It’s a while since we’ve discussed this, and as an issue it’s largely being pushed to the sidelines by our very own presidential-style election campaign. However, Mal Brough getting heckled by the indigenous community in Darwin seems as good a hook as any to hang some general discussion on.
Perhaps it was describing their visiting relatives as “blow-ins” who cause social problems that made them so hostile.
Another part of that story that raised my eyebrows:
Mr Brough also announced $6 million from the Aboriginal Benefit Account to fund a crocodile farming business and a business development zone at the remote community of Ramingining in East Arnhem Land.
“This is about creating real jobs and real wealth from the Northern Territory’s natural assets,” he said.
“It is part of a new way of thinking that can allow remote Aboriginal communities to make a real contribution to the Northern Territory economy.”
Because my first question certainly is: who is going to own this crocodile farm and business zone?
It seems like naked asset grabbing to take money from the Aboriginal Benefit Account unless the local indigenous communities are going to own it.
For information on other issues relating to the NT intervention, Lauredhel has a variety of links:
- Marion Scrymgour made the Charles Perkin oration last week. Her speech covers a lot of ground, and crucially points out that for an intervention which was justified as a means to combat child sexual abuse, there is a curious omission which simply has not been widely enough publicised:
In the 500+ pages encompassing the “National Emergency Response�? legislation, the words “child�? or “children�? are not mentioned once. The legislation does not address any of the 97 recommendations of the report, and as Pat Anderson, one of the authors of Little Children are Sacred, has said: “There is no relationship between their emergency powers and what’s in our report.�?
- The Maningrida people have launched a legal action against the constitutionality of the Government’s intervention plan, particularly against the plans to seize and reassign the assets of their community cooperative, the Bawinanga Aboriginal Corporation, but also against the abolition of CDEP and the permit system.
Mr Munro says abolishing the permit system could also be devastating for the wider Maningrida community.
“There will be an influx of people to communities likes Maningrida, and those people will include recreational tourists like fishermen and hunters, grey nomads. Also much less desirable people like grog runners and drug dealers, door-to-door salesmen. And none of these people intend to visit any benefit on the community at all.�?
- November 17 will be an International Day of Action :
One week before the Australian Federal election, on November 17th, various groups across Australia will be taking action to show opposition to the Federal government’s intervention into the Northern Territory. We hope that those outside Australia will join us in calling for an end to this government, an end to racist, colonialist policies towards Indigenous people, and support for the strong self-determination that Indigenous people demonstrate every day.
With allegations that the Australian Federal government is manipulating international media about the intervention, it is vitally important that information about the intervention and views of Indigenous people in the Northern Territory are widely disseminated through social justice networks. Please use your community and activist media to promote the interests of Indigenous Australians, and Indigenous people worldwide!
How can you hang a ‘general discussion’ on what a ‘group of people’ expressed on a single occasion? What about the numerous expressions of support (e.g. from Noel Pearson) for Mal Brough? Why not hang a ‘general discussion’ on those?
The 3 links are likewise partisan views that don’t contribute towards a ‘general discussion’.
Quote: ‘We hope that those outside Australia will join us in calling for an end to this government, an end to racist, colonialist policies towards Indigenous people’.
This is nonsense. Whatever Brough is or isn’t he is no racist.
Who is running the crocodile farm? You ask the question but leave it hanging. Who has the expertise to run it? Even if it is not owned by bthose working there - that I don’t know - the jobs created and the skills acquired would be useful. Do locals already have the skills necessary to manage this project.
Presumably you get a warm inner glow from labelling the Coalition racist and attributing the worst possible motives but how does that help indigenous people looking for jobs and relying on an investment of capital?
I thought we were in an ‘election period’ where caretaker conventions apply. Or is this just a promise to be fulfilled sometime in the future?
Seems pretty dodgy to me.
Well done Tigtog.
Pat Dodson is worth a very good listen, as well.
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/awaye/stories/2007/2063337.htm
Actually, I asked who was going to own it, seeing as it’s being funded with money requisitioned from the Aboriginal Benefit Account. And I leave the question hanging because there is no announcement as to who is going to own it.
Seeing as how you are conflating ownership with management, hc.
Forget Brough. Come 25 November he will no longer be minister for indigenous affairs. He can talk throgh his hat about crocodile farms, Crocodile Dundee or Crocodile Rock, for all that it matters now, which is not at all.
Start thinking about how Jenny Macklin will handle the portfolio.
Bough’s personal views are immaterial on this point.
What matters is the nature of the laws he administers.
1. Brough administers laws that punishe behaviour on the basis of race. Individual Aborigines risk penalties for doing things that their white next door neighbours would not be punished for. That’s racist.
2. Brough administers laws that unilaterally weakened a form of property that was unique to Aborigines. That’s racist.
What about the numerous expressions of support (e.g. from Noel Pearson) for Mal Brough?
Good point, Harry. Because the Pearsons, who support Brough, are being given a dream run in the Australian and Fairfax and we need to hear more from people like Pat Dodson and Marion Scrymgour because otherwise we are not being given a diversity of views.
Tigtog, You don’t answer the point? Why present this very specific incident as the basis for a ‘general view’? Whatever else it is - it is not that.
I am not ‘conflating’ anything. I am saying even if it was managed by the Commonwealth there is potential value for indigenous people. Maybe the issue of management and control is tied up with issues of expertise.
You don’t say who’s going to own it but then launch an accusation of theft.
Katz, Why play word games? The crockadile farrm is an asset designed to provide indigenous jobs. What’s wrong with that?
Spiros - its a critique of Brough, no mention of Macklin. Rudd has ‘me-tooed’ Howard on NT policy and I would not expect any different response anyway.
Helen, But why present this particular view as a ‘general view’?
All of you why not hold your hands outstreched and count the number of fingers. Don’t let irrational preconceptions guide your analysis of indigenous affairs.
And the reason for the lack of diverse views, is we are in caretaker mode, election now on,which means the unsettling reality for some in authorising statements on behalf of the candidates and the non -candidates have been set up to be over-exposed as Aboriginal spokes people before and during an election.The Murdoch Uncle Rupe Empire generally as working journalists are simply not committed as journalists to an outcome that doesnt please their senses of journalism and what the working hours imply.The nature of the superior work ethic and motivation of Libs and Murdoch journalists is something they will mount as superior and independent compared to NT. natives,in expressions they deem worthy of being the final say on any passing day. After all being a Liberal means business..doesnt it!? And, Murdoch is one of the most powerful business people in the world isnt he!? There is the answer!? The natives of the NT. havent been minding their own business when the Liberals intervened,and what Murdoch journalists and others like them do..is point out that Aborigines need their noses rubbed into it!? Make sure you comb your nasal hairs before Murdoch photographers take a photo of you!? Otherwise it could be paparazzi instead and you would need to speak a second language!? What that would be for Murdoch s isnt something I could guess!? Rudd, may know,and he advises regularly..doesnt he!?
Harry, you are beating up a strawman. I presented the story as a hook for general discussion, not as a “general view”, whatever the hell that may be.
There’s a lot to discuss about the NT intervention, and perhaps if you took your culture wars helmet off you might be able to see to type clearer arguments.
Oh dear, I always love it when the uninformed comment from the safety of distance…so I’ll feel free to contribute my little knowledge from even further!
As I understand it (an I’m currently in Cape Town, SA), the Croc Farm at Ramingining (in central Arnhem land) will be owned and managed by locals in partnership with a Darwin businessman who has owned and operated a number of similar farms around the Top End of the NT for some time.
I think it is right to express concerns about asset-grabbing by the current government and the biggest concern here will be the theft of CDEP assets from organisations that have built up substantial commercial enterprises, created real jobs, purchased real assets (boats, helicopters, road plant etc) and will now be at the real risk of having these assets and jobs effectively stolen from them.
Don’t forget also that in any situation - including the current re-invasion of the NT outside of Darwin - there will be Aboriginal people and organisations looking for opportunities in the chaos, and the crocodile farm may well be one such opportunity - another may be that many of the corrupt operators of small local community stores may be driven out and that local communities may (though this doesn’t appear to be the government’s aim) actually be able to take control of these essential services.
And goodbye to Mal and his cronies - including Noel Pearson who is about as qualified to talk on the situation in the NT as I am to discuss quantum physics.
Robert - thanks for sharing your local knowledge.
I’m glad to hear that the proposed farm will have some local indigenous ownership. Your points about the confiscation of CDEP assets are exactly why I wondered whether they would be excluded from any ownership. I’m glad to hear that I was being too cynical in this one small instance, although it doesn’t alleviate the broader point that the theft of CDEP assets and jobs is still a disgrace.
I see where Mal has also called for the Darwin town camp of Bagot to become a ’suburb’ as distinct from a town camp as the term is used to describe the areas administered by Tanganyere Council in Alice Springs.
Since the Larakiah have lost their land claim to some of this area of Darwin I am left wondering if Bagot will be re-cast as a place for home ownership, mutual obligation etcetera.
It’s worth remembering that the some of the announcements of funding, like the crocodile farm, while sounding like Govt funding commitments, are in fact not. The ABA belongs to Aboriginal people. Brough’s announcement is simply that Aboriginal people are investing in a crocodile farm. The ABC described it as “the Fed Govt has pledged $6m”. I’d imagine that this would remain Aboriginal property, unless the Govt does actually throw in some funding, in which case it could be transferred to Commonwealth ownership.
But the Govt has been dipping into the cookie jar for it’s intervention. Brough has decided that some of the measures are to be funded from the ABA. For instance the management of the 5yr leases is to be via a mechanism funded through the ABA. So, not only do Aboriginal people have to wear a measure they don’t suppot, they must also pay for it.
Most interesting was a recent episode of Difference of Opinion where the anger of both Olga Havnen and Lowitja O’ Donoghue at the intervention/land grab was palpable.
What has been left of the show, on site, is unreflective of the mood amongst the audience who have been pretty much edited out. Question time has been deleted, completely, while Sue Gordon gets a very big free kick to push government policy.
Still, you get some sense of the frustration amongst many in the indigenous community who feel that just one side of the debate is being told. The hc view is hardly questioned in the meedja while he spys bias on a slightly left blog. Please. Check out the forum section on the Aunty site.
I would not call trust-held land “unique to Aborigines”. You are probably (as most folk do) conflating the Aboriginal Land Rights Act with the Native Title Act. The two are separate and operate very differently. The ALRA only applies in the NT and if you ask me, is a cause of disadvantage.
I note tigtog that while you mentioned Scrymgour you failed to mention Allison Anderson, a fellow Labor MLA. She’s another of the NT’s several aboriginal MLAs and represents a central Australian constituency. She is strongly in favour of the intervention.
As for the CDEP, it did provide jobs. But it also drove down local wages by subsidising wages of some businesses and councils. A lot of the jobs simply aren’t viable. It doesn’t help that it’s hard to get onto the land in the first place.
My more general thoughts: http://chester4solomon.com/posts/the-tyranny-of-the-faraways/
and on Scrymgour / Anderson: http://chester4solomon.com/posts/onya-allison/
“A lot of the jobs simply aren’t viable”.
J. Chester, so absolutely correct.
700 staff appointed, so far, according to Olga Havnen, in the intervention/land grab. Of these, 300 are Centrelink staff…… ‘The viable ones’. Form filler help will surely improve things markedly.
Thanks for that clarification Jacques.
This state of affairs, of course, makes the Howard government’s actions in regard to Aboriginal property even more racist. To weaken a title specific to Aborigines is reacist by implication. To rescind on the basis of race common titles is explicitly racist.
Well intentioned or not, a land grab is a land grab.
And lumping Allison Anderson and Marion Scrymgour together, just because they’re both influential Aboriginal women, is not helpful either.
They are both incredibly different people with different experiences. As Clare Martin said, they are out there representing their electorates.
There have been genuine positives to come out of the in
vasiontervention in the centre as Anderson sees it, whereas Scrymgour’s mob in Nguiu got dudded big time in their deal, and they’re not happy about it.I read the article which said Rudd had a secret plan to can the intervention once he gets in.
I certainly hope so.
“The ALRA only applies in the NT and if you ask me, is a cause of disadvantage.” - Jacques
I can’t fathom how having economic rights to your own land is much of a disadvantage.
Because the communities don’t have economic rights to their own land. The Land Councils do. Because individuals are beholden to aparatchiks in Darwin and Alice Springs. Because trade & commerce is impossible. Because media cannot get reporters into communities without sucking up the aforementioned apparatchiks. Because there’s no oversight. Because there’s no way to invest.
I have very strong feelings about the topic, so it might be best if I left my remarks at that.
It is possible to support elements of the intervention and to be disgusted some of the things being done.
Alison Anderson talks of grandmothers being able to sleep at night. No one but an insensitive fool would deny them that right.
Marion Scrymgour talks of rights being trampled and land being taken by a government that seems determined to cause division. She is expressing a view shared by most who know anything about the way the intervention is proceeding.
When all of the dust settles the people who will pay will not be the politicians or the commentators. CDEP programs in the NT employed something over 8,300 people on amounts only a little more than the dole. They were contributing to their communities and were proud to be employed - not dole bludgers. On the best estimates that I have seen to date a maximum of 2,000 of these people will move to ‘proper’ jobs. 6,300 people will be without any employment or prospect.
CDEP is definitely not a perfect program but it did provide a chance for people to work for a wage. It is not being stopped because it failed but because the Feds can’t take half of CDEP wages as they can for other welfare payments.
The question of employment for people living in remote communities is difficult and complex. It is also important and deserves real thought and consideration rather than some half baked approach that simply knocks off the program so that a completely separate agenda can be pursued.
Thanks Jacques.
I think most of those concerns aren’t well substantiated. CAEPR (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research) suggests that collective ownership produces better economic outcomes for Indigenous people. I’ll see if I can find the link.
That the lack of individual ownership is the primary explanation for Indigenous disadvantage doesn’t appear to be a case argued from the apparant facts, but one from doctrinal preference. Many former cattle stations, on what is now Aboriginal lands, struggled to make a go of it for a variety of reasons. Continued economic hardship is more a continuation of that same struggle with remoteness, poor infrastructure and small populations, rather than a reflection of the inherent shortcomings of land title arrangments.
I’ve never really understood whole ‘reporters can’t get on Aboriginal land’ thing. I see news crews out there all the time. Maningrida had something like 90 seperate media visits in June-July. And if I recall correctly, they issued over 10,000 entry permits for 2006, with only 6 applications rejected.
David,
I agree. If you read both Alison and Marions’ comments, they don’t disagree with too much. They just seem to be talking about different aspects of the intervention.
For me, this is the most crazy thing about the whole intervention. Brough could have made it an absolute winner. There are no shortage of Aboriginal people who would have been enthusiastic supporters of a plan to address the issues in a co-operative manner, indeed they have been requesting action for decades. Instead Brough chose to go about in a way that bred opposition, most of it quite justified, by targetting unrelated issues that have been long-held conservative goals, equating opposition to aspects of the intervention as supporting child abuse, and all in a style best described as ’self-indulgent conspicuous compassion’.
I know you are busy running for election Jacques but on re-reading your comment I have to respond.
Those apparatchiks are actually employed by the representatives of the people. You may not like their decisions. Neither might I on occasion but then it is not my land - nor yours.
It has been my experience that there is no lack of desire among Aboriginal people for economic development on their land. Rather, the problem has been that there just aren’t squads of business people desperate to get out there. I hope that the intervention brings a few who aren’t carpetbaggers. That would be a positive.
As for media access I have observed the reality. A request comes in to a group of traditional owners. ‘Is he that bloke who wrote all those lies about … Tell him no.’ Or ‘does this mob normally tell the truth? OK let them come.’
“I have very strong feelings about the topic, so it might be best if I left my remarks at that.”
Yeh, thanks Jacques, you wouldn’t want to waste all your energy patronising Leftys, when door knocking is such a valuable tool and good for the wasteline.
It has probably been a surprise to you on this fleeting visit to see that others might have a few clues on matters you are undoubted master. Na, you would not want to take in others views…. they may get in the road of your ready preconceptions.
Nice to see some reason and informed comment from David and Michael among the clutter!
Just on the ABA ‘pot of gold’ that Brough has his arms grasped firmly around - have a look at the deal done in Alice Springs where $4 million (if my memory serves me correctly) has been taken from the ABA to fund the redevelopment of the local swimming pool (part of, I believe an $8 million job to which the Feds, the town council and the NT government have contributed).
The ABA ‘contribution’ has been justified on the basis that greater numbers of Aboriginal kids will use the pool - I have no idea how that idea was arrived at and what current or projected use by local Aboriginal people might be but I have some concerns that this money is being used for and whether any real benefit will flow to local Aboriginal people - particularly the kids - will there be dedicated learn-to-swim classes for local Aboriginal kids for example?
I agree with Michael’s comments about Brough’s (and Howard is in this up to his neck as well) bull-headed approach really rubbing many people up the wrong way - the whole notion of ‘intervention’ rather than ‘cooperation’ set the seeds of failure and pain in this show right from the start.
I too hope that some positives flow from this but it is a bloody hard way to win hearts and minds if you steal their land, open their towns to any blow-in and pinch their money. I also agree with David about the media access issue - up until very recently the mainstream media had little more than passing interest in issues on the ground outside of Darwin or Alice (unles there was a riot or rape) and while some of the recent comment has been thoughtful and considered, much of it still seems driven by Ministerial briefings and releases rather than a genuine attempt to find and report worthwhile news.
I’ve just had a quick look at Jacque’s home page for his candidacy (following his link above) - I’d noticed his comments in the past but quickly passed over them as being more concerned with beating up on blackfellas rather than being interested in progessing their lot - after looking at his comments on his site I see that little has changed. A tip Jacques - rather than just visiting Aboriginal communities and complaining about the “…hell on earth. Poverty, grog, violence, dependency” try to spend some time with the people that live there and go out on country with them - you just might learn something.
Good luck with the election Jacques - I think you’ll need it.
Haven’t noticed a hell of a lot cf concern in the NT, the states, or federally in such a long time about encouraging or facilitating representative Aboriginal input and engagement (that isn’t directed, controlled, piecemeal, tokenistic, ignored) into community development issues.
The ALC’s, native title claimants, other traditional owners and local community representatiives are pretty much it in NT in 2007. Why, I wonder?
Go cry your crocodile tears elsewherem Jacques.
And don’t have the nerve to blame Aboriginal people for your larger, stronger, infinitely more powerful and richer communities’ fuck ups.
hc, you say
Really? So why did he suspend the Racial Discrimination Act to get this bill through? Because it is racist and it would have contravened the Act. So suspend the Act, change the rules to allow racist legislation to pass.
Good post Tigtog. I can understand why the Maningrida community is so pissed off - one of the the Little Children are Sacred Report’s recommendation is that their successful Community Action Plan - going for nearly 1 year - be implemented across all communities.
Instead, Brough pulls the funding for it!! Then he sends in the police and army to Maningrida to “ask them what they want” and supposedly to “protect their children”. Well, this is what the MCAP was doing. Brough can’t pretend he doesn’t know this detail - it is in the report. Brough is a shyster and a hypocrit.
Pearson’s “model” is still not even proven across the Cape York communities where it is supposed to be operating, despite all the grandiose claims that are being made about it.
There is no evidence that removing the permit system will provide ANY benefits - and anecdotal evidence that this will provide plenty of negatives. Brough said “it wasn’t protecing children so we got rid of it”. This is moronic. Following this logic, speed signs aren’t stopping speeding so we should get rid of them all too!!
We need a treaty, recognition of indigenous Australians in the body of the Constitution, and we need a process that empowers and engages the indigenous community, not one that takes their lands and tramples on their rights.
Good news, the question time is there, it’s just that the layout of the page and the titling of the transcript parts is misleading. (I’ve exchanged email with the ABC person, who says they’re looking to rectify the problem). The different bits of the transcript are simply marked “TRANSCRIPT”, instead of “Part 1″, etc.
Here ya go.
My favourite bit? When Gordon panicked and blurted out “What I am feeling is that there’s a move that people don’t want change for traditional people in those remote communities.” Surrounded by committed Aboriginal activists, I thought this was a rather brave move.
So are you able to give a direct link to the question time from that show lauredhel?
I am still unable to catch that part of the replay/transcript.
Cheers.
“When Gordon panicked and blurted out “What I am feeling is that there’s a move that people don’t want change for traditional people in those remote communities.â€?
Indeed. This was a critical moment in the debate and broadcast.
Why. Well it unearthed the kind of whitefella moral panic (supported by Gordon) for so called ‘traditional people’.
Just who decided when degrees of remoteness should be an indication of ‘traditionality’ and thus more deserving of national attention?
Bear in mind most ‘remote’ youth did not speak their traditional languages but rather share an interest in the same popular culture as their urban cousins of the same age.
When self determination does not exist for Australia’s first nations people this vortex of externally imposed definitions becomes the norm, the accepted, but also the unspoken of’.
Gordon’s jibe was interesting in that she positioned herself not being traditional but something else that was not an authentic Aboriginal. Instead she declared herself to be something that was ‘legal’ and thus objective’ and non racialised or radicalised.
Black moderate intellectualisation is the new Black in the white political fashion world.
Not an Aboriginal person but something that once was an Aboriginal person no defined by white laws and protocols and ethics.
This was a very dangerous positioning that spokes directly to the assimilation and white privilege that she also purports to fight against.
Not quite white and not quite black but authentic enough for white governments to use and support their own agendas. The acceptable, middle class professional Aboriginal with moderate views (about taking responsibilities) .
Abandoned are those middle class professional Aboriginal people and leaders with apparently “radical views� (about Rights) and who were apparently brainwashed by the white Left.
Tigtog:
Listened to Marion Scrymgour’s Charles Perkins Oration on ABC Radio National. She certainly did tell some home truths.
This blatant misguided half-cocked disgraceful attempt to re-steal Aboriginal land has serious international implications for all of us. Wonder what excuses we will hear from Mr J Howard and Mr M Brough WHEN the United Nations Intervention Force compels the Commonwealth Of Australia to withdraw from the so-called Northern Territory and grant it independence?
That’s the sort of thing that happens when you let mediocre draughts players get into a chess competition against winner-takes-all master players.
Re Jaques Chester
I rarely bother to read inevitably remote delivered exchanges of ignorances I encounter on sites where Aboriginal advancement issues are discussed; it is too painfully frustrating an exercise, but on this occasion I encountered one Jacques Chester who clearly knows his stuff.
Jacques, there are things happening that you should be a part of. Please contact me on tonyryan43@gmail.com, or (07) 54 754 009.
As to the issues raised above; CDEP hides grotesque Aboriginal unemployment and stifles local enterprise, thus preventing the growth of a local and regional economy. Without a regional Aboriginal economy there can be no genuine freedom, self-determination or self-support. Without these there can be no pride or dignity. And, yes, I was there when CDEP commenced and objected accordingly.
And ABTA: this was intended to fund viable Aboriginal initiatives; all of which died under CDEP. The croc farm proposal is manifestly neo-colonialism and plundering of local resources.
The NLC and other land councils were always intended to introduce western style leadership and representationalism, and smother the original and traditional clan consensus protocols. For those whose propagandisation successfully launches approval of representationalism, please consider alternative phraseology… who in their right mind would elect a person who owes them nothing, to do their thinking for them.
It is putting power over your own life into the hands of another and, inevitably, this power will corrupt vis a vis Lord Acton’s observations. Sum up politicians?
Finally, Allison Anderson, unlike other “Aboriginal” MLAs and lobbyists, speaks a number of Aboriginal languages; demonstrating that she is culturally Aboriginal. Those who do not are merely trading on colour and, by definition racist, ruthless, unethical and exploitative. Of course you can disagree with me, and redefine anthropology while you’re at it.
Speaking of anthropology, give some thought to the reality that only a handful of anthropologists bothered to learn Aboriginal languages. So how do they manage to define what they cannot see? Not unnaturally, they hate Elkin and other competent anthropologists who disparaged monolingual pretenders and poseurs.
Ahhh, that felt good.
Kindest regards, and sorry to butt in,
Tony Ryan