Sadly, my view is that it’s going to fail, but it will take time to become obvious.

Brian, I share your view to the extent that all problems will not be solved in the life of the current government. However I see it is a potentially fruitful circuit-breaker.

Howard has put his hand up to own this problem. That is a precedent we haven’t seen before. If the expectations arising from such can be firmly nailed to someone’s hide in Canberra and the other capitals then we may see some improvements.

Brough has been freely promising that money is no issue. Only Minchin so far has been left with furrowed brow. Australia may at last own up to its responsibilities here.

If it is true, as you fear, that governments are impotent in cases such as these then it’s still worth a shot - in case you’re wrong. We are only spending Minchin’s money.

I do not believe that the public servants and volunteers (black and white) who will be on the ground - who will be the ablest and best motivated of their cohorts will do harm. They may do good. (And all these experts who claim to have been marginalised by Brough, will very soon find themselves more than welcome to participate, I’m sure.)

A 40-year-old man has been charged with abusing two teenagers at the remote Aboriginal community of Maningrida, one of 60 communities the federal government will now control under its plan to stamp out child sex abuse.
It is alleged the indigenous man assaulted the two males, aged 14 and 19, on May 21 this year at the community, about 500km east of Darwin.

He has been charged with assaulting a person indecently, attempting sexual intercourse with a child under 16 years, attempting to procure a child under 16 years and indecently assaulting a child under 16 years.

Earlier this week, three teenagers from Maningrida were committed to stand trial over the alleged rape of a 12-year-old boy over five months at the community.

And I believe it may not be impossible that an injunction would halt the mobilisation until Brough did the following:

[The Minister may not act until]

(b) any incident that the Minister determines, in writing, to be an incident in relation to which this Division applies.

It is not unlikely that someone with legal resources may care to require Brough to act legally.

(1) This Division applies in relation to the following incidents:

(a) the bombings that occurred in Bali, Indonesia on 12 October 2002 (local time);

(b) any incident that the Minister determines, in writing, to be an incident in relation to which this Division applies.

(2) Before making a determination under paragraph (1)(b), the Minister must be satisfied that:

(a) if the determination would relate to an incident occurring wholly outside Australia and Norfolk Island–one or more Australian citizens or Australian residents have died in or as a result of the incident; and

(b) it is appropriate in the circumstances for this Division to apply in relation to the incident.

(2A) The Minister must not make a determination under paragraph (1)(b) relating to an incident occurring wholly within Australia or Norfolk Island unless:

(a) the Minister suspects on reasonable grounds that the incident involves the commission of:

(i) an offence against a law of the Commonwealth; or

(ii) a State offence that has a federal aspect; or

(iii) an offence against a law of a Territory; or

(b) the Minister suspects on reasonable grounds that victims of the incident are persons of a kind with respect to whom the Commonwealth Parliament has power to make laws; or

(c) the Minister is satisfied that the incident is or has created a national emergency.
_____________________________________

The term “national emergency” has been used by Brough and Howard in relation to their intervention in NT. This is a precise term. Yet there has been little discussion of its legal standing. Indeed, as far as I can tell neither Brough nor Howard have explained what they mean by it.

The above section of the Cwth Crimes Act appears to be the only relevant use of the term in Cwth legislation.

As should be clear, this section serves as a fairly faithful template for what Brough has indeed done in relation to the NT exercise.

I have highlighted the relevant clause. It is clear from that clause that the minister cannot declare a “national emergency” unless he suspects “on reasonable grounds” that there has been an offence against the law of the Territory.

There are at least three observations that can be made:

1. It would appear that the Federal government would have difficulty doing the same thing in a state.

2. So far as I know, the minister has not revealed the particular incident or incidents that constitute an offence.

3. The declaration of a national emergency necessarily entails the expectation of criminal prosecution and punishment.

So who does Brough expect to prosecute and to punish? And why hasn’t he told us?

Howard was getting mangled in the WorkChoices grinder and was desperate for a rabbit out of a hat -he needed an issue that he could initiate that would see him as a protagonist on the pre-election stage.

I think with the NT intervention he got it. Certainly, this is now getting plenty of traction with plenty of lather in the meeja, especially of the basketweaving kind.

But this is a Good Thing. It has raised the profile of this ongoing abomination of a slow genocide to what ad people call top-of-mind awareness. For a time, anyway.

The worst thing that will happen is that Johnny Howard’s short attention span will focus on soemething else and the media caravan will move on.

I do not believe Howard about it all being a long-term policy. That is because he himself knows he will not be around long-term to see it through.

The timing of the report militates against the Howard agenda of a wedge in time for the election. While he had to move in concert with the release of the report it was too early, and he shot his bolt, so to speak. This issue will work itself out and be spent to be useful for him.

However, if it all pearshaped then the rabbit out of the hat will become the Killer Rabbit of Caerbannog.
And that is not unlikely.

In the end, out there on the street where Steve at the Pub lives, it does not matter that much anyway. It never has before, why should it now?

There is a growing opinion amongst the profession that dealing with sexual abuse is a highly specialised field, and personal maturity is an essential prerequisite.

Absolutely true and this is complicated further by the language barrier and trust issues between white workers and their potential clients. The best I can see coming from this approach is a 6 month lull where abuse is pushed underground. If there are a lot (it will take a massive funding increase) of programmes put in place to deal with offenders and victims, and to address all of the social factors such as substance and alcohol abuse then there will be actual change.

Leigh Sales on Lateline perpetuated the myth that “nothing else has worked”. Programmes already exist, with proven results, developed by and for indigenous people- they simply have not been funded and rolled out to all communities.

My view is that consultation is needed at all levels. Brough seems to have only consulted Sue Gordon of the National Indigenous Council amongst Aborigines. Brough has had a range of interactions since he took over the portfolio, but going on what he says, seems to have been very impressed by the experience of one community where they put in coppers and one woman consequently came forward. As a result a group of 13 men was identified who were having excess influence in the community and using threats and power to gain access to young people for sex. He has stated that organised paedophile rings exist in 45 communities. There may be some issues of definition, but Wild/Anderson found no evidence of any.

Sue Gordon’s role has been challenged by Larissa Behrendt, and particularly her willingness to overlook Brough’s obsession with taking over Aboriginal land. On ‘Australia Talks’ the other night he said that they’d had to take over half of the Northern Territory.

Phillips is not speaking on his own behalf, but was one of nearly a hundred peak organisations which met and sent a letter to Brough about their concerns. One of their central concerns was the land issue which Brough has not explained properly, or at all, and which is justifiably a source of suspicion and mistrust.

Phillips himself was stressing the need for communities themselves to reset social norms and rebuild from within, calling on outside services for help as required.

There’s the rub, I think. Wild/Anderson talk about the breakdown of social norms, in some communities to the extent that incest, which violates the Aboriginal ’skin system’ and would typically be punished by death, happens and seemingly can’t be stopped.

Putting police in communities won’t stop it either. Police may do something here and there to suppress overt violence and other adverse patterns of destructive behaviour. But often it will just push them further underground.

The real difficulty, it seems to me, is that some communities, given the power relations within, are unable to rebuild viable social norms.

Which leads me to think that a circuit breaker from outside is in order. It does seem that Brough is going to send in people for community consultations before sending in the cops. But the rhetoric has been wrong, as has the approach of applying standard solutions which seem very punitive and are likely to produce great resentment. Wild/Anderson say the every case of child abuse is different. The issue is so sensitive that reporting doesn’t even happen to people who are non-threatening and culturally sensitive.

So a differentiated approach at community level and within communities seems essential.

My daughter, who works with adult survivors of sexual abuse, tells me that anyone can be a social worker and this is a problem. There is a growing opinion amongst the profession that dealing with sexual abuse is a highly specialised field, and personal maturity is an essential prerequisite.

Which brings me back to Fred Chaney’s notion that this thing will stand or fall on the quality of the personnel they put in the front line. Wild/Anderson emphasise emphasise building the necessary skills and structures over time.

Brough’s big bang approach has given the issue the necessary profile to loosen the treasury purse strings to a degree that might be somewhere near what’s required for the first time in our history. But the break-neck pace is incompatible with quality and the need to release and build positive power within the communities.

Sadly, my view is that it’s going to fail, but it will take time to become obvious. But look, I’m not close enough to know really, so don’t take any notice of me.

Sorry for a post-length response. I had been thinking of a post on the ultimate powerless of external power to effect social change within communities, but I don’t have time.

It is sickening to read people who are talking about politics, almost as if willing failure on the first actual attempt to combat widespread child molestation in aboriginal communities.

Many of the posters here are perhaps not people of action, having only ever talked about things, are accustomed to long periods of carefully consultation & reflection before anything is done, where failure is wiped away by having a story ready to explain “unforseen outcomes�.

Failure to act in this case has real, horrific, physical consequences for children. It is likely that those who oppose this initiative are ones whose contribution to society does not extend to the tangible, and whose removal from our country would not cause hardship for society.

Steve, as for myself I hope Howard’s plan works, and were I in a position to do so I’d be the first to stick my hand up to volunteer to assist. However, not being a doctor, nurse, teacher, child protection worker or law enforcement officer I think I’d only be getting in the way.

Having said that you seem to be of the view that because something must be done, and this is something, it deserves unfettered and uncritical support. Yet it has become increasingly clear after a few short days that Howard and Brough don’t have any plan as such, but are simply making it up as they go along.

And really, given the form of this government and six months out from an election you could hardly blame people for thinking ‘hang on a minute’. Still, much good may come from it as the government is now in a position where it has to commit large amounts of money to the problem, and it has really focussed people’s minds on what is without question a national scandal.

It’s called politics.

Child rape is not on the menu here Christine.

Your comment is stupid, sour, and if you said it here, despite my best efforts to keep you safe, you’d be at risk of being deservedly flattened.

Although I’m sure you run a very fine establishment which doesn’t profit from and contribute to the misery of indigenous communities, there seem to be a few retailers and individuals who are quite happy to do so.

I’m sure I’d be happy to drink there were it not for your propensity to threaten to knock people’s blocks off every time they disagreed with you, a tendency you seem willing to demonstrate time and time again.

Get a grip.

IS your problem with alcohol a real one, or a smart-alec attempt to have a shot at my profession? There is no intrinsic problem with alcohol, it is with the “breed of the brutes”. That is, most people I have to physically evict I can pick by their eyes on the way in, BEFORE they have touched a drop.

Kim, not often I am accused of singing from the same song sheet as Noel Pearson, hehe. Though we have many things in common, our opinions have always been fundamentally at odds.

If I sat on barstool watching life pass by, sport, I wouldn’t be in the position I am today. Though I suspect from the commentary above, that there are many who contribute little more than that to the progress of this country.

Child rape is not on the menu here Christine.

Your comment is stupid, sour, and if you said it here, despite my best efforts to keep you safe, you’d be at risk of being deservedly flattened.

You are a VERY sick puppy.

And I’m disappointed that besides Pearson & Sue Gordon, there has been hardly any other decent interview on Lateline with other indiginous leaders, or or other experts in the field.

Nevertheless, I found his dichotomised view of things quite depressing, as I said at Hoyden:

When the transcript is out, if you can read it fairly and find a single instance of him according legitimacy to any criticism, I’ll be prepared to discuss modifying that characterisation, wbb. “With me or against me� was really the thrust. I was extremely disappointed both at the simplistic and dichotomised thrust of his remarks and the failure of Leigh Sales to question him rigorously.

An appalling state
Welfare bureaucracies must make way for change

OF all the criticisms levelled at John Howard for his call to action to break the cycle of sexual violence in Northern Territory Aboriginal communities, the most intriguing is the petulant stand taken by West Australian Premier Alan Carpenter.

While other state premiers have agreed to second police officers to the NT effort, Mr Carpenter continues to refuse. He says WA does not have any spare officers and if it did, they would be used to protect West Australians. His admission that WA was, for the first time, building police stations in some remote communities is merely an admission of long-term neglect.

Queensland, which at first refused, will now contribute police, along with NSW and Victoria. The mean spirit being exhibited towards the federal Government’s plan by some state leaders in part reflects the difficulty that other jurisdictions have had in coping with the same problems. Mr Howard’s plan is at sharp odds to the welfare and rights-based approach favoured by state bureaucracies. While new measures are being trialled in WA and Queensland, the fruits of non-intervention were on display yesterday in the results of an audit of Queensland’s 32 indigenous councils, which revealed more than $5 million of “unrecoverable” debt, including loans to council members and their families. On the scale of horrors, missing money cannot be compared to the sexual abuse of minors. But the audit demonstrates how a culture free of responsibility and discipline has failed. Mr Howard’s big advantage is the recognition that the status quo is broken. State premiers should snap out of it and follow the federal Government’s lead.

Moralistic and Evangelical, just like those Missionaries who ran Noel’s Community on Cape York back in the 50’s and 60’s - a perfect companion to Howard’s Nostalgic views of the same period.

He’s making my Blood Boil - sounding Shrill …

Nice one, Frank.

He’s making my Blood Boil - sounding Shrill and sounding more and more like Howard.

No Doubt Transcript will be up later.