Changing Changing Government Government

polices towards polices towards Aboriginal people Aboriginal people

over time.over time.

Syllabus Focus QuestionsSyllabus Focus Questions

changing government policies towards changing government policies towards Aboriginal peoples over time, including:Aboriginal peoples over time, including:

protectionprotection AssimilationAssimilation IntegrationIntegration self-determinationself-determination the varying experiences of:the varying experiences of:the stolen the stolen

generationsgenerations

SegregationLoss of family

identity

FederationLoss of

Citizenship“Dog License”

Loss offreedom

ProtectionismLoss of land,

kinship,culture

MissionariesLoss of

spiritualism

Terra NulliusLoss of

land

dispossession

The Premiers met at the The Premiers met at the Federation Conference IN 1897.Federation Conference IN 1897.

At that time the Bulletin reported,At that time the Bulletin reported,

"No nigger, chinese, no lasko, no purveyor of cheap "No nigger, chinese, no lasko, no purveyor of cheap coloured labour is an Australian.“coloured labour is an Australian.“

The Australian desert is truly in a primitive state in its The Australian desert is truly in a primitive state in its loneliness and lifelessness–but under federation loneliness and lifelessness–but under federation every dry creek bed and parched billabong should be every dry creek bed and parched billabong should be filled with water and thousands of miles of filled with water and thousands of miles of

productive territory added to our possession'-productive territory added to our possession'-The The BulletinBulletin 1895. 1895.

Paul KeatingPaul Keating ““The starting point for overcoming the The starting point for overcoming the

problems besetting the first Australians was problems besetting the first Australians was an act of recognition. Recognition that it was an act of recognition. Recognition that it was we who did the dispossessing. We took the we who did the dispossessing. We took the traditional land and smashed the traditional traditional land and smashed the traditional way of life. We brought the diseases. We way of life. We brought the diseases. We brought the alcohol. We committed the brought the alcohol. We committed the murders. We took the children from their murders. We took the children from their mothers. We practiced discrimination and mothers. We practiced discrimination and exclusion. It was our ignorance and our exclusion. It was our ignorance and our prejudice, and our failure to imagine these prejudice, and our failure to imagine these things being done to us.”things being done to us.”

Changing Policies: Why?Changing Policies: Why?

Government policies towards Indigenous Government policies towards Indigenous Australians were initially in response to Australians were initially in response to prevailing ideas of racial stereotypes, prevailing ideas of racial stereotypes, economic needs for land and resources economic needs for land and resources and political pragmatism.and political pragmatism.

These policies changed over time as a These policies changed over time as a result of internal social activism by result of internal social activism by Indigenous Australians and the pressure of Indigenous Australians and the pressure of changing ideologies such as Human and changing ideologies such as Human and civil libertiescivil liberties

When Britain colonised North America and New When Britain colonised North America and New Zealand the prior occupation of the land by Zealand the prior occupation of the land by indigenous peoples was recognised. Treaties indigenous peoples was recognised. Treaties were signed with these peoples, even if they were were signed with these peoples, even if they were very one-sided. This did not happen with very one-sided. This did not happen with Australia’s Aboriginal people.Australia’s Aboriginal people.

From the very beginning the British had declared From the very beginning the British had declared the land ‘the land ‘Terra Nullius’Terra Nullius’ (land of no one). (land of no one). This was legal as in the 18th Century it was This was legal as in the 18th Century it was widely thought that if land was found that did not widely thought that if land was found that did not belong to anyone it could be taken and claimed. belong to anyone it could be taken and claimed. Captain Cook declared it so in 1770 when he first Captain Cook declared it so in 1770 when he first made sight of Australia.made sight of Australia.

"The Conciliation" - painting by Benjamin Duterrau, 1840

Throughout the 19th century white settlers Throughout the 19th century white settlers gradually moved the Aboriginal people off their gradually moved the Aboriginal people off their land and into reserves. The indigenous people land and into reserves. The indigenous people were forced to experience dispossession and were forced to experience dispossession and paternalism.paternalism. In strictly legal terms they did In strictly legal terms they did not exist.not exist.

Paternalism is the practice of acting like a father, Paternalism is the practice of acting like a father, treating someone like a child, making decisions for treating someone like a child, making decisions for them without allowing them responsibility.them without allowing them responsibility.

The reserves were established to remedy the The reserves were established to remedy the initial dispossession of land, as each colony passed initial dispossession of land, as each colony passed laws most Aboriginals became wards of the state.laws most Aboriginals became wards of the state.

It was not long before more land was needed for It was not long before more land was needed for farming and these reserves were taken back by farming and these reserves were taken back by the government. By the late 1920s nearly all were the government. By the late 1920s nearly all were in the hands of lease holders.in the hands of lease holders.

CHANGING POLICIESCHANGING POLICIESConsider events , internationally that might impact on internal Consider events , internationally that might impact on internal

policypolicy

Protectionism 1886-1938 ?Protectionism 1886-1938 ? Assimilation1938- ?Assimilation1938- ? Integration1962-1967 ?Integration1962-1967 ? Self Determination1967- ?Self Determination1967- ? Multiculturalism ?Multiculturalism ? Reconciliation?Reconciliation?

Protection BoardsProtection Boards

1911 Australia1911 Australia By this time all states and By this time all states and territories with the exception of territories with the exception of

Tasmania had passed some form of 'protection‘ legislation Tasmania had passed some form of 'protection‘ legislation with an emphasis on segregation and restriction.with an emphasis on segregation and restriction.

Colonies passed laws, usually called “Aboriginal Protection Colonies passed laws, usually called “Aboriginal Protection Acts” to establish authority and jurisdiction. Protection laws Acts” to establish authority and jurisdiction. Protection laws reduced the status of the Indigenous to wards of the State.reduced the status of the Indigenous to wards of the State.

The responsibilities of the Protection Boards was to manage The responsibilities of the Protection Boards was to manage reserves. Some were run by the state and some were run by reserves. Some were run by the state and some were run by Church groups who felt the need to christianize the heathensChurch groups who felt the need to christianize the heathens

State ActsState Acts

Victoria 1886Victoria 1886 Queensland 1897Queensland 1897 Western Australia 1905Western Australia 1905 New South Wales 1909New South Wales 1909 South Australia 1911South Australia 1911

In 1886 the Victorian Aborigines Protection In 1886 the Victorian Aborigines Protection Board was set up. Its aim, taken here from Board was set up. Its aim, taken here from a parliamentary report, was a parliamentary report, was

““AA: to civilise, Christianise and above all : to civilise, Christianise and above all train Aborigines on stations established for train Aborigines on stations established for the purpose; the purpose; B: to remove as many children as possible B: to remove as many children as possible from their 'bad' environment and parental from their 'bad' environment and parental 'influence' to training homes and thence to 'influence' to training homes and thence to 'situations' [work] with white families;'situations' [work] with white families; “ “

ProtectionProtection This was government policy during the second half of the This was government policy during the second half of the

1800s and into the early 1900s. 1800s and into the early 1900s. Aboriginal people were removed from their traditional lands Aboriginal people were removed from their traditional lands

and placed on reserves (government-run) or missions and placed on reserves (government-run) or missions (church-run). (church-run).

The government argument was that this was done ‘for their The government argument was that this was done ‘for their own protection’, as they were a ‘dying race’. own protection’, as they were a ‘dying race’.

It was really a policy of segregation where Aboriginal It was really a policy of segregation where Aboriginal culture could be replaced by white culture under the control culture could be replaced by white culture under the control of the authorities and they could be ‘civilised’ and of the authorities and they could be ‘civilised’ and ‘christianised’. ‘christianised’.

It also allowed land previously occupied by Aborigines to It also allowed land previously occupied by Aborigines to become pastoral land. become pastoral land.

Aborigines had to seek permission to marry, to work or to Aborigines had to seek permission to marry, to work or to move somewhere else to live. move somewhere else to live.

‘‘Mixed blood’ or ‘mixed race’ children were removed from Mixed blood’ or ‘mixed race’ children were removed from their families, the Stolen Children, and brought up with their families, the Stolen Children, and brought up with white families and taught ‘useful’ skills such as domestic white families and taught ‘useful’ skills such as domestic work and simple trades. They were labelled as neglected work and simple trades. They were labelled as neglected and destitute and Australian governments had had a long and destitute and Australian governments had had a long policy of removing children ‘at risk’ from their families. It policy of removing children ‘at risk’ from their families. It happened on a large scale with Aboriginal children.happened on a large scale with Aboriginal children.

Indigenous Population Indigenous Population growthgrowth

Coranderrk Women 1880Coranderrk Women 1880

Coranderrk Aboriginal Reserve in Victoria became a site of Aboriginal activism and the Coranderrk people gained a reputation amongst white authorities as 'trouble-makers' because they continually defended their rights through strikes, deputations and petitions. Women were active in several of the campaigns, including strikes and walk-off

Wallagra Lake Reserve NSWWallagra Lake Reserve NSW

Training to be whiteTraining to be whiteKinchela Boys and Cootamundra Girls Kinchela Boys and Cootamundra Girls

HomesHomes

Day of Mourning 1938Day of Mourning 1938

Cootamundra Aboriginal Girls Training Home

Dog TagsDog Tags

AssimilationAssimilation

Although Protection Boards were replaced by Welfare Boards in most states between 1938-1951, with the idea of Aboriginals being able to retain some of their culture, officially the policy was not legislated till 1951

This was a change in policy but not necessarily a change in reality. This was a change in policy but not necessarily a change in reality. This government policy was introduced in 1951 by Paul Hasluck, This government policy was introduced in 1951 by Paul Hasluck,

Federal Minister for Territories. Federal Minister for Territories. Aborigines were encouraged to ‘think white, act white, be white’ Aborigines were encouraged to ‘think white, act white, be white’

with the intent that they would eventually live like white with the intent that they would eventually live like white Australians. Australians.

It forced Aborigines to totally abandon their traditional way of life It forced Aborigines to totally abandon their traditional way of life if they wanted to gain access to what was offered such as a if they wanted to gain access to what was offered such as a degree of freedom from the intrusions of the government in their degree of freedom from the intrusions of the government in their lives on the reserves and missions. lives on the reserves and missions.

However, discrimination continued in all areas including housing, However, discrimination continued in all areas including housing, education, health and employment. education, health and employment.

Racism and intolerance continued, and many Aborigines were Racism and intolerance continued, and many Aborigines were forced to live on the fringes of towns and were prevented from forced to live on the fringes of towns and were prevented from using public facilities such as town baths. using public facilities such as town baths.

Even returned Aboriginal soldiers were denied the same rights as Even returned Aboriginal soldiers were denied the same rights as their fellow, white, soldiers. their fellow, white, soldiers.

In 1962 all Aborigines were given the right to vote in federal In 1962 all Aborigines were given the right to vote in federal elections, which consolidated their voting rights in the states elections, which consolidated their voting rights in the states which had been given to them at various times between 1949 and which had been given to them at various times between 1949 and 1961 and had made them citizens of Australia. 1961 and had made them citizens of Australia.

They were still not counted as Australians in the census. They were still not counted as Australians in the census.

Some stereotypes remained Some stereotypes remained despite changing policiesdespite changing policies

UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION UNITED NATIONS DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTSOF HUMAN RIGHTS

Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.other limitation of sovereignty.

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discriminationsuch discrimination

DECLARATION OF HUMAN DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTSRIGHTS

Everyone has the right to a standard of Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his controlbeyond his control

American Civil Rights American Civil Rights MovementMovement

Australian Freedom RidesAustralian Freedom Rides

Integration 1962 AND 67 Integration 1962 AND 67 pivotal yearspivotal years

This was a change in wording and a relaxing of the harsher This was a change in wording and a relaxing of the harsher aspects of the government’s policies but most of the aspects of the government’s policies but most of the controlling aspects of assimilation remained. controlling aspects of assimilation remained.

The words defining ‘assimilation’ were changed in 1965 which The words defining ‘assimilation’ were changed in 1965 which seemed to allow Aborigines to retain some of their cultural seemed to allow Aborigines to retain some of their cultural ideas, beliefs and customs, and implied a greater acceptance ideas, beliefs and customs, and implied a greater acceptance of their culture and relationship with the land. The granting of their culture and relationship with the land. The granting of the vote in 1962 to all Aborigines embraced this ideaof the vote in 1962 to all Aborigines embraced this idea

This change was soon called ‘integration’. This change was soon called ‘integration’. It was not a very long-lasting policy. It was not a very long-lasting policy. The 1967 referendum, which gave the federal government The 1967 referendum, which gave the federal government

power over Aboriginal affairs (instead of the states), was power over Aboriginal affairs (instead of the states), was passed with a massive majority. passed with a massive majority.

The referendum also contained a question asking that the The referendum also contained a question asking that the constitution be changed to allow all Aborigines to be counted constitution be changed to allow all Aborigines to be counted in the census. This, too, was passed with a massive majority. in the census. This, too, was passed with a massive majority.

Seeking a Double MajoritySeeking a Double Majority

Self DeterminationSelf Determination This was a major change of policy and a major change in This was a major change of policy and a major change in

reality. reality. It was introduced during the first Whitlam government in It was introduced during the first Whitlam government in

1972. 1972. Racial Discrimination Act had wider implications for all Racial Discrimination Act had wider implications for all

future Aboriginal policy makersfuture Aboriginal policy makers Aborigines were to have full control over all aspects of Aborigines were to have full control over all aspects of

their lives. ATSIC was established to help formulate their lives. ATSIC was established to help formulate policy. It was disbanded by John Howard.policy. It was disbanded by John Howard.

They were no longer seen as a dying race. They were no longer seen as a dying race. They no longer had to be protected. They no longer had to be protected. They were no longer expected to assimilate or integrate. They were no longer expected to assimilate or integrate. They were now full and equal citizens in the eyes of the They were now full and equal citizens in the eyes of the

law. law. Land rights and native title to traditional lands now Land rights and native title to traditional lands now

became the major issues. became the major issues.

Gough Whitlam and Vincent Gough Whitlam and Vincent LingiariLingiari

1975 Racial Discrimination Act1975 Racial Discrimination Act In 1976 the Fraser government passed the Aboriginal In 1976 the Fraser government passed the Aboriginal

Land Rights Act. Aboriginals were allowed to claim Land Rights Act. Aboriginals were allowed to claim ‘crown land’ that was not being used by other people. ‘crown land’ that was not being used by other people. The Aboriginal Lands Council was set up to control this The Aboriginal Lands Council was set up to control this land. Several state governments passed their own land. Several state governments passed their own Land Rights Acts which recognised Aboriginal claims to Land Rights Acts which recognised Aboriginal claims to land.land.

In 1980 a National Federation Land Councils was set In 1980 a National Federation Land Councils was set up. Organisations such as this helped to bring the up. Organisations such as this helped to bring the issue of land rights to the attention of white Australia.issue of land rights to the attention of white Australia.

In 1985 Aboriginal people were given ownership of In 1985 Aboriginal people were given ownership of Ayers Rock, now known by its traditional name of Ayers Rock, now known by its traditional name of Uluru.Uluru.

MULTICULTURALISM

1986 Eddie Mabo begins his case for Native title. 1986 Eddie Mabo begins his case for Native title. In 1992 the High Court determines that the In 1992 the High Court determines that the Meriam people hold native title to their land.Meriam people hold native title to their land.

Native Title Act of 1993 was passed and National Native Title Act of 1993 was passed and National Native Title Tribunal was established.Native Title Tribunal was established.

1996 Wik Decision found that pastoral leases did 1996 Wik Decision found that pastoral leases did not grant exclusive use and did not necessarily not grant exclusive use and did not necessarily extinguish Native Title. extinguish Native Title.

Many people feared Native Title and it was Many people feared Native Title and it was incorrectly believed that Aboriginals would be incorrectly believed that Aboriginals would be able to claim peoples “backyards” under the act. able to claim peoples “backyards” under the act. This led to legislation changes in some states.This led to legislation changes in some states.

In 1997 The Native Title Amendment Act was In 1997 The Native Title Amendment Act was introduced making it more difficult to register a claim introduced making it more difficult to register a claim and limiting the areas that can be claimed under and limiting the areas that can be claimed under Native Title.Native Title.

In 1998 the first "National Sorry Day" was held, and In 1998 the first "National Sorry Day" was held, and reconciliation events were held nationally, and reconciliation events were held nationally, and attended by millions people.attended by millions people.

In May 2000, a "Walk for Reconciliation" was staged in In May 2000, a "Walk for Reconciliation" was staged in Sydney, with up to 400,000 people marching across Sydney, with up to 400,000 people marching across the Sydney Harbour Bridge as a gesture of apology. A the Sydney Harbour Bridge as a gesture of apology. A similar walk was staged in Melbourne later that year. similar walk was staged in Melbourne later that year.

RECONCILIATION

The Sea of Hands has become a symbol of the people's movement for reconciliation.

Northern Territory EmergencyTable 1. Comparison of key variables: Northern Territory Indigenous versus Australia Indigenous, 2006.Variable Northern Territory – Indigenous Australia– Indigenous RatioUnemployment rate (% labour force) 14.4 15.6 0.9Labour force participation rate (% adults) 38.9 51.2 0.8Employment to population ratio (% adults) 33.3 43.2 0.8Private-sector employment (% adults) 19.2 32.8 0.6Median income, Individual ($) 215 278 0.8Median income, Household ($) 837 791 1.1Home owner or purchasing (% households) 20.0 35.9 0.6Average number of persons per bedroom (persons) 1.8 1.3 1.4Household size (persons) 4.5 3.4 1.3Never attended school (% adults) 8.5 2.5 3.5Completed Year 10 or higher (% adults) 40.2 66.4 0.6Completed Year 12 (% adults) 10.1 22.2 0.5Post-school qualification (% adults) 13.1 23.8 0.6Degree or higher (% adults) 1.8 4.4 0.4Population aged over 55 years (% population) 7.7 8.2 0.9

The Northern Territory National Emergency Response (also referred to as "the intervention") is a package of changes to welfare provision, law enforcement, land tenure and other measures, introduced by the Australian federal government under John Howard in 2007, nominally to address claims of rampant child sexual abuse and neglect in Northern Territory Aboriginal communities. Operation Outreach, the intervention's main logistical operation conducted by a force of 600 soldiers and detachments from the ADF concluded on 21 October 2008

“You know, the whole aim here is not to condemn people for their problems. The whole aim is to support them, to get back on their feet again and to take charge of their own families again” Noel Pearson – 7.30 Report 19.06.07

DEBATEJohn Howards Intervention Policy in Northern Territory

Fred Chaney, in his 2007 Vincent Lingiari Lecture (2007). Indigenous people will be subject to a level of micromanagement that is unprecedented elsewhere in Australian society. Chaney highlights the suspension of the provisions of the 1975 Racial Discrimination Act and the interference in Indigenous property rights as being of particular concern. He highlights how the lack of meaningful consultation has almost guaranteed that there will be resistance (both passive and active) to the implementation of the policy.

What is suggested by this cartoon?Who is the likely composer?

The intervention in the Northern Territory has come under fire by a

variety of groups. In short, the main criticisms of the intervention are as follows:•The intervention has created chaos, increased poverty and racism. •The intervention has not uncovered any paedophilia rings and no child sexual abuse cases have been prosecuted.. •Only 2 of the 97 recommendations in the Little Children Are Sacred report were implemented•In order for the Federal government to implement the Northern Territory Emergency Response, suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 was required making it legal to force communities to sign over control of Aboriginal land in 5 year leases, prohibit alcohol consumption and distribution in Aboriginal communities, control spending patterns through income management and store cards and take-over Aboriginal service-providers. •The United Nations has expressed concern over the suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act, writing to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in March 2009 following a complaint made to the UN by a collective of Aboriginal communities

Impact of Kevin Rudd’s Apology “We apologise for the laws and policies of successive Parliaments and governments that have inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians.

We apologise especially for the removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their families, their communities and their country.

For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations, their

descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry.”

Australia will face the UN Human Rights Commission in Geneva in September accused of racially discriminating against Indigenous communities during the Northern Territory intervention.The final report of the UN's special rapporteur on Indigenous rights, Professor James Anaya, found the intervention limits the rights and freedoms of Indigenous people in breach of Australia's international obligations.It follows similar preliminary findings during a visit to Australia last year.The report does not discuss the Federal Government's planned changes to the intervention because they are not yet complete.Professor Anaya says there is little evidence that measures such as welfare quarantining actually work, and he welcomes planned changes.

UN's intervention report finds racial discriminationUpdated Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:33pm AEDT