octave Posted February 2, 2023 Posted February 2, 2023 Why doesn't Australia have an indigenous treaty? The idea of recognition or a voice or a treaty is not just some new fangled modern lefty idea. "In 1832, the governor of Van Diemen's Land reflected ruefully on his colonial administration's chaotic - and bloody - relationship with the island's indigenous population. Amid a period of great conflict between white colonists and Aborigines known as the Black War, Governor George Arthur said it was "a fatal error" a treaty had not been entered into with the Aboriginal people of what's now the Australian state of Tasmania, after white settlement had commenced some 30 years earlier." "The absence of a treaty was cited by Mr Arthur as a crucial and aggravating factor in relations with the first inhabitants of the island, the scene of some of the worst treatment inflicted on Aborigines by British colonists. link." In Australia Aboriginal people were given the right to vote by the 1967 referendum. In new Zealand it was a different story. "Although New Zealand's 1852 constitution was theoretically colour-blind, very few Māori were able to vote in early elections because they owned their lands communally. The wars of the 1860s fueled debate about Māori representation, and in 1867 four parliamentary seats were set up specifically for Māori. As a result of this legislation, Māori men achieved universal suffrage 12 years before European men." Recognizing Indigenous people in the constitution and having a small number of advisors elected by the indigenous people in no way prevents other measures being taken. There are people who want to only offer the carrot and others who only want to offer the stick but in my opinion we need both. It would not surprise me if there are harsh measures that the government does not have the courage to institute but given advice from elected representatives may just be what will allow the government to take more decisive actions. Some posters are sure that it will not help at all. I am quite honest in saying that I don't know whether it will improve things or not but I ask myself what is the downside. The cost is often suggested, but within the whole budget it is a drop in the ocean. The other point that has been made is that "they" (as if the are all identical) wont be interested and wont vote. If true then the ones who do vote, perhaps the more educated folks, may vote for representatives who are educated and wise. I honestly cant see anything here to be anxious about. Speaking personally for myself I do find it a bit embarrassing that Australia took a very different route to other Commonwealth countries. Moaris had 4 seats in parliament set aside for them in 1867 Australia allowed Aboriginal folks to vote in 1967. Not a stunning performance on our part. I have no idea if the referendum will pass or not. The record for referendums passing is not great. Australians are quite conservative. As of December 20 last year there was a slim majority in all states for a yes vote, according to Roy Morgan polling. A lot can change between now and the referendum and I suspect there will be scare campaigns. Interestingly the group most likely to vote against the referendum is men over 65. If it does not pass this time then I am confident that this or some other measure will pass in the future as the generations change. I think the debate on this has been less around the referendum and more about anecdotes and news stories (often the Daily Mail which is not exactly a quality paper) about how nasty those indigenous folks are. Even if the majority of indigenous folks were evil it does not negate the idea of trying another approach. https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/53-of-australians-would-vote-yes-to-establish-an-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-voice-to-parliament 1 1
facthunter Posted February 2, 2023 Posted February 2, 2023 Regardless of the eventual outcome it will never be a good look for LITTLE to be PROUD of coming out preemptively with a binding NO vote before anything much has been discussed. I guess it was to provoke a similar action by Dutton. But why not at least allow some debate? . Some of the NP will defy it and have SO indicated. The NP have a lot of internal stresses. All they do is blackmail the Lieberals into anything the wish to.. Nev 1 1
nomadpete Posted February 2, 2023 Posted February 2, 2023 2 hours ago, octave said: more about anecdotes and news stories Not so. Octave i agree with you for the most part. Where we differ is my personal experiences in many of the disadvantaged aboriginal communities. I do not form opinions based on such newsprint that you suggest. I lament that we are going to a lot of effort to create yet another advisory body, when all previous such advisory bodies have a very poor record of outcomes. However, I cannot think of a meaningful way to help those most in need. Like several other forumites, I could fill a book with personal real crazy experiences with our aboriginal folk. One young aboriginal tech that I worked with up the Cape said, "Don't compare me with those mobs. I'm not one of THEM!" There is little cohesion or agreement amongst the many mobs. 1 2
kgwilson Posted February 2, 2023 Posted February 2, 2023 There is little cohesion or agreement within our European/Asian society either. The mobs and tribes need the opportunity to discuss and agree or disagree on every issue that affects their society and how it interacts with modern Australia. We have been doing that for over 200 years and they have been doing it for 60,000 years and working things out for 99.5% of that time, sometimes peacefully and sometimes with conflict and war. As conquerors we haven't allowed that to happen so far. Not even small steps. We started with genocide, progressed to exploitation, then assimilation, all the time infiltrating their society with our values and creating the grand design of what is yours and what is mine and secretly hoping they would all disappear. That's why a voice has to be given a go. It may work or it may end up a total disaster but we'll never know if it is rejected. 2 1
spacesailor Posted February 2, 2023 Posted February 2, 2023 '' If it does not pass this time then I am confident that this or some other measure will pass in the future as the generations change. '' REMINDS ME OF '' vote for a Republic '' . BUT If we did become a republic WOULD WE STILL GET TO VOTE FOR OUR LOST MONARCHY ? , That is the question ! . England tried being a Republic , then had their only armed rebellion, to return to what it was before Cromwell . spacesailor 1
Popular Post old man emu Posted February 2, 2023 Popular Post Posted February 2, 2023 This seems to have gone undetected in this debate: In November 2019, the First People's Assembly of Victoria was elected, consisting of 21 members representing Aboriginal Victorians, elected from five different regions in the state, and 10 members to represent each of the state's formally recognised traditional owner corporations, excluding the Yorta Yorta Nation Aboriginal Corporation, who declined to participate in the election process. The main aim of the Assembly is to work out the rules by which individual treaties will be negotiated between the Victoria State Government and individual Aboriginal peoples. It will also establish an independent "umpire", the Treaty Authority, to oversee the negotiations between the Aboriginal groups and the Victoria State Government and ensure fairness. The current Labor government under Daniel Andrews is supportive, but the Coalition had not made a clear commitment to supporting the treaty process. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_State_Government 1 3 1
facthunter Posted February 2, 2023 Posted February 2, 2023 That's a typical pattern. I wonder why any aboriginals vote for or belong to the Libs. Separate development long term would seem to be problematic, but Whitey's fix for Blackfella problem has a long failure experience. T A Bot was Minister for Aborigines and Women's Affairs. Could ANYTHING be more ironic ? Nev 2
nomadpete Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 (edited) 24 minutes ago, facthunter said: . I wonder why any aboriginals vote for or belong to the Libs. They do. When I was in Coen (Cape York), there was an election. We had a great turn out from the aboriginal communities. Nomerous big trayback truckes arrived in town, loaded with eager aboriginals from far and wide. How their kidneys stood up to the corrugated roads, I'll never know. The party began Friday. On saturday they lined up to vote. The electoral roll was suss. However there was only one party rep handing out their 'how to vote (for us)' cards. So they all went in and followed the instructions. I only asked one but that's what he did. So about a thousand aboriginals voted. Mostly Lib. The rest of Sat and Sun was a great party, lots of football between tribes, lots of drinking, (didn't see any eating) a few fights, a lot of laughs and nobody really seemed to know anything about elections but were looking forward to the next one. Monday the weary revellers departed on their trucks now also loaded with pallets of ggrog Even those going to dry communities. The problem (education, self determination, personal involvement) largely remains. Same as it does for the rest of us. Edited February 3, 2023 by nomadpete 1 3
nomadpete Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 3 hours ago, old man emu said: This seems to have gone undetected in this debate: In November 2019, the First People's Assembly of Victoria was elected..... Thanks, OME. I do wonder how many communities have been made aware of this group? And I include whitefella communities. And is there a list of their achievements? 2
Bruce Tuncks Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 I for one live in the West Wimmera and have never heard of it. I've never met a blackfellow around here, but near the farm there is a tree with newly-stuck up tape proclaiming an aboriginal cultural tree. I agree that any action must be big and decisive if Alice Springs is going to survive except as another aboriginal place. It would be great if the voice provided the clear and brave call for action needed, but on their track record, I don't think there is any chance of this. Tasmania and treaties have been mentioned, as well as NZ. There are very clear differences between them and Australia. It is quite easy to imagine the Maoris landing in Australia before Cook. They would have eaten the aborigines. In fact, they were good fighters and at the treaty of Waitangi, the whites were not completely sure of winning. The whites only needed a ship with ammunition to get lost and they could even have lost the war. In Victoria, Batman tried to buy the state ( he only dealt with an old woman who couldn't keep up with the fleeing tribe ) but this was not recognised by the govt in Sydney. It's a fascinating story. 2
old man emu Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 An election to elect representatives to the First Peoples' Assembly in the Australian state of Victoria occurred in 2019. The election filled seats to the body which was charged with the responsibility of preparing for negotiations with the Government of Victoria about a treaty with the state's Aboriginal population. The voting period was 16 September to 20 October 2019. Only Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people living in Victoria and at least 16 years of age were eligible to vote in the election. However, only 7% of the eligible voters turned out to vote. The 21 elected candidates were announced on 4 November 2019. Seven days later the commission announced the 11 people appointed by formally recognised Traditional Owner groups (termed Registered Aboriginal Parties or Traditional Owner Corporations) to a reserved seat on the Assembly. The first meeting of the Assembly took place on 10 December 2019 at Parliament House, Melbourne. Once elected, the Assembly was not responsible for negotiating a treaty or multiple treaties with the Victorian government on behalf of Aboriginal clans and nations. Instead the Assembly's primary responsibilities were to: Establish the Treaty Authority – an independent umpire in the negotiation process Establish the Treaty Negotiating Framework – a body who set the ground rules for negotiations and authorised who may negotiate on behalf of certain people/clans Establish the Self-Determination Fund – to support Aboriginal communities to be on an even playing field with government when treaties are being negotiated. And as we all know, the words "carrying out of responsibilities" translates as "non-productive talkfest". 1
kgwilson Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 I keep hearing of first peoples assemblys and aboriginal representatives etc but most of these are from the few who have managed to become part of the "White" system. Most of the real aboriginal people get ignored by these so called representatives. These people don't really feel part of Australian society and they are not. They are mentally still part of their old original culture although they are living in what seems to them to be a completely foreign state ingrained now by alcohol, drugs and violence. Many can't or won't get jobs. Again this is not a thing that their subconsious considers. These are the people that those who have managed to rise to an acceptable level of understanding of modern Australia need to slowly bring out of their despair by using the Voice to get funding and use it in their way to improve their lot. Creating or using existing government structures and departments or creating new ones has never worked and never will. When people say I've never seen an aborigine here or there they are right. Most were either killed or kicked out of these places over the past 250 years. In 60,000 years there would not be a square metre of Australia where they have not been at one point or another. 2
nomadpete Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 1 hour ago, kgwilson said: using the Voice to get funding and use it in their way to improve their lot. Billions of dollars of funding has already been provided and it has made things worse. It isn't about the money. 1 1
nomadpete Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 1 hour ago, kgwilson said: Creating or using existing government structures and departments or creating new ones has never worked and never will. Agreed. Such structures frequently lead to institutionalising the beneficiaries instead of empowering them. 1 1
nomadpete Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 1 hour ago, kgwilson said: When people say I've never seen an aborigine here or there they are right. Those people probably apply selective blindness. I have been abused by aboriginals as frequently on suburban trains in Brissy, as in shopping malls in Alice. However I have more frequently worked with intelligent educated aboriginals away from cities or towns. 1 1
kgwilson Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 16 hours ago, nomadpete said: Billions of dollars of funding has already been provided and it has made things worse. It isn't about the money. No it isn't about the money but how and who spends it. Of the millions or billions spent so far a pretty large portion has lined the pockets of the so called aid organisations hierarchy and the amount allocated to government organisations who can not organise a p!ss up in a brewery let alone even understand the needs of aboriginal communities. 1 3
nomadpete Posted February 3, 2023 Posted February 3, 2023 38 minutes ago, kgwilson said: understand the needs of aboriginal communities. That is a good starting point. Unfortunately the needs percieved by observers looking in are always very different from the wants. 1 1
facthunter Posted February 4, 2023 Posted February 4, 2023 You can never have top line facilities in remote locations nor be able to assist when natural disasters strike as well as the more densely settled areas. Why even expect it? IF you get an air ambulance, you're lucky Nev 1 3
old man emu Posted February 6, 2023 Posted February 6, 2023 Eh, Bro! Today is Waitangi Day. Fill up your chilly bin, slip on your jangles and let's go look at the country we gave away. 1 1
old man emu Posted February 6, 2023 Posted February 6, 2023 Stone the crows, mate. I can only speak one langwidge, and that's Strine. 2
facthunter Posted February 6, 2023 Posted February 6, 2023 (edited) IF you know the language well, you'll be lonely. For many, rolling the eyes and an occasional Grunt is it. Nev Edited February 6, 2023 by facthunter 1 1
spacesailor Posted February 6, 2023 Posted February 6, 2023 Japanese Sandal's . As opposed to Roman sandal's, it's the between the '' toe loop ''. spacesailor
Bruce Tuncks Posted February 6, 2023 Posted February 6, 2023 I was actually offered a job at Docker River... it was "buildings superintendant" On asking for more detail, I was told that the buildings superintendant had to get the dunnies back to working on monday mornings. The indigenous didn't know to stop using a dunny that didn't flush. Wow... and yet the politically correct lot had dismissed as " racist " a proposal to build culturally correct housing for first -housed abos from the bush. 2 1
Bruce Tuncks Posted February 6, 2023 Posted February 6, 2023 The powers that be had come up with their idea of a solution tho.... it was a glossy brochure which explained about how to use a dunny. 1 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now