And we are off - Aboriginal leaders say $1 billion 'not sorry enough'

[cordelia]

mmmmm who will pay for any compensation...let me see....that's right...the hard working average aussie who gets taxed more the harder he works to fund stupid govt initiatives like this. I get annoyed that I have to pay huge amounts of CGT to support this kind of nonsense......people complain about paying too much tax then they support this drivell.....go figure

 

[2020hindsight]

mmmmm who will pay for any compensation...let me see....that's right...the hard working average aussie who gets taxed more the harder he works to fund stupid govt initiatives like this. I get annoyed that I have to pay huge amounts of CGT to support this kind of nonsense......people complain about paying too much tax then they support this drivell.....go figure

Cordelia ... In case you missed it, I post this one again ...(back at post #178 for the link).
BTW, what you call "drivell" I call justice - but that's not something we are gonna be able to change here now. (my guess)

The Federal Government is preparing an apology, but has rejected renewed calls from Aboriginal leaders to compensate people who were forcibly removed from their families.

 

[Julia]

2020 and Chops:

I wonder if you happened to hear a talk by Noel Pearson on Radio National this evening from 6 - 7pm. It was based on an essay of his of a few months ago.

It was an erudite and thoughtful talk which just might possibly give you both food for thought as to what is best for our indigenous people.

A search on the ABC website would probably bring it up, or failing that, contacting the ABC always brings a courteous and helpful response.

I'd be interested in your comments after you've read a transcript/podcast.

 

[2020hindsight]

2020 and Chops:

I wonder if you happened to hear a talk by Noel Pearson on Radio National this evening from 6 - 7pm. It was based on an essay of his of a few months ago.

It was an erudite and thoughtful talk which just might possibly give you both food for thought as to what is best for our indigenous people.

A search on the ABC website would probably bring it up, or failing that, contacting the ABC always brings a courteous and helpful response.

I'd be interested in your comments after you've read a transcript/podcast.

holy drinking permits batman

Julia , it lasts for an hour - can you give us a few specifics maybe - and we can comment on them ?

 

[Julia]

holy drinking permits batman

Julia , it lasts for an hour - can you give us a few specifics maybe - and we can comment on them ?

No, to attempt to do so would be an injustice to Mr Pearson.
If you are as passionate as you suggest about the welfare of aboriginal people you will find time to hear or read for yourself what he had to say.

 

[agro]

i thought aboriginals were Australians too?

can't keep living off welfare payments

 

[2020hindsight]

No, to attempt to do so would be an injustice to Mr Pearson.
If you are as passionate as you suggest about the welfare of aboriginal people you will find time to hear or read for yourself what he had to say.

Julia , you say a speech from a few months ago . Was this the speech? or similar? Where I posted extracts, and you told me I shouldn’t lol.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=167618&highlight=pearson#post167618
Here's an extract from one of his speeches ...
http://www.cyi.org.au/speeches.aspx
http://www.cyi.org.au/WEBSITE uploa...sury_Passive Welfare and service delivery.doc

Sure I admire him and his optimism. Every right to be because where he is the Abs are doing better than other places.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=171279&highlight=pearson#post171279

Always been against hand outs
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=171444&highlight=pearson#post171444

Only trouble is, he has been criticized by John Daly recently (and I think rightly so)
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=227515&highlight=pearson#post227515

PS might try on the weekend or whatever - but I was disappointed that he didn;t say anything when "intervention" was spread to communities that didn't have any problems on file. - guess he was pleased that something - anything was being done.

 

[Julia]

Julia , you say a speech from a few months ago . Was this the speech? or similar? Where I posted extracts, and you told me I shouldn’t lol.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=167618&highlight=pearson#post167618
Here's an extract from one of his speeches ...
http://www.cyi.org.au/speeches.aspx
http://www.cyi.org.au/WEBSITE uploa...sury_Passive Welfare and service delivery.doc

Sure I admire him and his optimism. Every right to be because where he is the Abs are doing better than other places.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=171279&highlight=pearson#post171279

Always been against hand outs
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=171444&highlight=pearson#post171444

Only trouble is, he has been criticized by John Daly recently (and I think rightly so)
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=227515&highlight=pearson#post227515

PS might try on the weekend or whatever - but I was disappointed that he didn;t say anything when "intervention" was spread to communities that didn't have any problems on file. - guess he was pleased that something - anything was being done.

2020, after I made my earlier post I tried to phone Radio National to see if I could get a link. Was connected to an answering machine. In case they don't ring back I have sent an email. Will hope to get something from one of those sources and when I do will pass it on.
Will have a look at your above links to see if the contents seem to be from the talk when I have more time, probably over the weekend.

 

[2020hindsight]

http://www.abc.net.au/message/news/stories/ms_news_2143738.htm

Stolen Generations claimants announced

The Tasmanian Premier Paul Lennon has announced 106 people will share in a $5 million scheme to compensate the state's Stolen Generations.

Mr Lennon announced the successful claimants in Launceston this morning, saying the move marked the completion of an important step forward for reconciliation.

Independent assessor, Ray Groom, reviewed 151 applications for compensation.

He found 84 people who were removed from their families as children were eligible for payment. Another 22 applications were approved as children of Stolen Generations victims.

Forty-five claims were rejected.

Children of Stolen Generations victims will share in $100,000; the remainder will be split equally among other applicants.

Mr Lennon says it is an important step in the reconciliation process.

"The Aboriginal children who were taken from their parents, other than the reason they were Aboriginal, were denied the right that children should have to argue for in our community and that is the right to be brought up in a family," he said.

THis from 7 years ago - the feds spending $11million defending the Govt on one case. ..

http://www.abc.net.au/specials/lingiari/pg11.htm

On last reckoning about $11 million had already been spent on one case. How much will be spent on 2000 cases, or whatever the number might be?

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/lawrpt/stories/s163676.htm

Deep Listening....
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/allinthemind/stories/2007/2096863.htm

 

[2020hindsight]

Incidentally, this is what some Abs can claim if they take on the system individually $525K .......

http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/stolen-generation-payout/2007/08/01/1185647978562.html

Stolen generation payout
August 2, 2007

Page 1 of 3 | Single page
An aboriginal man who was taken from his mother as a baby has been awarded $525,000 compensation, in Australia's first successful stolen generation court claim.

A decade after the Bringing Them Home report elevated the issue of "stolen" Aboriginal children to national prominence, South Australia's Supreme Court has become the first jurisdiction in the country to recognise it as a basis for legal compensation.

In a landmark judgement, the court found that Bruce Trevorrow, 50, was treated unlawfully and falsely imprisoned when he was removed from his mother's care and handed over to a white family in 1957, aged 13 months.

Justice Thomas Gray's judgement is expected to trigger more cases of its type, and was hailed as a victory by Aboriginal leaders including former ATSIC chairwoman Lowitja O'Donoghue.

"I want to say to the Australian Government and the Australian people that it is time to accept the history of Australia," Ms O'Donoghue said.

"It is time to understand there was a stolen generation, instead of all these history wars that have been debated since the Bringing Them Home report."

Bruce Trevorrow was separated from his mother in December 1957 when he was admitted to the Adelaide Children's Hospital suffering gastroenteritis.

More than six months later, his mother wrote to the state's Aboriginal Protection Board, which by then had fostered him out, asking when she could have her son back. "I am writing to ask if you would let me know how baby Bruce is and how long before I can have him home?" she wrote in July, 1958. "I have not forgot I got a baby in there."

The court was told the board lied to her, writing that her son was "making good progress" and that doctors needed to keep him for treatment.

Justice Gray's 300-page judgement, which took him 18 months to hand down, established for the first time that removing a child from his family in these circumstances constituted wrongful imprisonment and was a breach of the state's duty of care.

"He was falsely imprisoned," Justice Gray found of Mr Trevorrow. "He was the subject of breaches of the common law duty of care owed by the state."... etc

etc etc

He awarded Mr Trevorrow $450,000 for injuries and losses suffered, and a further $75,000 in damages for his unlawful removal and false imprisonment.

 

[noirua]

Hi 2020, Although I'm not unhappy about people being compensated, I wonder whether a wider view of this should be seen.

Some people were affected by acts by others in the past and quite terrible were some of these. However, many people have suffered through many wars fought by Australia and some lost a great number of members of their family.

In the First World War some lost the whole of their younger generation.

A lot of families should perhaps be awarded tens of billions of Dollars for losses due to suffering of their families in the past.

Remember Australia Aboriginals but DON'T forget the rest of the people who make up Australia!

 

[2020hindsight]

Well all I can say is hat's off to the Tasmanian Govt for this initiative.

noi, Your references to war

Put yourself in the position of an Ab soldier - getting shot at from the front - and being stabbed in the back by the govt and others back home stealing your kid

 

[noirua]

Well all I can say is hat's off to the Tasmanian Govt for this initiative.

noi, Your references to war

Put yourself in the position of an Ab soldier - getting shot at from the front - and being stabbed in the back by the govt and others back home stealing your kid

Indeed, indeed, how could I not sympathise. What about the lack of compensation for the 75 miners killed in 1921 in the Mount Mulligan Mining Disaster, Far North Queensland and the lack of help given at the time to their families: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Mulligan_mine_disaster

I happen to know, through a late Uncle, how a friend of his received no compensation after leg injuries in the disaster. He later went to live with his sister in Ontario at his disgust of the Queensland Authorities and Australian Government.

 

[2020hindsight]

noi
no question, if they were entitled to compensation, they should get it.

My wife went to work as a legal secretary as a youngster - found an old file on a shelf - brushed off the 4 year old dust - a compensation case - encouraged everyone to look into it rather than leave the poor bloke in limbo for another n years - walked the case through, chose the expert witnesses - and (long story short) won one of the biggest compo awards to that point in time.

My Dad was in the Airforce in Darwin in WWII - had a melanoma - his doctor casually mentioned it to him soon after he came back - but NO warning to DO anything about it (sheesh) - about a year later (too late) it was removed - my mum asked the doctor to certify (for War Widow's pension) that he had seen it soon after his return from Darwin - he refused - obviously it would embarrass his professional reputation.

Dad died, mum struggled on with 3 kids - no war widow's pension - meanwhile other widows whose husbands died of diseases fairly difficult to associate with wartime service (Leukemia etc) received said pension. I could tell you how hard mum worked but I don't want to bore you. All old history.

In summary you don't always get compensation - still, assuming you are entitled to it, you should have access to claim it at least.

 

[bunyip]

This whole 'sorry' business with regard to the stolen generation makes me sick.
The current generation of Australians should not feel obliged to apologise for actions taken by others before many of us were even born! We are NOT responsible for what happened back then.
Should today's Germans apologise for what the Nazis did? Of course not! They can't be held responsible for what happened long before their time.

Instead of harping on the emotional issues with regard to the so called 'stolen generation', let's be a little more broad-minded and consider the other aspects relevant to the situation.
The government of the time believed that aboriginal children were severely disadvantaged by being brought up in aboriginal communities. For the purpose of giving these children better prospects in life, the decision was made to remove some (not all) of them to a different environment where they'd be fed and clothed and given the sort of education, guidance, and life skills that would enable them to function normally in society.
Nobody is denying the obvious distress to the children and their families. But in fairness to the decision makers of the time, we should understand that they were acting in what they believed to be the best long term interests of the children. These children were, afterall, half caste children who were part white - perhaps they belonged as much in white society as they did in black.

So what was the outcome of this policy of relocating aboriginal children to environments that were considered more suitable, at least by the white decision makers?
Did the removal policy achieve its objectives, and if so, have those objectives proven to be worthwhile?
Or would those children have been better off if they'd stayed with their families and grown up in an aboriginal environment? You be the judge.
I've seen quite a few of the 'stolen' generation interviewed on TV now that they're adults. Most of them were well dressed and well spoken, had responsible jobs, and were making something of their lives.
How would they have fared if they'd been left in their communities with their families?
I'm one of a minority of Australians who have personally been out to those remote aboriginal communities to see first hand the environment in which they live and raise their children. There's no doubt in my mind that, with few exceptions, the 'stolen' generation are better off than their full-blooded half brothers and sisters who were left in their aboriginal environment.

I can't think of a more thankless task than trying to formulate policies to help aboriginal people - those responsible for making these decisions are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Noel Pearson is held in high regard by many people, myself included, for his innovative thinking and conscientious efforts to help his own people. And yet he has his detractors, aboriginal people among them, and has received death threats on more than one occasion.
Former politician Mal Brough is a another courageous and innovative thinker who had the best interests of aboriginal people at heart. He put his political reputation on the line by introducing far-reaching measures aimed at improving the lives of aboriginal children. He received more criticism than favourable support, and was voted out of office at the last election.
Those who made the decisions in the 'stolen generation' issue were genuinely trying to help aboriginal people - but they've been ostracised ever since.

Over the years the situation has deteriorated alarmingly for children in aboriginal communities. These days they're increasingly subjected to violence and drunkenness and sexual abuse from their own people. The really sad part is that children raised in this type of environment are likely to adopt the same sort of unsavoury behaviour themselves in adult life.
Here's a point to ponder....
Would these children be better off in the long term if they were removed from their families and placed instead with foster families who'd give them education, guidance, and treat them with the love and respect and dignity that are essential for the normal development of children?
Or would their long term interests be better served by leaving them with their families in their present environment?

And now we have the situation that was entirely predictable....aboriginals want compensation for what they like to tell people was a grave injustice committed against them.
Maybe it's them who should be be making financial reimbursement for costs incurred by those who gave aboriginal children the chance for better lives.

 

[skint]

Can someone please point out to me the difference between individuals seeking compensation from a company (James Hardie) knowingly endangering its workers, or a church (Catholic) knowingly turning a blind eye to children being sexually abused or a government (Australia) knowlingly kidnapping children? Further, could any of the many posters in the Pauline Hanson camp truly claim they would not seek redress if their children were taken from them or were a child taken from their parents? Turn it up! As usual, 20/20, you're a lonely voice of reason. Keep it up mate!
If you disenfranchise (Aborigines were counted as fauna until the late sixties), marginalise and kick a community in the teeth for a couple of hundred years, it is unreasonable to assume that the problems (substance abuse/dependence, domestic violence, crime etc..) that result will be fixed within a generation by telling them to "get a job".
I think some posters would benefit from thinking a little further about how the situation developed (similar to indigenous peoples in many countries) rather than just the resultant symptoms.

 

[skint]

This whole 'sorry' business with regard to the stolen generation makes me sick.
The current generation of Australians should not feel obliged to apologise for actions taken by others before many of us were even born! We are NOT responsible for what happened back then.
Should today's Germans apologise for what the Nazis did? Of course not! They can't be held responsible for what happened long before their time.

Instead of harping on the emotional issues with regard to the so called 'stolen generation', let's be a little more broad-minded and consider the other aspects relevant to the situation.
The government of the time believed that aboriginal children were severely disadvantaged by being brought up in aboriginal communities. For the purpose of giving these children better prospects in life, the decision was made to remove some (not all) of them to a different environment where they'd be fed and clothed and given the sort of education, guidance, and life skills that would enable them to function normally in society.
Nobody is denying the obvious distress to the children and their families. But in fairness to the decision makers of the time, we should understand that they were acting in what they believed to be the best long term interests of the children. These children were, afterall, half caste children who were part white - perhaps they belonged as much in white society as they did in black.

So what was the outcome of this policy of relocating aboriginal children to environments that were considered more suitable, at least by the white decision makers?
Did the removal policy achieve its objectives, and if so, have those objectives proven to be worthwhile?
Or would those children have been better off if they'd stayed with their families and grown up in an aboriginal environment? You be the judge.
I've seen quite a few of the 'stolen' generation interviewed on TV now that they're adults. Most of them were well dressed and well spoken, had responsible jobs, and were making something of their lives.
How would they have fared if they'd been left in their communities with their families?
I'm one of a minority of Australians who have personally been out to those remote aboriginal communities to see first hand the environment in which they live and raise their children. There's no doubt in my mind that, with few exceptions, the 'stolen' generation are better off than their full-blooded half brothers and sisters who were left in their aboriginal environment.

I can't think of a more thankless task than trying to formulate policies to help aboriginal people - those responsible for making these decisions are damned if they do and damned if they don't.
Noel Pearson is held in high regard by many people, myself included, for his innovative thinking and conscientious efforts to help his own people. And yet he has his detractors, aboriginal people among them, and has received death threats on more than one occasion.
Former politician Mal Brough is a another courageous and innovative thinker who had the best interests of aboriginal people at heart. He put his political reputation on the line by introducing far-reaching measures aimed at improving the lives of aboriginal children. He received more criticism than favourable support, and was voted out of office at the last election.
Those who made the decisions in the 'stolen generation' issue were genuinely trying to help aboriginal people - but they've been ostracised ever since.

Over the years the situation has deteriorated alarmingly for children in aboriginal communities. These days they're increasingly subjected to violence and drunkenness and sexual abuse from their own people. The really sad part is that children raised in this type of environment are likely to adopt the same sort of unsavoury behaviour themselves in adult life.
Here's a point to ponder....
Would these children be better off in the long term if they were removed from their families and placed instead with foster families who'd give them education, guidance, and treat them with the love and respect and dignity that are essential for the normal development of children?
Or would their long term interests be better served by leaving them with their families in their present environment?

And now we have the situation that was entirely predictable....aboriginals want compensation for what they like to tell people was a grave injustice committed against them.
Maybe it's them who should be be making financial reimbursement for costs incurred by those who gave aboriginal children the chance for better lives.

Talk about a rose-coloured glasses view of history. Manning Clark, eat your heart out! For example, many of the children were placed in orphanages and treated hideously. I had an aboriginal friend who was removed from here mother without consent. In her adoptive white family, she was repeatedly raped as a young girl and also physically abused. Was she better off? As a young bloke, I lived in the Territory and spent some time working as a jackeroo with many Aborigines. They were very much considered to be second class citizens. You don't fix a community by further dividing it.

 

[numbercruncher]

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says an apology to indigenous Australians will aim to "bridge the gap" with non-indigenous Australians rather than providing any compensation.

Mr Rudd said compensation did not need to be part of the reconciliation efforts.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/080127/2/15nf0.html


Good on yah Ruddmeister !

 

[ithatheekret]

He must have read the Liabilities Act over the last few weekends .

If he wants some good dunny reading , there's over 30,000 tax laws he could get upto date on . I'd suggest he did it one volume at a time though , or he wouldn't have room to flush .............

 

[BIG BWACULL]

Well they have enough money in the future fund to set up a past fund To pay for any f%$k ups they encounter , (call it an insurance policy if you like) After all there is 61.3 billion in there