david f,
About people who have the benefit of hindsight & knowing of the past, opportunistically judging people who didn't have the luxury of knowing the future is right-out wrong & hypocritical !
The perpetrators (mostly ignorant) of the past & the victims (mostly ignorant) of the past are history. So, whatever is happening today should be scrutinised not what happened generations ago.
We can't change the past , we can only work for a common future & disregard those who prevent a good common future by tearing at the scabs of the past purely for personal gain at the expense & efforts of others ! Do you not see the hypocrisy ?

We can try to make up for some of the injustices of the past. The English took the land of the Aborigines, forced Christianity (an alien superstition) on them and murdered many of them in the process. Australia can try to make up for the wrongs that have been committed. Aboriginal remains and artifacts have been restored to them. That is part of the process of atonement. The past is past, and those occupying the land are not going to leave, but we try to make up for some of the past. I don't see the hypocrisy in examining the past and trying to come to terms with it. I am an immigrant to Australia, and when I read of its bloody history I see that a great wrong has been done. Germany under Adenauer has tried to make up to the Jews for the Nazi years. Those who suffered under the Nazis are mostly dead, but the German government has tried to do something for their descendants. It is right that Australia should in like manner do the same. The first war Australia fought was for the dispossession of the Aborigines. Since I have been living in Australia I have become aware of what happened in the past and am horrified by it.

We can try to make up for some of the injustices of the past.
david f,
Yes I agree and, from what I can that has been done !

typo- should obviously be 'from what I can see'

david f,
I totally & unreservedly agree that compensation is due from those benefitting ! The big question is, when has enough compensation been provided ?
Three generations ? Five ? Ten ?
When & what is the cut-off moment for compensation ? When there are people born in an invaded land long after invasion who had no part in the invasion just as there are the people who, as the descendants of the invaded, haven't been invaded ?
In my book I'd say compensation is due for having lost property which had been acquired by personal effort & freedom of movement as far as the transport available in the days of invasion has allowed people to travel.
I'd welcome the opinion of others interested in moving on & letting wounds heal instead of opportunistically tearing at scabs !