APOLOGY
TO THE ABORIGINES ON THE STOLEN GENERATIONS
One of the
recommendations of the 1997 Bringing Them Home report
was for Australian parliaments to offer an official apology. A decade later, on
13 February 2008, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd presented an apology to
Indigenous Australians as a motion to
be voted on by the house. The apology text was as follows:[40][41]
I move:
That today we honour the Indigenous peoples of this land, the
oldest continuing cultures in human history.
We reflect on their past mistreatment.
We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were Stolen Generations—this blemished chapter in our nation's history.
The time has now come for the nation to turn a new page in Australia's history by righting the wrongs of the past and so moving forward with confidence to the future.
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.
To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry.
And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry.
We the Parliament of Australia respectfully request that this apology be received in the spirit in which it is offered as part of the healing of the nation.
For the future we take heart; resolving that this new page in the history of our great continent can now be written.
We today take this first step by acknowledging the past and laying claim to a future that embraces all Australians.
A future where this Parliament resolves that the injustices of the past must never, never happen again.
A future where we harness the determination of all Australians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, to close the gap that lies between us in life expectancy, educational achievement, and economic opportunity.
A future where we embrace the possibility of new solutions to enduring problems where old approaches have failed.
A future based on mutual respect, mutual resolve and mutual responsibility.
We reflect on their past mistreatment.
We reflect in particular on the mistreatment of those who were Stolen Generations—this blemished chapter in our nation's history.
The time has now come for the nation to turn a new page in Australia's history by righting the wrongs of the past and so moving forward with confidence to the future.
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.
To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters, for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry.
And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry.
We the Parliament of Australia respectfully request that this apology be received in the spirit in which it is offered as part of the healing of the nation.
For the future we take heart; resolving that this new page in the history of our great continent can now be written.
We today take this first step by acknowledging the past and laying claim to a future that embraces all Australians.
A future where this Parliament resolves that the injustices of the past must never, never happen again.
A future where we harness the determination of all Australians, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, to close the gap that lies between us in life expectancy, educational achievement, and economic opportunity.
A future where we embrace the possibility of new solutions to enduring problems where old approaches have failed.
A future based on mutual respect, mutual resolve and mutual responsibility.
A future where all Australians, whatever their origins, are
truly equal partners, with equal opportunities and with an equal stake in
shaping the next chapter in the history of this great country, Australia.
— Kevin Rudd, Prime Minister of
Australia, 13 February 2008, at a sitting of the Parliament of Australia.
The text of the apology did not refer to compensation to
Aboriginal people as a whole, nor to members of the Stolen Generations
specifically. Rudd followed the apology with a 20-minute speech to the house
about the need for this action.[42][43] The government's apology and
his speech were widely applauded among both Indigenous Australians and the
non-indigenous general public.[44][45]
Opposition leader Brendan Nelson also delivered a 20-minute
speech. He endorsed the apology but in his speech Nelson referred to the
"under-policing" of child welfare in Aboriginal communities,
as well as a host of social ills blighting the lives of Aboriginal people. His
speech was considered controversial and received mixed reactions. Thousands of
people who had gathered in public spaces in around Australia to hear the
apology turned their backs on the screens that broadcast Nelson speaking.
In Perth, people booed and jeered until the
screen was switched off. In Parliament House's Great Hall, elements of the
audience began a slow clap, with some
finally turning their backs.[46]
The apology was unanimously adopted by the House
of Representatives, although six members of Nelson's opposition
caucus left the House in protest at the apology.[46] Later that day, the Senate considered a motion for an
identical apology, which was also passed unanimously. Beforehand, the Leader of
the Greens,
Senator Bob Brown, attempted to amend the motion to include
words committing parliament to offering compensation to those who suffered loss
under past indigenous policies, but was opposed by all the other parties.[47][48]
Legal status and compensation[edit]
The legal circumstances regarding the Stolen Generations remain
unclear. Although some compensation claims are pending, a court cannot rule on
behalf of plaintiffs simply because they were removed, because, at the time,
such removals were authorised under Australian law. Australian federal and state
governments' statute law and
associated regulations provided for the removal from their birth families and
communities of known mixed-race Aboriginal children, or those who visibly
appeared mixed.[49]
Compensation claims have been heard by the NSW Supreme Court's
Court of Appeal in Williams v The Minister Aboriginal Land Rights Act
1983 and New South Wales [2000] NSWCA 255 and the Australian Federal
Court in Cubillo v Commonwealth of Australia [2000] FCA 1084.
In Williams, an individual (rather than a group of plaintiffs) made
claims in negligence arising from having been placed under the control of the
Aborigines Welfare Board pursuant to s 7(2) of the Aborigines Welfare
Act 1909 shortly after her birth, and was placed by the Board with
the United Aborigines
Mission at its Aborigines Children Home at Bomaderry near
Nowra, NSW. The trial judge found that there was no duty of care and therefore
that an action in negligence could not succeed.[further
explanation needed] This was upheld by the NSW Court
of Appeal in 2000.
In relation to whether the action in NSW courts was limited by
the passage of time, the Court of Appeal, reversing Studert J, extended the
limitation period for the non-equitable claims by about three decades pursuant
to s 60G of the Limitation Act 1969 (NSW): Williams v Minister, Aboriginal Land
Rights Act 1983 (1994) 35 NSWLR 497.
The apology is not expected to have any legal effect on claims
for compensation.[50]
Historical debate over the Stolen Generations[edit]
Nomenclature and debate over the use of the word "stolen"[edit]
The word "stolen" is used here to refer to the
Aboriginal children having been taken away from their families. It has been in
use for this since the early 20th century. For instance, Patrick McGarry, a member of the Parliament of
New South Wales, objected to the Aborigines Protection
Amending Act 1915 which authorised the Aborigines' Protection Board to
remove Aboriginal children from their parents without having to establish
cause. McGarry described the policy as "steal[ing] the child away from its
parents".[23]
In 1924,[51] the Adelaide Sun wrote:
"The word 'stole' may sound a bit far-fetched but by the time we have told
the story of the heart-broken Aboriginal mother we are sure the word will not
be considered out of place."[52][53]
In most jurisdictions, Indigenous Australians were put under the
authority of a Protector, effectively being made wards of the State.[54][55] The protection was done
through each jurisdiction's Aboriginal Protection Board; in Victoria and
Western Australia these boards were also responsible for applying what were
known as Half-Caste Acts.
More recent usage has developed since Peter Read's publication
of The Stolen Generations: The Removal of Aboriginal Children in New
South Wales 1883 to 1969 (1981), which examined the history of these
government actions.[3] The 1997 publication of the
government's Bringing Them Home – Report of the National Inquiry
into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from
Their Families[56] heightened awareness of the
Stolen Generations. The acceptance of the term in Australia is illustrated by
the 2008 formal apology to the Stolen Generations,[57] led by Prime Minister Kevin
Rudd and passed by both houses of the Parliament of Australia. Previous
apologies had been offered by State and Territory governments in the period
1997–2001.[58]
There is some opposition to the concept of the term "Stolen
Generations". Former Prime Minister John Howard did not believe the
government should apologise to the Australian Aborigines. Then Minister for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs John
Herron disputed usage of the term in April 2000.[59] Others who disputed the use of
the term include Peter Howson,
who was Minister for Aboriginal Affairs from 1971 to 1972, and Keith Windschuttle,
an Australian historian who argues that various abuses towards Australian
Aborigines have been exaggerated and in some cases invented.[60][61] Many historians argue against
these denials, including to Windschuttle in particular.[62] Anthropologist Ron Brunton also criticised the
proceedings on the basis that there was no cross-examination of those giving
their testimonies or critical examination of the factual basis of the
testimony.[63]
No comments:
Post a Comment