Prev
Next

Abbott slams Rudd team’s robotic lipservice

Mark Kenny

by Mark Kenny

13 Mar 06:00am

Must Reads

Facebook’s being a boob over breastfeeding pics - this is a caption

Facebook’s being a boob over breastfeeding pics

100

Don’t blame the beautiful game for riot shame - this is a caption

Don’t blame the beautiful game for riot shame

35

Can you be a “different kind of girl” when you’re 53? - this is a caption

Can you be a “different kind of girl” when you’re 53?

22

Filed under: Election 2010, Kevin Rudd, Politics, Tony Abbott

86 comments

FORMAL acknowledgement of the first Australians as the original owners of the land is now de rigueur for Rudd Government ministers and MPs. It usually goes something like this: ``I would like to recognise the original owners of the land upon which we meet and acknowledge them as the oldest continuing cultures in human history.’‘

Illustration: Jon Kudelka

It is intended as a heart-felt gesture of respect and has been received well by all concerned. But it is now being uttered so often and in such a pro-forma way, whether it be at the start of a National Press Club address, or an opening of one event or other, it has begun to ring hollow.

Even among strong supporters of the Aboriginal cause, there is a sense that the acknowledgment, sometimes trotted out with all the emotion of an instruction to stow your tray table and put your seat-back in an upright position, is devaluing the poignancy of Mr Rudd’s historic apology to the Stolen Generations.

Not one to beat about the bush, Tony Abbott says he has had enough. Fearlessly reviving a conservative bugbear of the Keating period, he has spoken out branding it a left-wing ``genuflection to political correctness’‘. The feisty Liberal leader this week passed the 100 day mark in his ``no guts, no glory’’ push to become Australia’s 27th prime minister.

In an exclusive interview with The Punch to mark the milestone, Mr Abbott weighed in following what he viewed as a particularly ill-judged Prime Ministerial acknowledgment delivered at the AMA annual dinner the night before.

``Kevin Rudd is not an old style lefty ... but the Labor Party is full of people who are, and I guess this is the kind of genuflection to political correctness that these guys feel they have to make. Sometimes it’s appropriate to do those things, but certainly I think in many contexts, it seems like out of place tokenism, and last night at the AMA dinner, I think that’s certainly how it struck people.’‘

The comments are typical of the crash through or crash approach being adopted by the Liberal leader and go a long way to explaining his current effectiveness.

Abbott knows he has little time to get voters to sit up and listen and that he has just one shot at this.

Thus, he is gambling on the political rewards of using direct simple language outweighing the risks of offending some people. Early returns are good - amongst Liberals anyway. Mostly it is unreconstructed populism anyway - how else to explain his sudden embrace of generous paid parental leave after previously saying he would never support it? Not to mention that it is to be funded by a new tax which he promised he would not resort to just weeks before.

In comments targeted mostly at South Australian voters who go to the polls next weekend, he lashed out at Kevin Rudd’s modest progress in securing water for the Lower Murray. Capitalising on simmering resentment in the central state, he says Rudd is ``all announcement and no follow through’‘.

By contrast, he promised a referendum if up-stream states failed to refer powers. ``I would regard us as having, in a very important respect failed, if we hadn’t solved or were on the verge of solving theses issues within the first term.’’ Sound familiar? It’s an undertaking oddly reminiscent of Mr Rudd’s 2007 promised referendum for a full federal takeover of the public hospital system if the states failed to lift their game.

Abbott didn’t stop there. There was the thinly disguised suggestion that Kevin Rudd is either lazy or disorganised because he doesn’t publicly exercise - even the PM could find an hour for a quick bike ride or run - and the claim that the PM is both ``big-headed’’ and little more than a ``federal premier,’’ a ``down-market Bob Carr’‘.

There’s little doubt the Government is worried about the Abbott threat - you can tell just by how often its staffers tell you otherwise.

But there is also a now some optimism returning to their analysis. They couldn’t believe their luck when Tony Abbott announced his paid parental leave scheme viewing it as his first significant speed wobble.

Like a dot-com company that had grown too fast to have proper internal control systems, the PPL decision, spilled out on Monday without reference to either the party-room or shadow cabinet, betrayed a tendency to impulse often associated with the Abbott persona. For a bloke who deposed a former leader largely for not observing party-room sentiment, it was crazy-brave.

For the Government, it came with another benefit as well. In breaking a commitment to impose no new taxes, Abbott’s PPL announcement neutered two of the Opposition’s most telling lines of attack on the Government - ie that it has broken promises and increased taxes. Abbott somehow managed both inviting the charge his policy is ``a great big new tax on everything’‘.

The PPL policy may be superficially popular because it trumps the Government scheme in its generosity, but the decision was strategically naive. Abbott’s explanation that he made ``a leader’s call’’ was unconvincing.

Whether it will prove to be ``fatal’’ as one Government staffer concluded, remains to be seen. Unlikely you would think. But at the very least, it has shortened the leash Abbott’s colleagues have him on. Some say he was put on notice in the party-room: one more cheap trick like that and you’ll be fending off rumours and rumblings of discontent just like your predecessors.

Most commented

330Is it sexist? We've got nothing to compare it to
298It takes selective memory to call Howard era a golden age
296Why do our universities teach shonky "magic"?
249Gillard's mapping a route but will probably still be routed
172Friday dilemma: Should smacking be illegal?
170A comedy of errors that's not very funny
163Julia Gillard is on the highway to the danger zone
147Outlaw bikies cannot be judged outside the law

86 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Bob says:

      07:00am | 13/03/10

      What?

      I’ve had all kinds of people acknowledge the traditional owners in all sorts of places, but because the PM talks like a robot he isn’t allowed to do it?

      Reply

    • persephone says:

      08:48pm | 13/03/10

      Our local shire has begun every public funtion - including all council meetings - with this acknowledgement for several years now, and if anything was slow in introducing it, compared to surrounding shires.

      Abbott’s churlishness about a a sentence or two tacked on to the start of a presentation shows how reluctant he is to really accept the place of Aborigines in our society.

      It’s a very small polite gesture which costs noone anything.

    • Robert Smissen of Rural SA says:

      11:33pm | 14/03/10

      Persephone when it is repeated so often it tends to lose sincerity

    • persephone says:

      07:00am | 15/03/10

      What, like singing the National Anthem before every sporting game?

    • Louise says:

      09:24am | 15/03/10

      Persephone,  the national anthem is very rarely sung at sporting events.  The Wallabies do it, because they represent the country.  National anthems are only ever played at AFL events during the finals season, as to the NRL I presume that this is the case as well.  Its also very rarely played or sung at the cricket.  When it is played at sporting events it has relevance to those who attend as it is a relatively rare event and the playing of it therefore has consequence.

      In terms of acknowledgment of aboriginal lands and traditional owners - why is it necessary to have that acknowledgement spouted at every opportunity and in what are generally circumstances which are not appropriate to the acknowledgement.  When at every two bit gathering of government departments or ministers its simply “spouted” and not said with any real feeling.  It’s tokenism pure and simple and people are starting to realise that.

    • persephone says:

      09:32am | 15/03/10

      Which is why the players never seem to know the words.

    • DG says:

      11:37am | 15/03/10

      persephone:

      I agree.

      Acknowledgment of country is no more onerous than a simple “thank you”.

      The repeated use of the words “Thank you” does nothing to deplete their meaning. The tone, and apparent apathy, of the speaker can, and often does, deprive those words of sincerity. That says more about the speaker than the words.


      Lousie: The reason for acknowledgment is largely cultural. Aboriginal people place substantial important on where a person is from, They are known by reference to their lands, not by a flag or totem or anything like that, the land. In that context is is completely appropriate that it is repeated regularly.

      If it helps you to understand the significance, it may be of interest to know that even when our local Aboriginal community gets together for a meal or anything like that, we always have an elder do “welcome to Country” for any of our brothers and sisters that are not of the local community.

      For example: I am a Wiradjuri man. I appreciate that the elders take the time to welcome me, and other visitors, to Tharawal land at formal meetings or other gatherings. 

      If there are no Tharawal elders present it is appropriate that another elder, or the host, acknowledges the traditional caretakers of the land.

    • John A Neve says:

      07:44am | 13/03/10

      I don’t know who came up with this very strange idea in the first place, but they were misguided.

      “Original owners” what rot, they may have been here when caucasians arrived, but so what?  Were there people here before them, what tribe are we talking about, how much land were they on, were they of one race or a mixture? So many questions and ver few answers.

      We would be one of, if not the only country that carries on with this “origanal owners” rubbish. Think of the shambles in the world if all countries went down the “origanal owners” path.

      Reply

    • Christian Real says:

      09:29am | 13/03/10

      John A Neve, You, my friend appear to be the only one misguided by your diatribe about our people,our ancestors,and knowing you as I do, I would have thought that you would have not been the type or calibe of person to do such a thing.
      “The Traditional Owners” of the land were here,in this Country long before White European explorers ever set foot upon this Country’s soil.
      Also the word is “Traditional Owners” John, not “Original owners” as you have written in your comment.

    • monkeytypist says:

      10:51am | 13/03/10

      Firstly, John, it’s actually a very easy business to find out who is/are the traditional custodian(s) of the land you live on - but I very much doubt you have ever bothered to find such a person, much less speak to them in person and understand the stories of the land you live on as passed down through the generations.  Secondly, our country has a unique history.  Are you suggesting that the dispossession of indigenous Australians isn’t a part of that history?  Are you suggested that our uniqueness as a country should not at any cost be reflected?

    • Christian Real says:

      02:52pm | 13/03/10

      John A Neve,
      It is “Traditional Owners”, my friend, not “Original Owners” as you have written in your comments,but hey we all make mistakes!

    • persephone says:

      08:55pm | 13/03/10

      Every one of these I’ve heard specifically acknowledges the tribe that used to inhabit the bit of land the event is being held on - not a big task, the information is freely available.

      And no, it’s not unique to Australia, but adapted from similar acknowledgements made in other countries (I think, but am not certain, that New Zealand does this, certain states of America and possibly Canada).

      Where there are no tribespeople left, or there is uncertainty as to which tribe lived in the area, a more general form of acknowledgement is used.

      As I said above, it’s a very small gesture but it means a lot to local Aboriginal groups.

    • John A Neve says:

      04:08pm | 14/03/10

      To all those who have rebuked me, I suggest you read the article again. The term uesd is “Original”. But no need to apologize.

      Christain, at no time have I denied your ancesters were here before caucasians. What I did ask, is how do we know, no one preceeded them?

      I also asked what would the world be like if every other country went down the path of “this “original owners” rubbish”.

      Needless to say you all dodged that question, political correctness got your tongues?

    • Eric says:

      08:53am | 15/03/10

      John makes an excellent point, which is predictably ignored by the black armband brigade.

      Every tribe on Australian soil has taken the land from a previous one. The “aborigines” encountered by the first Europeans were simply the latest wave of conquerors.

      Perhaps the “Traditional Owners” should apologise to the “Original Owners” who they displaced, and the “Original Owners” in turn to the “Original Inhabitants”, and so on back to the dawn of time.

    • persephone says:

      09:38am | 15/03/10

      Eric
      no one’s stopping them, so they can do it if they want to.

    • Eric says:

      10:11am | 15/03/10

      So if no one’s stopping them, why aren’t the “Traditional Owners” acknowledging and apologising to the people who came before them?

      I’m seeing a double standard here.

    • Margaret Gray says:

      11:06am | 15/03/10

      “...As I said above, it’s a very small gesture but it means a lot to local Aboriginal groups…”

      Says who?  You?

      That same robust source that proclaims:
      “...I think, but am not certain, that New Zealand does this, certain states of America and possibly Canada…”

      I think, but I am not certain, that you have no absolutely idea.

      But it doesn’t seem to stop you from singularly dominating and blanding out the Punch comments forum every day.

    • DG says:

      12:06pm | 15/03/10

      Eric -

      You are assuming that there were ‘people’ here before the Aboriginal peoples. The fossil record indicates that this is not the case. Humans, related to those we call the Aboriginal people, are the earliest known occupants.

      It is possible, and based on the evidence I would say probable, that the Aboriginal people were the first hominids on this continent.

      The same is true for the Maori of New Zealand - as far as I am aware they are the first Hominids on those islands.

    • Rover says:

      12:12pm | 15/03/10

      The PM uses these words:
      I acknowledge the First Australians on whose land we meet, and whose cultures we celebrate as among the oldest continuing cultures in human history.
      Not “traditional owners” or “original owners”.

    • Felicia says:

      01:05pm | 15/03/10

      To me its about respect. Respect for a people who were the first mariners and explorers. They braved unbelivable odds to get here. They lived their lives simply till we arrived and when the bills come in I envy them. They are a people I feel proud of. Passage here for my convict ancestors was not an easy path either but the courage Aboringals took coming here far bypasses any other intake of immigrants.

    • John A Neve says:

      03:45pm | 15/03/10

      DG,

      Can you say categorically no one was here prior to Christain’s ancestors?

      I love people like you, you believe what you want to believe, tell do you believe in Climate Change?

      Or do you only believe in what suits you?

    • Eric says:

      03:46pm | 15/03/10

      Wrong, DG.

      On the macro scale, Mungo Man is genetically distinct from today’s Aborigines, and indicates that an earlier people were displaced.

      On the micro scale, the different competing tribes of Aborigines have waged war against each other for thousands of years, to the point that every square inch of territory once belonged to someone else. Just like every other human society on the planet.

    • DG says:

      05:08pm | 15/03/10

      Can you categorically say that there were people here before my ancestors some 30,000 years ago?

      As I said there is no evidence that there was. Perhaps I should qualify that as “I have, despite looking, found no information that there were hominids in this Country before the Aboriginal People”.

      If you want to believe that there was, in the absence of evidence, that is your choice. Fossils are rather difficult to find and as such it is possible that there were hominids that did not leave a fossil record.

      I believe in climate change - I’m not convinced that it’s man made. But it’s beyond any doubt that Earth’s climate has changed over the ages. That doesn’t mean that I am against plans that aim at reducing our dependence on oil fuels.

      Eric:
      “Mungo Man is genetically distinct from today’s Aborigines”

      We’ll that’s not completely correct. There is some evidence to suggest as much based on the classification of Mungo Man as as either morphologically gracile or robust. It’s certainly not settled that Mungo man is even a man, let alone morphologically different from modern Aborigines (I raise gender as that is relevant to the assessment of comparative morphological classifications), and on some mtDNA “found” in 2001 that has subsequently been challenged as contamination, and inconsistent with other information available. 

      I agree that there is some degree of rivalry between Aboriginal tribes. But given that Aboriginal people are defined by their land it would seem that this would not support the assertion that such interaction was about the acquisition of land as opposed to other issues between tribes, such as the acquisition of resources, and trade issues.

    • TC says:

      06:28pm | 15/03/10

      I acknowledge the First owners of the car I drive on whose driveway we met.

    • Christian Real says:

      08:04am | 13/03/10

      If Tony Abbott is to be taken seriously and respected as a Leader then he should stop using our people as stepping stones to enhance his political career and political ambitions.
      As part of the former Liberal government that failed to say “Sorry” to our people,I noticed that Tony Abbott fell into line behind his then Leader John Howard and like the rest of that Liberal government did not bring himself to be different from the rest of his colleagues and say the words “Sorry” to our people.
      Tony Abbott, now as Leader of the Liberal party Opposition does not think or feel that it is appropriate for “Sorry Day and other Aboriginal things to be taught in schools across Australia,and yet he has the audacity to pretend that he cares about our people,when all he cares about is himself and his own political ambitions.
      The publicity stunt that Tony Abbott pulled in the Northern Territory when he claimed that he was lost on his quad bike, with out food and water and that our people were lost also.
      Our people would not have been lost in their own country, in their own lands, nor would they have been short of food and water,because they would have known where to find these things.
      An opportunist, a phoney, these are the things that Tony Abbott is, but a Leader he is definately not, and never will be.

      Reply

    • Big Bopper says:

      11:07am | 13/03/10

      I agree with you Christian Real I to think it was a publicity stunt. Tony Abbott never called his wife or 000 he called his press secretary when he was lost. The Liberals have an extremly negative attitude Its No No No for everything. This Maternity leave is a scam to get voter. Why should a checkout chick in Coles or Woolies be paid less to have her child than a high powered executive. Is the Coles ladies baby worth less to Australia? And why should Big Buisness foot the bill? Goods and services will rise as a result and investors will get less dividends. Why invest? Abbott is all for show be it in his skimpy budgie smugglers to his tight lycra bicycle shorts. And his fear of gays I think is a repulsive trait they are humans like you or me, it will only cause problems.

    • Bleary says:

      11:23am | 13/03/10

      You know what? Maybe he doesn’t say sorry because he thinks it isn’t appropriate to apoligise on behalf of other people for things that they haven’t done.Guess what? I’m not sorry either for something that I didn’t do and I didn’t appreciate Rudd assuming on my behalf.
      Maybe if the Aboriginal “industry” spent as much time putting their own house in order as they do playing the victim with outstretched hand for cash handouts,people would have a differing opinion.
      Maybe some of the elders could do their own apology for the appalling physical and sexual abuses of children in the NT and WA in remote communities? No? I didn’t think so either.

    • Simon says:

      09:37pm | 13/03/10

      How is the ALP headquarters today Christian?

    • Lucie says:

      09:16am | 14/03/10

      Why don’t we have a sorry day for white people who were forced onto disease ridden ships in shackles and sent to the other side of the world by force for stealing a loaf of bread to feed themselves. Why is Abbott using “your people” as stepping stones to enhance his political career, but Rudd isn’t?  Rudds “sorry” was all about popularity and winning the election, did he have any interest in aboriginal issues before the last election? NO.

    • Davy says:

      07:02pm | 14/03/10

      So Mr C Real. Who exactly constitutes “our people”. Are you talking about a particular tribe which due to unfinished business may be waring with some other tribe. Are you talking about a colour. Are you talking about a group in oz society who get more and bigger government handouts. Are you talking about people who claim indiginaity even though they could be 15/16ths white.

      There is no “our people” if we are to become australians together.

      Perhaps you need to change your name to “B Real”.

    • Robert Smissen of Rural SA says:

      11:37pm | 14/03/10

      Christian old chum just saying “sorry” & nothing else, mate that is sorry. Are you saying Aboriginals Never get lost? ?Rubbish, most now are townies & like most townies couldn’t find their bum without a roadmap

    • Skippy says:

      08:04am | 15/03/10

      Hmmm Christian looks as though you are on a slippery slope here - so good to see many talking so much sense!

    • Dick J says:

      02:01pm | 15/03/10

      Sorry to whom?

    • wayne says:

      08:30am | 13/03/10

      rudd should stop saying sorry and start delivering results. despite all the talk rudd hasn’t achieved anything, just the illusion of success.
      ps: getting over the gfc doesn’t count as it really isn’t an accomplishment spending money you didn’t save up.

      Reply

    • Brett L says:

      04:46pm | 13/03/10

      it’s too late for Rudd to start delivery now.

    • TC says:

      06:18pm | 15/03/10

      And he’s really really good at “sorry”

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      09:44am | 13/03/10

      The word “SORRY ” has begun to grate on the collective nerves of many Australians. The decisions taken by our forefathers , in pioneering days ,
      in harsh & often dangerous situations, were not decisions which are necessary in this day & age. The so-called “stolen generation ” , was , in fact , a decision taken in what was then considered , the best interests, of children, for those times.
      To have a guilt trip foisted on people of our current generation , by the Labor party , is unbelievably stupid. All it has done is cause resentment among the
      white community who prefer to dispense with the political correctness bullshit and get on with assisting the indiginous people to a better life.
      Those members of the aboriginal people who continue to push the P.C. line are doing a disservice to their people.
                      I firmly agree with JOHN NEVE when he says :  ” Think of the shambles in the world if all countries went down the ” original owners path.
      He is 100% correct.

      Reply

    • Christian Real says:

      03:27pm | 14/03/10

      Wayne Fehlhaber 09.44pm 13/03/10
      Wayne, it appears as though I will have to correct you like I had to correct John Neve..
      It is “Traditional owners”, not “original owners”

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      09:05am | 15/03/10

      Christian Real , no need for any correction , the story uses the word ” original “.  That silly rot just emphasises the extent to which P.C. is being pushed Christian. Arrogance does not enhance your debating skills at all old mate. Bleary has called it right when he suggests that N.T. Elders should make their own apology for the sexual & physical abuse being carried out on their own kids. Former Minister , Mal Brough’s Intervention still has a mammoth task in bringing that problem under control.

    • Snake says:

      11:19am | 15/03/10

      That would be the 2nd time you’ve been corrected on your supposed correction Christian. Read before replying.

      John is right. History is full of “Original Owners” being defeated and invaded and forced to assimilate while a stronger (often more civilised) new-comer takes ownership of the land. You cannot expect every single country to go back hundreds of years just to “acknowledge” those defeated.

      No matter what is said here, the Aborigines, like the Jews, the feminists and the homosexuals will never stop playing the victim card if it gets them what they want.

    • Andy says:

      09:47am | 13/03/10

      Rudd and his symbolism, thats all it is with him. He knows saying sorry was going to appeal to the populist and it has, and he knows that he’ll be given hero status into the future for it. It’s all about Kevin and what will make him popular nothing else. He has had no interest in indigenous issues until he became Prime Minister. Abbott has at least been intersted and involved in Aboriginal issues well before he was Leader of the Libs. His interest and involvement is genuine. Rudds token gestures are fake and so is he.

      Reply

    • monkeytypist says:

      10:48am | 13/03/10

      Mark, are you Catholic? Have you ever been in a courtroom? Because you don’t seem to have much knowledge of the way ritual words work in practice.  Ritual words, by their nature, tend to be devoid of “expression” and “feeling”.  They tend to be recited with a minimum of inflection.  They’re not theatrical performances.  Saying “hello” is a ritual.  Saying “bless you” is a ritual. And - before you get any ideas - I’m not saying that them becoming a ritual means they’re unimportant.  Far from it.  It’s vitally important that traditional owners be acknowledged.  But here’s the thing: acknowledging traditional ownership *should* be as reflexive and unremarkable as saying “bless-you” when someone sneezes.  I think we’ve got a long, long way to go before such an act is devoid of all its meaning. And remember, the people who get to judge whether it’s meaningful are not are the traditional owners themselves, not anybody else.

      Reply

    • TC says:

      02:56pm | 14/03/10

      Ive been out of Australia for a few years and didnt know Australians had embraced the notion you describe. I still havent stopped laughing. “Vitally important”? Go get all theossaurial on those words? What is vital or important about it? This guilt complex, political correctness and self flagellation mixed up with smug self righteousness appears really silly from here

    • nic says:

      11:14am | 13/03/10

      This is what happens when cynical, meaningless gestures are employed to produce warm, fuzzy feelings, they become seen as cynical, meaningless gestures, My family were here on the second fleet. I think 200 years is a bit late to be seeking absolution.

      Reply

    • persephone says:

      07:01am | 15/03/10

      Governments are seen as perpetual legally, regardless of who is in charge.

      Thus present governments, for example, are legally liable for the errors of past governments.

      Rudd did not apologise on behalf of individual Australians, but on behalf of the government and the apology was for specific actions of past governments.

      And if we’re going to get rid of meaningless gestures,  let’s stop singing the National Anthem before major events.

    • DG says:

      01:42pm | 15/03/10

      persephone:

      Agreed - if a hospital kills 50 people and then changes it’s executive, should the hospital be free from responsibility for things that were done by a previous executive? What about a company that pollutes rivers for 50 years, or sells hazardous chemicals (such as asbestos), then has a change of executive. Is the company still responsible?

    • Phil says:

      06:03pm | 15/03/10

      persephone and DG

      Does that mean that Anna Bligh is responsible for Kevin Rudd and Wayen Goss shredding the documents the subject of the Heiner Affair, thus removing any possibility that the young aboriginal woman in questions could be entitled to justice, closure or I fear compensation?

      The day that happens I will walk Sydney to Melbourne in Lycra

    • DG says:

      11:05pm | 15/03/10

      That means that the head of the Qld government is responsible, in that capacity (as opposed to personal responsibility), for anything done by that State in the past yes. And so they should be, lest the concept of Statehood be meaningless.

      Any other interpretation means that Queensland of today is not the same Queensland as tomorrow or last week. How could you ever contract with such an entity to do work for them? How could such an entity employ people without re-appointing every one each day or every few weeks?

      The state in question needs to exist in perpetuity to retain it’s financial record, to be a viable entity for contracting purposes, to operate on a day to day basis and to maintain law and order.

      It’s long established that the change of Government or change in the Management of a company does not involve the setting aside and creation of a new government/company.

    • The Overlord says:

      01:44pm | 13/03/10

      The most mediocre Prime Minister in Australia’s history continues on.  You can fool some of the people some of the time…

      Reply

    • acker says:

      02:14pm | 13/03/10

      OK with acknowledgement of sorry or the traditional owners/tribes land traditional land use, but indigenous tribes should start putting in some rules for when it is appropriate for visiting politician or public servant to use so it does not become over-used and deminishing relevance.

      Reply

    • The Watcher says:

      04:38pm | 13/03/10

      blah, blah, blah is all i hear when the incompetent labour hacks and their union buddies pretend to care about the plight of Aboriginal people. The apology was historic, in the sense that only a left wing loon would have the audacity to disrespect and use a historically mistreated people for his political advantage, by apologising and then forgeting them all over again. Rudd is the fraud and only sensible people know and accept that. Easy to take responsibility for things that happened when he was peeing his pants, but cant even sack that hairless bag of incompetence, Peter Garrett. The issue of service delivery to Aboriginal people has not been done as it should be by both parties, but I dont see Rudd living up to his own incompetent standards.

      Reply

    • Sam Chowder says:

      06:39pm | 13/03/10

      I’m going to rob a bank and then say sorry instead of serving a jail sentence - I don’t know why crims haven’t done this before.

      Reply

    • Eric says:

      03:53pm | 15/03/10

      By “our people,” I assume Christian Real means the ALP.

    • Moira says:

      08:16pm | 13/03/10

      How is acknowledging the original owners of the land an apology? It is an acknowledgment and it is used in a wide variety of places under many and varied circumstances.  How heartily these word are muttered is neither here nor there. The coalition is made up of nothing more than redneck, conservatives with their white blindfolds fastened so tightly the blood can’t get through.  Get a blo*&y life Tony. There is NOTHING offensive about acknowledging this country’s original owners, what kind of person could make an issue of it.

      Reply

    • Christian Real says:

      03:16pm | 14/03/10

      Moira 08.16pm 13/03/10
      Moira, I agree with you,it is an aknowledgement to the Traditional Owners of the land,it is a token and mark or respect to our people.

    • Mr Subramanian says:

      09:59pm | 13/03/10

      As opposed to the previous Government’s method of not saying sorry nor delivering results? LOL

      Reply

    • Peter McFarlane says:

      07:25am | 14/03/10

      Every time I hear some Labor comrade parrot “I would like to acknowledge that we are meeting here today on the traditional lands of the Kaurna people,” I cringe at the platitude.  Why don’t they do something practical?  For example why doesn’t the Adelaide Convention Centre employ aboriginal cultural officer(s), and offer programs to visitors providing real insight to the Kaurna people.  Ditto every major hotel and government building in Adelaide - then I might just believe they are serious.

      Reply

    • Robert Smissen of Rural SA says:

      11:47pm | 14/03/10

      I don’t understand why Gaurna people is spelt with a “K”, what languauge does that come from? ?

    • Skippy says:

      08:21am | 14/03/10

      The ‘welcome to country’ address is merely hollow lip service! I work in natural resource management and every time we have a meeting somewhere there is always this address… ‘I would like to acknowledge the land upon which we meet the traditional owners blah blah blah! What is the point, the address never acknowledges who the owners are, what land it is, it’s just ticking some menial box. It means very little to anyone, but in this industry if you start a conversation without it, you are considered insensitive to traditional owners - whoever they are, and funnily enough many of the Indigenous don’t even know that!

      Reply

    • Christian Real says:

      03:40pm | 14/03/10

      Skippy 08.21 am 14/03/10
      Skippy, The “welcome to Country” address is a token and a mark of respect for the Traditional owners of this land, this Country.
      The only “Hollow Lip service” is coming from Tony abbott and his Liberal hugging cheersquad.

    • Skippy says:

      08:01am | 15/03/10

      Christian I strongly disagree with you - if it was as you say ‘respect for the traditional owners’ they would go to the trouble of at least knowing who the ‘traditional’ owners are - it’s a joke, it;s just carrying on with this rot for the sake of not upsetting Aboriginal people. I have seen over and over again adresses like these given by Aboriginals and they don’t even know the history of the land, that they deem is so scared to them! Go figure, if you guys were serious about ‘your country’ I would have thought you would at least know the heritage. If you want us ‘white fellas’ to respect this sort of stuff get real about it and then you may just convince us that this sort of token act is more than many of us perceive it to be!!

    • persephone says:

      08:22am | 15/03/10

      Skippy

      most of the ‘welcome to country’ addresses I have heard name the tribe.

      Often ‘welcome to country’ addresses for big events, such as conferences, are actually delivered by local Aboriginal people.

      In our shire, a number of tribes claim ownership, so we use the term ‘traditional owners’ - I know there was a lot of consultation with local aborigines as to the form of words they would prefer.

    • Steve says:

      03:45pm | 15/03/10

      Skippy…
      Everything you talk of with regards to this issue revolves around one key aspect… Education!! If you are taught nothing you know nothing, if your fed some disseminating ridiculous propaganda through the mainstream media as personal opinion, then perhaps you may believe you know something. But if you are a traditional owner of lands like the Aboriginal people then all this does not matter as there is only but one belief, the land! They are the land they belong to the land and it is the land that saves them, thank god it is as big as it is because if they were all on Tasmania then they would have been extinct now. But lets not dwell too much on this right now because both you and I know like many others here. This is not about the issue of traditional owners or Aboriginal welfares either… Its election time again and we had to wonder when the Pavlov’s dog button would be pressed from THE DUMBING DOWN OF THE NATION PROGRAMME from mountebank Johnny! We had ten years plus of this very orchestrated cynical programme. First step day one sack all the heads of departments within government, replace with own people. Spent billions on middle class welfare systems… no Aboriginal spending there! Need we go on not one thing done towards reconciliation… why? Because they truly believe they would never have to address the issue and would remain in power, which is what this, whole process is about…. Pavlov dog for Howard battlers… or is it Howard Mugs??

    • Lady Fong says:

      10:26am | 14/03/10

      How more or less proforma is the acknowledgement than ‘good afternoon ladies and gentle, it gives me great pleasure to welcome….’ Do these welcomes ring hollow to Tony Abbott?  It is good to be reminded that Aboriginal people were here first and the rest of us are all boat people. Think back to 1788 and the first fleet. Let’s be kinder to each other more often…better still…make that all the time.

      Reply

    • Christian Real says:

      03:06pm | 14/03/10

      Wayne Fehlhaber 9.44am on 13/03/10,
      Wayne, being a person of Aboriginal origin, I can assue you that the “stolen generation’ was real and not a figment of the imagination like you Liberal die - hards tend to believe and use the spiel “So Called”
      My Grandmother and her siblings were abducted from their rightful family and she was sent to Goulburn at the age of 14 to be a servant in an English household.
      You Wayne, and others might believe the Liberal diatribe, that the Aboriginal children were taken from their families for their own good, but our people’s children were used as servants and slaves for their English masters.

      Reply

    • James says:

      06:07pm | 14/03/10

      Hey Christian. Maybe you should send your family details to Robert Manne. Bolt’s been taunting him for years to come up with 10 names and he has yet to do it.

    • Christian Real says:

      03:26pm | 14/03/10

      Simon   09.37pm 13/03/10
      asks: “How is the ALP headquaters today?”
      As far as I know Simon, the ALP headquarters are still there, they haven’t moved.

      Reply

    • Luke says:

      03:49pm | 14/03/10

      I wish I was welcomed in the UK with the same, land rights and sympathy.

      Reply

    • Nicki says:

      04:17pm | 14/03/10

      Great Tony, this new policy of yours will improve standard of living for all Australians,especially for original owners of this land.
      Love your ideas, my vote is for you .
      I hope you will another another great new policy tomorrow morning.

      Reply

    • Darryl Price says:

      08:29am | 15/03/10

      My family have a landholding going back to 1813, which was legally granted in 1827 by the then NSW government. Every morning when at home we don’t thank the traditional owners of the land. The truth is, they lost the “war” such as it was. And we won. So there. Persephone; a gesture that “costs no-one anything” has no value anyway short of ticking the boxes for politically correct apologia.

      Reply

    • AliceC says:

      04:48pm | 15/03/10

      Are you kidding? They lost the ‘war’. What could they do??? We came with our disease, different culture, language and guns.

      If your family (armed with sticks) went up against another group of people with guns (same number of people as your family), I suspect you would easily loose the ‘war’ too….

      And this ‘legal’ granting of land was by the Caucasian government based on English law and did not give any consideration to the people living on the land at the time.

    • Eric says:

      05:14pm | 15/03/10

      AliceC, what is your point?

      Of course they lost the war. Do you think war is some kind of game, in which everything has to be balanced and fair?

      Stupidity like yours is the greatest weakness of civilised society.

    • cassba says:

      10:19am | 15/03/10

      Enough wiht the references to your shire Persephone!  Who are you exactly?  Bilbo Baggins from the shire of Hobbiton and not the goddess of the underworld, as whom you have been masquerading?

      Reply

    • Zeta says:

      10:34am | 15/03/10

      I wonder if Aboriginies in the Northern Territory, as they struggle to find a supermarket that will accept their welfare cards, and wait around for hours to find a similarly equiped taxi to take them back to their remote communities gain some solace in the fact that they’re acknowledged as the traditional owners of the land at bureaucratic wankfests, sporting medal presentations, political gatherings, and corporate conferrences.

      Christ I know I would. Maybe my brain is just wired white, but I don’t know how Aboriginies do it. They must be genetically predisposed to peace or something.

      Because if I was subjected to that cloying oppression, the constant hypocrisy and totalitarian paternalism, and if my culture had been systematicaly destroyed, when the white Land Rovers drove into my community to inform us more of our freedoms had been taken away to ‘protect the children’, they’d be dodging IEDs.

      I wonder if we’d still acknowledge them as the traditional owners of the land if they ever fought back?

      Reply

    • Skippy says:

      11:48am | 15/03/10

      There is a thing called employment Zeta that would take them off the need for welfare cards, where they could then possibly purchase their own vehicle - it’s called independance. Unfortunately the govt have made many Aboriginals dependant on such schemes, why work when you can have it handed to you? It’s our taxes that support this ridiculous notion of handouts all because of Aboriginality! I’ve grown up in these communities, where it’s black and white quite literally, unless you have some experience of life in remote communities and see it for what it is first hand, you cannot begin to understand ‘how they do it!’ Don’t believe the rot that it’s the doom and gloom you paint it to be! In many cases the violence and abuse stems from too much time on their hands because many don’t work. Of course there is always exception to the rule and many good Aboriginal people out there that do work hard, but in the broarder scheme, I am yet to be convinced that they are hard done by!

    • Zeta says:

      12:11pm | 15/03/10

      Yeah because there are so many jobs you can do in Wadeye, or on Palm Island. Maybe rock stacking? Or dust farming? Rubber band flicking? What are these ‘jobs’ of which you speak?

    • Skippy says:

      12:33pm | 15/03/10

      Zeta you may just be suprised - in the broarder context you know what I mean. I have seen jobs go begging all because of the vicious cycle that is embedded in their culture. Jobs specifically targeted ‘Aboriginality’ have been shelved because they weren’t taken up, and the rest of us would have taken like a duck to water! C’mon get a grip, many don’t want to work, and I am yet to see anyone prove me wrong. I walk down the street in my home town in my lunch break and there are so many Aboriginal people drinking and kids pushing kids in prams! This is all I have seen for years. They have had so much opportunity and as an Elder once said to me ‘my people are going down the drain, they don’t want to work, they want to drink. Yes the government have helped create this mess, but just because they hand you a bottle doesn’t mean you have to drink it!’ I reckon enough said!!

    • DG says:

      01:35pm | 15/03/10

      Skippy:

      It’s a little more complex than that. It means assimilation. There are plenty of Aboriginal people out there that are simply unwilling to surrender just yet. It’s the battle between ideology and practical reality.

      Some, such as myself, see assimilation as inevitable while others seek self determination. Which ever way one chooses to look at it, Aboriginal communities are bound by the western legal system, the young people are lured away with to the western lifestyle and slowly Aboriginal culture dies.

      A few more generations and we will be like the African Americans - we will have become a subculture in the broader social structure. It’s up to the current Aboriginal leaders to make sure that the Aboriginal people retain the positive links to our culture rather than being consumed by hatred.

    • shockedwatcher says:

      01:00pm | 15/03/10

      Far better an apology which for many of us non Aboriginals was heartfelt. I just turned on the miday news on ABC in time to see that silly old Wilson Tuckey say Aborignals should never have been given the vote!! This is appaling and it just goes to show how much of a sham Abbotts little tour of the Outback was. Wake up Mr Abbott, you and your party seem so false.

      Reply

    • Zeta says:

      01:12pm | 15/03/10

      Best be trollan… Did he really? It’s 1:15pm now and it’s still not trending on Twitter. Surely you jest.

    • luke says:

      01:44pm | 15/03/10

      shockedwatcher, this is a comment from abc online,

      An Alice Springs based native title body says it agrees with comments made by the Federal Opposition Leader relating to the acknowledgment of traditional owners.
      “So I guess in one sense it’s kind of now asking the politicians to match us with actions rather than just words.”

      Mr Pearce says he welcomes the debate.

      Tony Abbott is listening to their concerns, stating the facts will help towards making things better.

    • fren says:

      01:52pm | 15/03/10

      My tribe landed in Australia in the 1890s and we have lived in the area for many generations we were forced here by a colonial power and had no choice. In fact we lived off the land and hunted, gather and grew crops and built up housing in our traditional methods. Past generations were born in the area and are buried in the area.  I feel that I am spiritually connected to the land and have a love for it.

      Its Aboriginals desire or the Governments desire to be seperate will ensure that they will never really be accepted into Australia culture. Every time they tick a government form that indicates that they are special people group undermines them as a people. I noticed they even give you the amount ATSI listed as a percent on the my schools web site.

      It really is time to take some drastic measures that are more then sorry

      Reply

    • Matt Stewart says:

      03:15pm | 15/03/10

      I think it would be more appropriate if all levels of government thanked the traditional owners of their pay cheques and perks - the taxpayers of Australia.

      Reply

    • Betsey Bandicoot says:

      04:31pm | 15/03/10

      So Tony Abbott thinks that the formal acknowledgement of the first Australians as the original owners of the land is a left wing “genuflection to political correctness”.

      No one could argue with Tony Abbott’s knowledge of genuflection That is one of those pointless gestures which assume that an omnipotent being is interested in a your body language. Right from the time of Jesus it has provided rich material for satire on hypocrisy.

      As someone who finds great worth in the teachings and life of Jesus, I find it repugnant that each day Parliamentarians have the Lord’s Prayer read and then set about with great gusto to amass a pile of trespasses to be forgiven by the Lord they have just prayed to, and whose injunctions they are proceeding to set at naught.

      Anyone watching Parliament would see that the Christian wannabes are the worst offenders.

      Talk about pointless and politically correct. Fix that one Tony and get rid of the blasphemy.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      05:09pm | 15/03/10

      Well, I maintain that white-man really dislikes black-man because we really don’t understand this country.
      (This may explain our road-toll.)

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Lucy Kippist

lucyjk 07 Feb 12 09:10PM

RT @JenBrockie: A take on social media from India http://t.co/5XCerDTB @tehelkadotcom

Lucy Kippist

lucyjk 07 Feb 12 09:08PM

RT @alaindebotton: So many of our problems would be alleviated if we had 3 or 4 exceptional friends living within a 2 minute radius.

Paul Colgan

Colgo 07 Feb 12 07:22PM

RT @latikambourke: Yes, @PeterSlipperMP is genuine.

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 07 Feb 12 06:41PM

It's terribly unfashionable to admit but my Cityrail train just left on time again

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Interest rate barney barely even rates as interesting

by Tory Shepherd

61

Interest rate barney barely even rates as interesting

Stop all the cheering, cut off the champagne. Prevent the pollies from barking and silence the drums.…

Life slips away while you’re filming it on your phone

by Tory Maguire

70

Life slips away while you’re filming it on your phone

Some friends of mine had lunch on Saturday with a mate who spent so much time artfully composing photos…

Other stuff to be angry about today (with chorizo pic)

by Anthony Sharwood

34

Other stuff to be angry about today (with chorizo pic)

That dopey Spaniard. Three-time Tour de France winner Alberto Contador has been banned for two years,…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: City vs country: What would you change your life for?

Dieter Moeckel says:

We made the tree change from Darwin to Wonbah more than 15 years ago. After fencing, a road, and couple of dams our money was gone. Super is enough to live comfortably. We have geese growing old and stringy the only one that made it to the pot committed Kamakazi by flying into a tree; the chooks are… [read more]

From: I’d rather have a piece of toast than listen to crap lyrics

Erick says:

Led Zeppelin are responsible for my all-time favourite mixed metaphor: "There you sit, sit and stare, like a book on a shelf rusting." (Misty Mountain Hop) I laugh every time I hear it. Hmmm, I believe I've decided what to play on the way to work today. [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

Well, puck me with a fitchfork. The F-word is apparently an acceptable part of Australian speech. That’s… Read more

150 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed