The news is full of the tragic state of Aboriginal communities - and the radical initiatives proposed by our PM to improve the situation. I've been discussing this online and in person over the past few days, but I don't have a clear opinion on whether these initiatives are good or bad - or a bit of both. I don't feel informed enough to make sweeping judgements. (Many of you would be amazed to hear that I think I need information in order to make sweeping judgements, I know!)
What does concern me, though, is the way in which this situation is being used to portray Aboriginal communities in a very familiar way. The message seems to be: Aborigines can't help themselves, so 'we' (Federal Government, non-Aboriginal people, experts) need to step in and fix things. I have nothing against intervention per se. But I think that firstly, to blame Aboriginal people without taking seriously our responsibility as a nation for this situation is both historically and morally wrong. And secondly, I think there should be recognition of the many examples of positive changes that have come from within Aboriginal communities.
As just one example, let me mention Woolaning Homeland Christian School. Check out a fascinating paper on the birth and (literal) vision of this initiative. In the midst of our urgency to fix things, to bring about change, we need to not forget the many Aboriginal people who have long laboured to bring about change in their communities - and achieved amazing things - without much support at all. Surely we should be listening to their voices as we seek solutions? Surely they should be given the opportunity to lead the way?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Howard's proposals have been getting me going this week too. Like you, i confess to not knowing much about the details of the government's plan but to nevertheless having some strong reservations.
I agree that the situation is not ok as it stands - i'm not opposed to the idea of trying to make a difference per se. But I totally agree with what you are saying about needing to value and support community-generated ideas far more highly. One of the things that concerns me most about the government's plan is that its so top down and heavy handed - there s little evidence that the govt has listened to those people who actually work in and live in those communities all the time.
I am also very worried about the simple 'law and order' approach the govt is taking to the issue. Sending in the army and the police doesn't seem a good idea to me. Given the often terrible history of govt intervention into aboriginal life in this country, i think a plan to basically 'send in the police' is misplaced in its basic appraoch. I heard the head of Anglicare n the radio yesterday, saying that th issue of child abuse needs to be dealt with an holistic way - ie that attention needs to be given to issues such as housing, employment, cultural recognition, even to saying sorry. Its not just about health. Its not just about the law. And to act as if it is, only poses great risks of doing more damage to indigenous / govt relations in this country.
There. thats my two cents!
Thanks, Meredith - I've been listening to Noel Pearson and I think his approach is helpful. To say 'yes' to the basic commitment to action, but to remain constructively critical of the details. Not that it makes any difference what I think!
The following is a letter that I sent to The Age that was published on 26-06-07:
Rudd too keen by half
KEVIN Rudd was far too hasty in supporting John Howard's proposed solutions to the indeed appalling incidence of child sexual abuse in remote Aboriginal communities. Rudd could have welcomed Howard's intentions and desire to urgently address the problem without immediately offering unqualified support for the whole package. Howard's package contains a number of disturbing and draconian measures. The Government's approach reeks of the racist and paternalistic attitudes to Aborigines that many hoped had been consigned to the dustbin of history.
The Government's plans called for a more critical and measured response than Labor has so far offered.
Geoff Wilson, Montrose
****
The particular draconian measure I had in mind was the govt's plan to resume control of Aboriginal land for at least 5 years. (I believe this is, as one Aboriginal leaders has argued, a Trojan horse to extinguish Aboriginal land rights, another long term Howard plan - remember him peering over his 'brown' map of Australia on "The 7.30 Report" early in his first term?)
I am the Curriculum Coordinator at a Christian School in the outer-east of Melbourne, which has taught a central Australian Aboriginal language (Warlpiri) and has been sending our Yr 10 students to visit the Warlpiri community at Yuendemu for over 25 years.
Long-term improvement in the living conditions of remote Aboriginal communities will only come about when govts (and other agencies) work in genuine partnership with Aboriginal communities (& their leaders).
Brough and Howard (who's nary had much interest in Aboriginal policy) arrogantly declares: "I am right" on this issue. Anyone with a modicum of knowledge about the problems in these communities certainly realises that one individual -- even a great (sic) politician like our PM -- has all the "right" answers on these complex, seemingly intractable, problems.
Thanks, Geoff, for dropping by and sharing your experience. Apologies for this slow response, as I have been out of town and off the internet for a while. I am glad that your letter was published. I wonder if you are aware of the two-day meeting at Collins St Baptist next week - there will be a number of senior Aboriginal Christian leaders there and I am hoping to get along to listen to what they have to say about these developments.
Post a Comment