Rudd's remarkable beginning

16/2 Laurie Oakes for the Daily Telegraph | ... On Thursday night, at Canberra airport, Nelson ran into Lorna "Nanna" Fejo, the Stolen Generation's member whose sad story was a central feature of Rudd's speech on the sorry motion.

As it happens, Nelson has known Nanna Fejo since he was AMA president. They are friends.

Nelson invited her, and seven other Aboriginal women who were travelling with her back to Darwin, to join him in the Qantas lounge where they could wait comfortably and have a cup of tea.

Inside, the Opposition Leader spotted a group of eight chairs. Five were occupied but there were others seats nearby, so Nelson politely asked the occupants if they would mind moving to allow the elderly women to sit together.

Four were delighted to do so, but - as Nelson apologised for inconveniencing them - the remaining businessman snarled: "Don't say sorry to me, mate. You did that yesterday and I'm not happy about it. I don't give a stuff who they are - I've got rights here, too."

As one of the Aboriginal women commented consolingly to Nelson later: "Not all people are kind."

The incident demonstrated several things. One is that Nelson is genuinely sympathetic to the cause of indigenous Australians, whatever those who turned their backs during his speech to Parliament might think.

Another is that the Opposition Leader found himself in a no-win situation.

He infuriated many people with the qualifications and reservations in his speech but angered others for going along with the apology at all.

My opinion of the speech, for what it is worth, is that Nelson misjudged the occasion. Much of what he said - about sexual abuse, alcohol misuse and other current problems in Aboriginal communities - would have been fair enough in a different context. But this was not the time for it.

... Nelson's supporters argue his "sorry" speech showed courage, not poor judgment.

Nelson, they say, believing that the occasion provided a rare opportunity to bring the current problems of indigenous Australians to the attention of a mass audience, deliberately decided to include some unpleasant truths in the speech even though he knew it could make him unpopular.

Rudd's remarkable beginning

16/2 Laurie Oakes for the Daily Telegraph | ... To say he [Kevin Rudd] played Brendan Nelson as a fisherman plays a trout would be unfair - but he certainly manipulated events to ensure images of unity and bipartisanship overshadowed divisions in Coalition ranks and any equivocation in the Opposition Leader's words. During the Aboriginal "welcome to country" ceremony at the opening of Parliament, for example, Rudd involved Nelson by giving him just a few minutes' notice that he would be invited to speak. After the sorry vote, Rudd - again with no warning - invited Nelson to join him in parading around the chamber waving to the galleries before presenting to the Speaker a gift from Stolen Generation representatives. And the PM deliberately ambushed Nelson with his public invitation to co-chair a kind of "war cabinet" on indigenous housing and other issues, giving the Opposition Leader no chance to confer with colleagues or lay down conditions before accepting.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23219326-5001030,00.html

One last sorry kick at Howard

16/2 Tim Blair for the Daily Telegraph | ... The mood overall was one of celebration, which is an odd response to being implicated in the systematic racist theft of children... As the Prime Minister [Kevin Rudd] said the words "I am sorry", the crowd erupted in applause and cheers ... Oh, there was anger, too, but not over any guilty involvement in toddler snatching. According to the Herald Sun: "When a clip of former prime minister John Howard from 1997 was shown on the big screen the crowd erupted into booing.

"That's why we didn't vote for you," yelled one man. And that is the hidden story of Apology 2008. For many, it was the last chance to take a righteous kick at Howard, pursued by the Left over the Stolen Generation ever since the Bringing Them Home report was released 10 years ago.

It didn't matter to Howard's opponents that he wasn't elected to Parliament until after the alleged offences detailed in Bringing Them Home occurred. By making an apology from Howard their central demand, those who postured as champions of the Stolen Generation betrayed their political motives. Some of them, such was their piety, actually hardened attitudes against an apology.

A few years ago I was the token right-winger at a Brisbane writers festival when the young audience got a little worked up over the whole Howard non-apology issue. I said I'd take them seriously when they made similar demands of Gough Whitlam, who'd been Labor party leader in opposition and then prime minister at a time when a generation of Aboriginal children was actually said to have been stolen. That took some heat out of the room. Perhaps they'd never quite thought of things that way. Or maybe they just didn't know who on earth I was talking about.

Well, old Gough was there in Parliament on Wednesday, still unmolested by apology requests. But Howard stayed away, which left miscast Brendan Nelson to stand in as the Official Figure of Evil. ...

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23219577-5001030,00.html

Sorry is just the beginning

14/2 Sue Dunlevy for the Daily Telegraph | ...... Thanks to the Howard government’s controversial intervention into Northern Territory Aboriginal communities, we are now spending $3.5 billion on indigenous programs and the Government has taken control of indigenous welfare payments to stop it being squandered on grog.

There has been some progress. Seven months after the controversial Aboriginal child health checks began, 6051 children have had their health checked - revealing kids riddled with worms, scabies, renal infections, hearing impairment and massive levels of dental decay.

The check-ups showed that 2000 children need primary health services, 500 need to see an ear, nose and throat specialist and 1700 need dental care.

.... The former indigenous affairs minister Mal Brough abolished the CDEP program that employed 7000 indigenous people in part-time municipal work in the Territory.

But reports suggest the private employment contractors he paid millions to set up work for the dole programs have so far found employment for only a handful of people. In some cases the Government is paying twice for employment services because the new Labor Government stopped the closure of CDEP services still operating when it came to power.

Some progress is being made.

In the gang-war torn Northern Territory Aboriginal community of Wadeye, $29 million has been spent building 48 new houses, government offices and improving electricity supply.

More children attend school, alcoholism is on the decline and violence has eased.

More than 39 extra policemen have been stationed in indigenous communities in the Northern Territory, 10 community stores have opened and 38 business managers are overseeing the new community order.

Dentists have carried out work on 350 children and dental surgery has been scheduled for another 200. Four ear, nose and throat surgery blitzes have been scheduled in Alice Springs, with buses leased to get 200 children to the first blitz in April.

Thirty five children have undergone heart checks after initial check-ups detected heart murmurs, and Australian hearing has provided audiological services to 51 children. ...

Speech: The Right Time: Constitutional Recognition for Indigenous Australians

The Sydney Institute - October 16, 2007

.... A little more than 100 days ago I spoke at The Sydney Institute on the topic of the Government's emergency intervention in Northern Territory Indigenous communities.

This intervention  and in particular the public's reaction to it  has been a watershed in Indigenous affairs in Australia. It has overturned 30 years of attitudes and thinking on Indigenous policy.

The response from people around Australia has again highlighted to me the anguish so many Australians feel about the state of Indigenous Australia and the deep yearning in the national psyche for a more positive and unifying approach to Reconciliation.

 A new paradigm

This new Reconciliation I'm talking about starts from the premise that individual rights and national sovereignty prevail over group rights. That group rights are, and ought to be, subordinate to both the citizenship rights of the individual and the sovereignty of the nation.

This is Reconciliation based on a new paradigm of positive affirmation, of unified Australian citizenship, and of balance  a balance of rights and responsibilities; a balance of practical and symbolic progress.

It is this balance which holds the key to unlocking overwhelming support among the Australian people for meaningful Reconciliation.

Some will say: Surely we've been here before. What's different now?

Good question.

I'm convinced we are dealing today with a new alignment of ideas and individuals; a coming together of forces I have not witnessed in 32 years of public life.

As always, the Australian people themselves are the best guide.