roughly half the Indigenous population is getting on with life, and probably has no higher domestic violence than the Australian average. So those stats are really relevant mainly for the remote, rural and outer suburbs welfare-dependent populations. Similarly with life expectancy: if Indigenous people, on average, live ten or fifteen years shorter lives, then double that gap for those welfare-oriented populations.

I'm certainly not meaning to 'point the finger' but to highlight that there is a tragic crisis in those populations, to which no decent person can shut their eyes. Lives are being blighted, lost. It may be all self-inflicted in a social sense, but there is absolutely no excuse for doing nothing. Even if colonialism is somehow partly the cause, so what ? Does that mean we can wash our hands of it all ? Absolutely not.

Without comprehensive action at the level of family and 'community', there will be a constant flow of young people into places like Don Dale. And I think we all know that.

Joe

Joe, we agree, we are not achieving the desired outcomes for all Aboriginal people, something a compassionate society would like to for all, aboriginal and non aboriginal. There are too many negatives, and the stats show that. In some areas there has been marked improvement, in others not so. All shades of government have tried to tackle the problem areas in recent times, with varying degrees if success.
I think there is no particular link in our modern European society between a recent connection to tribalism, and violence, although those with a close tribal connection, like those without, can demonstrate a propensity to somewhat the same degree of violence. I put this down to socio-economic conditions than anything else.
It was once put forward the notion that if you were able to transport a "caveman baby" through time to the present day. Give that child the advantages of a modern society, education etc, as an adult they would be indistinguishable from the rest of society. No such thing can be proved of course.

Hi Paul,

You suggest: "Joe, we agree, we are not achieving the desired outcomes for all Aboriginal people, something a compassionate society would like to for all, aboriginal and non aboriginal."

I slightly disagree: "we" may have roles to play, but primarily these are matters for those Aboriginal people affected themselves to resolve. That's what I've always thought 'self-determination' meant: that people work on and resolve their own problems.

Now clearly, that's not happening in remote 'communities' and it's becoming more and more likely that it won't happen. So what are the options ?

Marcia Langton has suggested more funding and more family and parental responsibility. I'm not sure what more funding would bring: funding seems to be already pretty extravagant. Better use of available funds, of course. But how to improve a sense of parental responsibility ? How to get across to very uneducated and very isolated people that they actually do have responsibilities for their kids' nurturing, it's not primarily the 'government's' responsibility, it's theirs. Not the grandmas' responsibility, but theirs, the parents.

But what if they are utterly useless, always on the grog, or drugs, or off gambling and beating the daylights out of each other ? Should another generation of those beautiful kids be sacrificed for our/somebody's convenience ? Should we just avert our eyes and focus only on the long-term outcomes, i.e. Don Dale ?

So we have to ask the very hard questions: are some young kids being so neglected that they, if they survive, are likely to be in the justice system, and illiterate and starved, before they are ten or twelve ?

What would we expect of the 'system' if these kids were white ? What overall fiduciary obligations does the 'system' have for ALL kids, even Black ones ?

Something's shameful, all right, and it's our lack of courage to make hard decisions.

Joe

Where to start?

The first priority must be to overcome the widespread corruption, wastage, misappropriation and theft that have blighted service delivery for donkey's years.

The big story that the Oz meeja and the Twitterati didn't run with, but why not?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-06-06/indigenous-organisations-investigated-allegations-fraud/7476570

<Indigenous organisations investigated amid allegations of fraud and corruption by senior figures

Allegations of fraud, shocking waste and corruption have rocked Indigenous-run organisations around the country.

There are 44 Indigenous organisations and programs currently being investigated by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet's IAG Risk, Compliance and Integrity branch.

Four Corners has learned that, in some cases, executives and other trusted figures abused their positions and have been accused of misusing taxpayer funds.

The organisations under investigation receive hundreds of millions of dollars in grants from the federal and state governments.

The department has also examined alleged nepotism and conflicts of interest, as well broader failures of governance and accountability.

In one disturbing case uncovered by Four Corners, a former project manager contracted by the West Australian Department of Housing swindled approximately $3 million from the Indigenous community of Warmun in the Kimberley...>

Next question,

"What has prevented successive governments, federal and State, from doing just that when all have been regularly informed by their own (government) departments including their own auditors (eg the ANAO reports tabled in the federal parliament) of the corruption, fraud and wastage affecting hundreds of millions of taxpayers dollars annually?".

The fraud doesn't stop with the siphoning off of taxpayers $$, the fraud extends to the advice being given to government by the biggest beneficiaries of it, the many academics, bureaucrats, NGOs and advocates, the elite who ride the gravy train - in many cases for decades!

Paul1405 and others should sit down and nut out who gains what from maintaining a dysfunctional system. And emphatically YES, the claimed victims can gain too from a dysfunctional system. For instance, by not doing the tough yards and being responsible for themselves and their children, even where that is as simple as washing hands with soap and water before preparing food.

First clue, it isn't the Australian public that contribute $billions in taxes annually and are fed up to the back teeth with the constant deceit, spin and blame-shifting over decades.

Any wonder the electorate is 'inexplicably volatile' and 'doing the wrong thing' by electing Hanson and others?

Joe, you are asking the sixty four dollar question. What is to be done to resolve a terrible dilemma. Much of the time on the thread has been spent pointing to statistics and anecdotal evidence to show that a problem exists. None of that offers a solution
"Marcia Langton has suggested more funding and more family and parental responsibility" I agree, I'm not sure "more funding" is the answer. Then to say "more family and parental responsibility", I would say defiantly, but then how do you achieve that when people are dysfunctional in the way they are. Got to cure the dysfunctionality in the first place to be able to move to the level of family and parental responsibility so desired. The answer is not Don Dale type institutions for the young, but something better for all concerned.

i Paul,

Yes, indeed, " .... but then how do you achieve that when people are dysfunctional in the way they are. Got to cure the dysfunctionality in the first place to be able to move to the level of family and parental responsibility so desired."

I typed up transcripts of almost-annual national conferences of government officials in Indigenous Affairs during the sixties, about two thousand pages: www.firstsources.info, Royal Commissions and Conference Page, colour-coded. Much of it dealt with remote communities, and how to make them viable, how to generate employment, etc. The discussions would usually move rapidly onto other issues.

They had few answers then to a core problem, i.e. employment of the able-bodied, so necessarily occupied themselves with issues of welfare. The issue of equal pay was canvassed - long before the Gurindji case, by the way - but was already the rule (imagine my surprise) before the Referendum. So why was there suddenly greater unemployment around 1968-1970 ? Access to welfare payments.

People made choices: employment or welfare. Most chose welfare. Hence the problems of 2016.

You're right: enough of futile analyses. What to do ? Compulsory parenting classes ? What, for years ? For both mothers and fathers ? If they say no, bugger off, that's racist, then what ?

The spectre of a genuine 'temporarily removed generation' looms.

Joe

Paul,

This dysfunction is typical of small and remote communities, for example the Pitcairn islands. These remote communities may be close to the land, but is far from decent services, education, healthcare and employment. Boredom and poverty are the result which is potent recipe for drug and alcohol abuse, and resultant violence and child abuse.

Perhaps saving the children involves closing the unsustainable remotest communities.

I don't often agree with Shadow, but in this case he has hit the nail on the head.

" These remote communities may be close to the land, but is far from decent services, education, healthcare and employment. Boredom and poverty are the result which is potent recipe for drug and alcohol abuse, and resultant violence and child abuse."

A dysfunctional life. which relies on welfare to survive, with its associated drug and alcohol dependency, poverty, people who are unemployable, broken relationships, health problems, poor levels of education, lacking life skills leading to terrible life choices, violence is common. Often coming with a family history of welfare dependency.
These people are not just in remote communities, but in towns and cities as well. In a way those in remote communities could be seen as having an excuse, for the reasons Shadow outlined. Given the advantages those in a urban environment, both black and white, would have little excuse.

The idea of forced relocation from a remote environment to one of a more urban nature, may do nothing more than transport the problems. I don't agree with forced relocation.

"So why was there suddenly greater unemployment around 1968-1970 ? Access to welfare payments."

Joe, no doubt, although well intended we did create a welfare dependency trap for many Aboriginal people around that time, as we did for a lot of white people as well. Once a welfare cycle has been established, it is difficult to break.

Hi SM & Paul,

The bogey-man of 'closing communities' is a red herring: nobody is, or can be, forcibly moved - but services can be more focussed on larger 'communities', rather than the piddly ones of ten and twenty people.

In the 170 'communities' scheduled for a wind-down in services in WA, the population affected is around 1300 - about eight per 'community'. Bloody ridiculous. Nobody has to move, but they can't expect any services if they are too small, or conveniently near towns. So the huff-and-puff demos in blissfully ignorant eastern cities were way off the mark.

So 'forced relocation' is something that John Bilger might flog, but it has no basis in fact.

I certainly don't think that children should be removed from parental control unless it is grievously lacking, and that the child is actually in danger of severe abuse or death. I would love to know (no, not really) the death rates of remote-'community' children between the ages of one and five ? i.e. once they are beyond the age at which kids usually get hospitalised. My bet is that it is vastly higher per 1,000 Indigenous children than anywhere in the cities.

But if parents blatantly pose a threat to their own children, then temporary removal to caring homes may be one remedy. If parents have serially abused and neglected all of their children, then perhaps adoption should be considered as soon as possible.

I remember a mother sitting with us at Lake Bonney in SA's Riverland, eating a chicken by herself; her boys tried to grab a bit and she told one, "F.... off, you little black ape." Not really an indulgent parenting style, one would think. Of course, that's forty years ago. I wonder if the boy is still alive. Yeah, I remember now, one Easter she was flogging her kid up and down the street: "You little c...., you pinched my Easter Egg.' On and on about her Easter Egg. Etc., etc.

Joe

This RC is a farce before it starts, thanks to the appointment of a professional (paid by us) aboriginal activist, and a woman judge involved in the Mabo scam, with the added reputation of being a soft touch in her judgements on youths.

Joe, I know that woman from Lake Bonney, she moved to Sydney, seen her recently. her kid got no older, still in a wet dirty nappy, mum was whinging about having no money, just been to the local 7/11 for a $20 odd pack of fags. What can you do?

A quip from a Maori family member about someones kids; "When they (the children) left school the girls went to uni, and the boys went to jail". Three girls with good jobs, 2 married with great little kids, the two boys, one in jail (2 years for car stealing), one, well not in jail, but has been.

Education, leading to good careers is obviously the answer.

Hi Paul,

Yes, and I'm hanging out for the stats for last year and it's driving me nuts. From the few figures that I've found, it seems that the great majority of Maori university students, and graduates, are women, like here. But perhaps the gap is closing over here, at 1-2 % p.a.

Education yes, and we should expect maybe no miracles - we can leave them to Hollywood - just solid results. But most certainly, some bright sparks should be putting their minds to work right now trying to plot how those young people in places like Don Dale can be turned away from lives that end up in Berrimah, Long Bay, Wacol, etc.

for those who really do need it, can they be put through literacy courses ? Finish it and there's a year off your sentence.

Can they be induced to learn trades, with reductions in their sentences as incentives ? Given time, perhaps some may be able to go on to university courses, with sentence reductions as incentives.

But more realistically, maybe there should be a focus on very basic skills. Surely they shouldn't be coming out just as useless as they went in ?

Of course, IF their parents had been doing their job at the other end of the process, it wouldn't be quite so necessary. Water under the bridge.

I worked in the meat works at Otahuhu (Westfield) forty five years ago, and lived in Ponsonby, it was a great place back then.

Cheers,

Joe

The voters of the Northern Territory passed judgement on the one term incompetent Country Liberal Government, last weekend. Unlike their dysfunctional federal colleagues who scraped back in by the skin of their teeth, there was no such luck for the useless Adam Giles and his motley crew, they copped an 18% swing.
No doubt the disgusting treatment of juveniles by the CLP government in the territory was a major factor in the landslide Labor win.

Paul1405,

So you and Greens are saying that the taxpayer-funded $1.3billion leftist publicity machine that is the ABC was successful in toppling a government with its shock-horror spin of old news?

I reckon there is some truth in that too.

However, the poor performance of all CLP members and internal division, no effective teamwork, saw the CLP defeated.

Speaking about internal division, Greens leader Di Natale has moved against the rude and objectionable SHY, leaving that 'human headline' 'unhappy' and critical of her leader. More fuel for the Easter Bloc to light fires everywhere. The parallel between the Greens and the Democrats is obvious.

The left gravy train would be rockin' in Darwin, eh what? Bye, bye Budget!

Hi Paul,

As OTB says, there may be something in what you suggest. But NT people are not that all that unsophisticated: what the ABC portrayed happened some years ago, staff have been stood down, and the Don Dale Centre was closed a couple of years ago, and people know that.

And there have been so many other scandals and upsets wracking the Giles government that it was bound to fall. If anything, Bill Leak's cartoon was closer to the mark than anything the ABC would have the courage to explore.

And yes, OTB, SHY and the Eastern Bloc have come out of this election divided from the Deeper Greens: perhaps watermelons and zucchinis don't mix. Although the classes that they rely on (there's the Marxist coming out), the comfortable professionals and frustrated students, have grown over the last fifteen years, we can observe that their probable destiny is to follow the Democrats into the wilderness.

That should keep this thread going a bit longer.

Cheers,

Joe

Paul,

It appears that SHY was fired for being too extreme, which takes a lot in the fringe parties. The CLP proved to be just as inept as labor and the people have voted to swap scandal for fiscal incompetence.

It is looking increasingly as though the Queensland and Victoria labor parties will be one term wonders as well.

What we have here folks, is a few of the forums more rabid right members trying to put spin and deflection onto what was a disastrous result for conservatism in Australia. It is pathetic to watch as the three amigos try furiously to bail out their sinking ship, with a tea strainer!

Beach as usual tries to deflect to his trusty old chestnut "The Greens". Beach, a news flash for you, Sarah Hanson-Young didn't contest the NT elections. She got reelected to the Senate last month.

Talk about dumping, Giles was another Abbott, but the conservatives in the NT were a bit slow on the draw, the hot sum you know, and failed to dump the useless log when they had the chance.

Joe, the CLP can't tie their shoelaces without falling over, One term governments are their specialty, look at that other fly by nutter in Queensland Campbell Newman, lasted five minutes! Beach as a supporter of these short term lunatic governments what is your spin to explain the disasters?

Shadow ditto for you.

Fellas I'd like to say "better luck next time!", but I can't.

Hi Paul,

"Joe, the CLP can't tie their shoelaces without falling over".

Couldn't agree more. Now we'll see if Labor can deliver, or if they will come up against some of the same insoluble problems, and turn to water.

Perhaps in three or four years, we'll be saying "Paul, Labor can't tie their shoelaces without falling over." What do you reckon are the chances ?

Joe

Hi Joe. I agree Labor can fall over just as spectacularly as the conservatives. That is why I advocate a vote for minor parties and independents, the dinosaur parties are populated with self seekers, who have no real interest in the well being of their fellow Australians.

Cheers Paul.

p/s I know how you like good stories, last weekend we took part in a "Maori" entertainment night, ("T" has a small part singing traditional Maori songs, like 'Pokarekare Ana' etc, she has a good voice), The show is full of professional (paid) entertainers, along with a few others, like "T". The night includes a hangi dinner (professionally prepared in the traditional manner), and drinks at RSL bar prices, large private function room. About 200 plus in the audience including a good number of pakeha, who are most welcome, they enjoy the entertainment and food as much as anyone. The highlight of the night was the Polynesian dance performance by the girls and boys from the Cook Islands, with their backing group about 40 people in total. The night was well run, with no trouble. Given the chance, different cultures can come together and appreciate each other, like the "Maori" Elvis who was also very popular, not bad for $35/head.

Hi Paul,

Ah, memories. When we lived in Auckland, around 1970, we knocked around with people in the Cook Islands community, and loved those concert parties, up to seventy people at a time, dancing, drumming, singing, just fantastic. The people we knew seemed to mostly come from Rakahanga and Manihiki, but I had a good mate from Arorangi on Rarotonga. Just beautiful, beautiful people.

Ah well, back to topic: are remote 'communities' on a death spiral ? If so, how to save the children ? There was a news report that, in one 'community', starving children have been seen suckling on the teats of mangy dogs. [That's okay, keep sipping your Fair-Trade No-Fat coffee, it's not your problem.]

I suppose there are two premises to consider:

* some/many/most/all parents in those hell-holes are utterly useless, putting themselves first, front and centre, and they have no intention of changing;

* the children can't be removed from 'communities' without their consent, i.e. the children's consent.

So: in order to do what the parents should be doing,

* can meals be provided to all kids, perhaps through the schools, morning noon and evening ?

Government funding could be provided because, after all, such programs would represent actual work done, for children, and not just funding for a group of people to just be the health workers, education workers, engagement officers, community development officers, etc., etc., while doing nothing: 'working at home', perhaps.

* since homes are unsafe for children, should there be hostels on 'communities' for children who want to stay in them, where they can be fed, cleaned up, clothed, etc. - you know, all the things that parents aren't doing.

Perhaps these children's hostels could be attached to the schools. If they wish, children could stay in them indefinitely. Assure parents that they will keep getting paid all manner of children's allowances as well as royalties and cheap rent, regardless, all that they would be entitled to if, hypothetically, they were actually looking after their own kids. Let the Cargo keep rolling. And

[TBC]

[continued]

* run after-school programs, homework sessions, and extra-curricular activities, for the children. Gradually get kids used to rigorous learning in class and to inspire them to aspire to post-school careers, with regular sessions on career advice in order to boost their aspirations to be anything they want. Oh, and sack the career counsellors in most schools ASAP.

Of course, this may take many years to really bed in. But the hard question forces itself on all of us as fellow-citizens: should children be inflicted with, and totally disadvantaged for life by, useless parents merely because they have produced them ?

So the bottom lines are: Save the children. And: let the Cargo keep rolling for the adults.

What do you reckon ?

Cheers,

Joe

Hi Joe,

I cannot agree more, your description of "starving children have been seen suckling on the teats of mangy dogs" is unacceptable in any society.
Selfish people are not unique to remote communities, or Aboriginal communities for that matter, in my time I have come across many such people, black and white. I don't wish to convey the impression that all people on welfare are mooching off society, there are many many genuine cases. Those first aid measures you speak of, are no doubt given the circumstances, necessary in the first instance for the well being of the children.
However, in the long term the cycle has to be broken, but how that is achieved is the difficult question, as we have discussed many times before. I am a firm believer that the long term solution to many of our social problems lies in education, combined with a strong and loving family unit. Sadly, so many children lack both of these essentials. Society can help with education and other daily requirements, but can provide none of the family care that is lacking. Until then we are doomed to repeat the cycle, but slowly things are improving in some areas, and there are positives that can be worked on for the future.

Cheers Paul.

The cycle is being repeated in the family environment. That cannot be changed. For example where a parent, longrassing 'rellies' with personality disorders are present. Support and 'education' (whatever that means)? Expect low success.

Another problem is the apparent inability to diagnose and treat early childhood conduct disorder, let alone soon enough. -Because it is NOT politically correct to do so. What to do about that?

Greens, Labor and Libs like Turnbull are cynical, gutless wonders who may superficially recognise the complexity of indigenous problems, but immediately revert to the safety of PC 'solutions' popularised in the media and by the ABC's Q&A for instance, such as 'recognition'(symbolism), 'education'(a universal panacea apparently) and more buckets of taxpayers' money.

What is preventing change is the question that should asked. Remembering that in a dysfunctional system even the apparent victims can perceive that they have a stake in the existing system and can work against change. Not referring to children, but to dole bludgers for example.

Beach, you are simply a rabid right finger pointer who is ideological driven. You offer no solution to the problems, and I am sure you would be happy to see Aboriginal people once more marginalized in shanty settlements on the edge of towns where they would be out of sight, and out on mind.

What is your One Nations policy on Indigenous people?