Just Say Sorry
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
OEP 
Joined: 12 Jan 2007
Location: Perth
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| spoljar wrote: | Or should each person receive funds directly, say a sum of money that is perhaps allocated directly to them. Lets say for arguments sake, $1 million for each indigenous person. Would this benefit them more or would it infact be counter productive considering some of the cirumstances that the majority seem to be in eg poor health, education and alcohol and drug abuse!
Want to see what everyones views are on this as at the end of the day, after the apology is made, some action needs to be taken. What is the best way to go about it? |
Just giving money to someone isn't enough. Before anyone can truly put money to good use they have to be taught how to correctly invest it. By that I don't mean in shares or houses, etc, but how to distribute what they receive in a way that supplies them with basic living needs (ie: food, petrol, rent, etc).
That education should be supplied along with any monies supplied, and you never know it may just help those that need it to live a better quality of life.
_________________
A Collingwood supporter since the egg was inseminated. |
|
|
|
 |
Dale61
You can't have manslaughter without laughter.
Joined: 17 Apr 2002
Location: /home/room/chair
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Well, there's no point in posting the URL of where that 'message' came from, is there?
It was a leaked memo from about mid 2001. It was doing the rounds of Parliament House, and was quickly swept under the carpet once it was made public. It was allegedly written by one of Little Johnny's staffers.
_________________
Whale
Oil
Beef
Hooked |
|
|
|
|
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I hope to be as smart as HAL in 2001. |
|
|
|
|
Piethagoras' Theorem 
the hypotenuse, is always a cakewalk
Joined: 29 May 2006
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Dale, your post seemed to suggest they were your own words. That's the impression I got. I believe that's what most others would've thought.
_________________
Formally frankiboy and FrankieGoesToCollingwood. |
|
|
|
|
Alec. J. Hidell
Joined: 12 May 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Am I the only one who doesn't think racism is funny?
People who think this type of shit is all in good fun are sick
_________________
The one man in the world, who never believes he is mad, is the madman. |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| spoljar wrote: | I just wanted to get some opinions regarding funding for the Aboriginal community. From the research that I have done, it appears that the money allocated for the indigenous community, is not actually getting to the people that require it the most.
Does any know why? Is this another State vs Federal issue? Is it a small percentage of 5% pocketing most of the money?
Who should allocate the funding? Should it be various leaders of each tribe that can ask for the funding required that they believe will directly benefit their particular tribe. At the end of the day, I would imagine that each tribe have their own requirements as such and each tribe is uniquelly different. Or would perhaps the issue of greed play a role with the leaders as what happens through most races, white, yellow, black, whatever.
Or should each person receive funds directly, say a sum of money that is perhaps allocated directly to them. Lets say for arguments sake, $1 million for each indigenous person. Would this benefit them more or would it infact be counter productive considering some of the cirumstances that the majority seem to be in eg poor health, education and alcohol and drug abuse!
Want to see what everyones views are on this as at the end of the day, after the apology is made, some action needs to be taken. What is the best way to go about it? |
I was talking to a bloke late last year who told me he was a maori chief who had moved to Australia to get away from the pressure. He described how back in NZ, the government had handed over large sums of money in reparations to the tribes. His tribe set up a government trust with the money and had a council that allocated the interest each year. (principle stayed invested). Most went to essentials for the tribe, health; education; cultural things and what was left was allocated according to a wish list/order of merit drawn up so that each got a turn. Some would get a new car, house deposit, whatever.
Other tribes blew the cash on luxury items for the elders.
He's travelled around Australia a fair bit to conferences and seen a bit of the Aboriginal issues and while he believed the government here needed to do something similar with reparations, his comment was "FFS don't give em the money wihout having some oversight from an appointed council with white involvement or they'll just piss it all away".
It may soundf paternalistic, but if you give a group of people who are used to having bugger all, access to a large sum of money with no governance, it's a recipie for trouble.
I'm sure someone will call me racist for this, but the old saying about give a man a fish you feed him for a day; teach him how to fish you feed him forever comes to mind.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
Zakal
One Game, One Club, One Jumper
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Agreed Stui, throwing money (and by money i mean cash or equivalents) at a problem isnt always going to make it go away.
Ive spoke to a few NZers and those who've worked in various indigenous support roles who share a similar few.
I also knew a guy who ran a kind of general store in the NT, and part of his job (not sure why or how it came to be so) was to distribute (or perhaps it was just to cash) the social welfare cheques from the government, and he had done this for a good many years.
He was saying that what happens all to often is that as soon as the particular person banking (or receiving) their cheque gets their money, it gets spent very very quickly. And it wasnt always of the person's own volition.
After a while he made arrangements with some people to hang on to their money for them (either in an account, or whatever) as a way of semi-forced saving. This worked for a while until it got out in the community at large that he was saving money for certain people, and the people for whom he was saving the money returned with groups of their friends and family to demand the money be released as their friends/family were a little short this week and needed some help for their "rich" friend/brother/sister/son/daughter/cousin or whatever.
Very soon the savings accounts for those he thought he was helping were back to a zero balance, and thats pretty much where they stayed.
Money on its own is not the answer. People are far better being destitute (financially) but surrounded by access to quality healthcare, education etc than having a few thousand dollars in the bank living in a slum.
Does that sound paternalistic? of course it is in a way...but then again its only an extension of the society we all live in. We all (well most of us) pay taxes etc so the government can provide us with certain social necessities. Personally, id be pretty pissed off if instead of giving me money, the government decided to 'spend it for me'...i always prefer tax cuts and rebates to "improved spending in Area X"....but unfortunately i dont see there being much of an alternative. |
|
|
|
|
John Wren 
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| stui magpie wrote: | | spoljar wrote: | I just wanted to get some opinions regarding funding for the Aboriginal community. From the research that I have done, it appears that the money allocated for the indigenous community, is not actually getting to the people that require it the most.
Does any know why? Is this another State vs Federal issue? Is it a small percentage of 5% pocketing most of the money?
Who should allocate the funding? Should it be various leaders of each tribe that can ask for the funding required that they believe will directly benefit their particular tribe. At the end of the day, I would imagine that each tribe have their own requirements as such and each tribe is uniquelly different. Or would perhaps the issue of greed play a role with the leaders as what happens through most races, white, yellow, black, whatever.
Or should each person receive funds directly, say a sum of money that is perhaps allocated directly to them. Lets say for arguments sake, $1 million for each indigenous person. Would this benefit them more or would it infact be counter productive considering some of the cirumstances that the majority seem to be in eg poor health, education and alcohol and drug abuse!
Want to see what everyones views are on this as at the end of the day, after the apology is made, some action needs to be taken. What is the best way to go about it? |
I was talking to a bloke late last year who told me he was a maori chief who had moved to Australia to get away from the pressure. He described how back in NZ, the government had handed over large sums of money in reparations to the tribes. His tribe set up a government trust with the money and had a council that allocated the interest each year. (principle stayed invested). Most went to essentials for the tribe, health; education; cultural things and what was left was allocated according to a wish list/order of merit drawn up so that each got a turn. Some would get a new car, house deposit, whatever.
Other tribes blew the cash on luxury items for the elders.
He's travelled around Australia a fair bit to conferences and seen a bit of the Aboriginal issues and while he believed the government here needed to do something similar with reparations, his comment was "FFS don't give em the money wihout having some oversight from an appointed council with white involvement or they'll just piss it all away".
It may soundf paternalistic, but if you give a group of people who are used to having bugger all, access to a large sum of money with no governance, it's a recipie for trouble.
I'm sure someone will call me racist for this, but the old saying about give a man a fish you feed him for a day; teach him how to fish you feed him forever comes to mind. |
yes, the maoris got a huge payout as a result of settlement of treaty of waitangi claims. one tribe, tainui [hamilton region] put it into casinos, the warriors league team and other investments and lost a truckload. ngai tahu [south island based] bought fisheries [ironic that!] and other shrewd investments and are doing very nicely.
interestingly, nz'ers are pretty much bound by the treaty of waitangi and if nothing else, their indigenous race fare a lot better than ours. Maori is an official language and all govt depts must incorporate the principles of the treaty in all their outcomes.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
bwphantom
It's Better to Burn Out Than to Fade Away
Joined: 15 Mar 2002
Location: Brisbane QLD
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The difference is that most NZ'ers have embraced the indigenous culture and have integrated it as NZ culture.
What have australians embraced of Aboriginal Culture?
I am not saying all NZ whites are non racist. But at least they have worked hard on integrating culture.
Seems us Aussies are a bit slow.
_________________
All this may be summed up in one word - CHARACTER - and if that is not worth developing, nothing is.
Jock McHale |
|
|
|
|
John Wren
"Look after the game. It means so much to so many."
Joined: 15 Jul 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ government driven. there are still lots of pockets where 'once were warriors' is a reality.
_________________
Purveyor of sanctimonious twaddle. |
|
|
|
|
Zakal
One Game, One Club, One Jumper
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wasn't NZ colonized in a completely different way? On my understanding New Zealand wasn't considered Terra Nullius, which means the more 'usual' British method of colonization of partial assimilation of the culture was used....thus from the very beginning the Maori people were given more recognition (not to be confused with equal recognition) than the Australian Aboriginal peoples were. |
|
|
|
|
Culprit 
Joined: 06 Feb 2003
Location: Port Melbourne
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I never heard the German people say I wasn't around in WWII so I should not apologise for the holocaust and what the Government did back then.
Will anything change after we say sorry? In my opinion no, but it’s the start and for the opposition to say they should be consulted is laughable. When they were in Government they ignored this as an issue. |
|
|
|
|
Dale61
You can't have manslaughter without laughter.
Joined: 17 Apr 2002
Location: /home/room/chair
|
| Post subject: | |
|
A small tub of yoghurt has more culture than White Australia!
_________________
Whale
Oil
Beef
Hooked |
|
|
|
|
David 
to wish impossible things
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: the edge of the deep green sea
|
| Post subject: | |
|
What do you mean by culture, exactly?
_________________
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange |
|
|
|
|
Zakal
One Game, One Club, One Jumper
Joined: 04 Nov 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Culprit wrote: | I never heard the German people say I wasn't around in WWII so I should not apologise for the holocaust and what the Government did back then.
Will anything change after we say sorry? In my opinion no, but it’s the start and for the opposition to say they should be consulted is laughable. When they were in Government they ignored this as an issue. |
Maybe the actual parties in power should have to apologise as well, as im pretty sure all major parties had a hand in the policies in question. After all "the Government" as an entity is a piece of legal fiction. Its formed by a party (or coalition of parties) which is formed by people (mostly now dead).
You cant extract an apology from a dead person, but the Parties and Government "live" on (in their curious legally ficticious way). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
