australian government intervention

While this intervention is getting good press, we at the institute are not convinced that the Aboriginal people are getting a good deal. See article below and also Children of the Sunrise.

chris graham, national editor, indigenous times

From Crikey

I never quite understood how Mal Brough managed to escape genuine mainstream media scrutiny so often during his brief but, shall we say, "exciting" time in Indigenous affairs. I always just put it down to the "conga line of suckholes" phenomena identified by Mark Latham (albeit as a "Liberal" inclination in dealings with Americans... but as we all know a trait which also besets some in the media when confronted with a "Minister").

The media liked Brough – known as "Sideshow Mal" within Indigenous affairs - because he was always prepared to "say anything, do anything" to get a headline. That makes for great copy. Unfortunately for Brough, however, the media didn’t get to decide the outcome of the contest for his parliamentary seat.

That privilege was afforded the fine residents of the federal electorate of Longman who, it turns out, decided that Mal Brough was even more odious than the "average" Queensland Coalition member... which is quite something.

Across the state, Queenslanders registered an eight percent swing against the Howard government. But in Longman, the swing against Brough was almost 11 percent. Even worse, of the 29 seats up for grabs in Queensland, only three recorded swings to Labor above 11 percent, and two of those were in seats where the sitting Coalition member had retired.

I accept that opposition to the NT intervention did not translate to any significant swing against the Coalition at a national level. But given the huge swing against Brough personally, it’s hard to escape the conclusion that his boy’s own adventure in the NT didn’t play a part, albeit a relatively small one.

Perhaps, when it came time to vote, at least some of the good people of Longman stopped to think about the NT intervention and decided that using the s-xual abuse of children for your own personal/political gain was really quite... well... disgusting. Either that or the Longman punters decided that Mal Brough was just a really sh-t local member.

As for the Aboriginal vote in the Northern Territory, well they also got to cast judgement on Brough (and Howard). And what a judgement they delivered! Conveniently, one federal seat – Lingiari – encompasses all of the 73 Aboriginal communities affected by the NT intervention.

Media have correctly noted that "Aboriginal booths" in Lingiari delivered votes to the ALP in the 90 percentile range. True enough, but once again the reporting has been sub-par. Just quoting the percentages from a few booths doesn’t come close to telling the real story.

It’s correct to say that at the Wadeye booth, for example, the ALP collected about 95 percent of the vote. But what does that actually mean in real numbers? Of the 723 people who cast a ballot, just 26 of them voted for the CLP. 26! And doubtless almost every one of those was white.

In Angkarripa, in central Australia, the CLP managed just five primary votes out of a potential 503. That’s 0.99 percent of the total vote.

But the really big story – one which went begging for the media - was from a small booth in Arnhem Land. Yirrikala is home to Galarrwuy Yunupingu, the prominent Aboriginal leader who outraged colleagues by reversing his opposition to the NT intervention on the eve of the official start to the election campaign.

Brough, no doubt, thought he had an ally in Yunupingu, but the electoral returns reveal otherwise. Of the 266 votes up for grabs, the CLP secured just two of them - 0.75 percent of the primary vote.

And what of the other great story that went begging? The vote for the ALP in the booth of Hopevale – Noel Pearson’s hometown. 75%.

One of the great hypocrisies not just of media coverage of Indigenous issues, but of Australian thinking generally is our inability to apply the "good for the goose, good for the gander" principle when it comes to black issues.

For example, WorkChoices. The Australian public rejected it. No one’s debating the mandate to wind it back.

Yet the Aboriginal people of the Northern Territory overwhelmingly, comprehensively, spectacularly reject the NT intervention, and we’re all still arguing about whether it too should be scaled back.

The fact is, Aboriginal people still want the $1.3 billion spent in their communities, plus a lot more to make up the massive gaps in health, housing and education that have grown amid decades of appalling government neglect. They just don’t see why they have to give up their basic human rights in the process.

Aboriginal people rejected the methods of the intervention. They want consultation, not confrontation. They want assistance, not insistence.

And they want to be heard. As usual, Aboriginal Territorians have spoken loud and clear at this federal election, but I fear that as usual, not enough people are listening.

open letter to the pm

Dated September 27, 2007 and written by Dennis Eggington, CEO of Aboriginal Legal Service, Western Australia.

Mr Howard could you please clarify the following points.

Under your new Citizenship Test you expect applicants to embrace the Australian value of a fair go. Where is the fairness in denying Indigenous Australians so much as an apology when at the same time you are offering exit grants of up to $150,000, combined with an extra $20,000 in relocation and retraining grants to farmers with assets of up to $350,000?

Please understand that as an Indigenous Australian I do not begrudge people being compensated in some just way for being forced off land. As an Indigenous Australian, dispossession is something I understand very well. However, where is the justice when some farmers will walk away with over half a million dollars in their pockets whilst their Indigenous compatriots, currently having their lands compulsorily acquired by your government are told they will then need to leases back buildings and services and have their benefits withheld for non-compliance?

Your government`s vastly different interventions in regional and rural Australia are probably being roundly applauded by many. I guess it just depends on which side of the cocky`s fence you happen to be standing.

Mr. Howard you describe the current circumstances confronting drought affected farmers as 'pitiful'. It is also pitiful that you have consistently failed to address the human rights drought that has affected our people for over two centuries. It is both sad and ironic to note that one day before your announcement of these grants for farmers, that our organisation hosted the Western Australian launch of a national Stolen Wages report highlighting the extent of financial abuses against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workers. Once again we repeated our call for the return of these Stolen Wages to hard working indigenous men and women, many of whom would have toiled upon these very farms your current initiative is targeting. We also continue our call for reparation for our members of the stolen generation.

Perhaps you need to amend your new Citizenship test to reflect the fact that a fair go is nothing more than a white lie.

Yours Sincerely

Dennis Eggington
ALSWA CEO

alcohol laws

The Federal government are taking some draconian steps in their Northern Territory Initiative. For those who are not aware of the alcohol related law changes, here they are.

Alcohol is banned on all Aboriginal land, community living areas and town camps.

If someone purchases $100 or more worth of alcohol or more than 5L of cask or flagon wine, bottle shops must sight ID and take details.

A first offence for drinking, possessing, supplying or transporting alcohol in banned areas is up to a $1100 fine.

If the amount of alcohol is over 1350ml (3 cases of beer) the offence could be trafficking which is up to a $74,000 fine or 18 months in jail.

The offences started on 15th September 2007.

Not also that Alice Springs is now a restricted area and drinking in any public place carries a $100 on the spot fine or up to $500 if taken to court.

Alcohol is totally banned in town camps in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, including all houses.

More information is available on the Australian Government Website