|
|
|
WEB SPACE kindly donated by
|
July / August 2000
Corroboree 2000 - Walk for Reconciliation (back to top)Sydney -- By Babs Fuller-QuinnWhy was I getting up so early on a freezing Sunday morning? Maybe just a few more minutes under the blankets. No, I had to meet, in the City, 30 people from ESORA. (Eastern Suburbs Organisation for Reconciling Australia) Hopefully we would be joined by 60,000 to 100,000 people who wanted to make that walk across the Sydney Harbour Bridge. It was the day of the big walk for Reconciliation. Would the people walk? I had no doubts about commitment when I saw Bondi Junction railway station absolutely packed at 8.30am and then everyone getting off at Town Hall looking for platform 3. Many people carried flowers, some wore Corroboree 2000 badges and others had pinned on black and yellow ribbons. Being a bit over the top, I wore all three. Somehow or other ESORA members did manage to meet up with each other, but getting on the train together was another matter. Packed escalators, packed staircases, packed platforms, packed trains. This will probably be one of the rare occasions when train travellers wouldn't be complaining about the SRA. We were all beginning to realise how the community felt about Reconciliation. It was now truly a people's movement. As we rode over the bridge the spirit of the day became electric. The many thousands of people crossing the bridge waved to us all. They already were taking their first steps in the historic walk. It was all too congested at North Sydney station. "Everyone off at Milsons Point" came the announcement over the train's PA system. Next, we were on the bridge, bumper to bumper with the thousands who had walked from North Sydney; and that's when we too waved at the crowds on the trains as they went by. Flowers, banners, ribbons and balloons fluttered in the sharp breeze but we were soon warmed by sharing the happiness of something so special. And the silence of the tremendous crowd of people was utterly exhilarating. Someone in the crowd yelled out "Look at that" and there on the very top of the Sydney Harbour Bridge was the Aboriginal Flag. Then to our great delight the word SORRY appeared in the sky. Well the 60,000 to 100,000 people I thought might have undertaken the walk was in reality as many as 500,000 people. People voted with their feet, a million of them - and the last walker left North Sydney at 2.00pm. As one of the walkers seen on television said; "Ask Johnny Howard is he looking, has he heard, has he seen?" There is no doubt there is overwhelming support for Reconciliation. We mustn't let the moment pass us by. Capture the moment and work for justice and equity because there won't be Reconciliation without both. MelbourneThe streets of Melbourne were ablaze with colour when the 'Bringing Them Home' rally was held on May 26th. Red, black and yellow flags dominated the scene at the Treasury Gardens for the start of the march and thousands more people joined it as it wound its way through the City to Parliament House. Chairperson of 'Bringing Them Home - Stolen Generation Committee', Alf Bamblett led the march with many of the Wurundjeri people, the Aboriginal tribe who inhabited the Melbourne area before colonisation. A very moving ceremony took place in front of the Parliament House building, white flowers were laid on the steps and one minute silence was observed as a tribute to the stolen generation and to the mothers of the stolen children. Victorian Premier Steve Bracks and other government ministers placed flowers on the steps before addressing the crowd, and the Aboriginal Affairs Minister Keith Hamilton said 'Sorry' on behalf of all members of the Victorian Parliament. Richard Frankland, an Aboriginal songwriter and film producer, spoke about the Aboriginal experiences in the Australian military forces, which he has documented in his award-winning film 'Harry's War'. A member of the stolen generation, Neville Austin, told of his feelings as a stolen child and his eventual re-union with his mother when he was a teenager. He made a plea to acknowledge the past and to protect the children for the future. Earlier in the day an equally moving ceremony was held with the Wurundjeri people and Archbishop Peter Watson among a gathering of several hundred at St Paul's Catherdral. Friday 26 May was a significant day for Melbourne and the rain did not deter the determination of the crowd to support the struggle for justice for the stolen generations, it only added to the poignancy of the occasion. Perth -- By Joan WilliamsIn the centre of Perth on May 31 an estimated 2,500 people on Reconciliation Day crammed into a big marquee in Forrest Place and overflowed into all surrounding points of vantage. Distinguished Aboriginal leader Fred Collard gave permission for the event to take place on the Nyoongar people's land, adding 'We enjoy it at Aboriginal expense or dispossession. We call on the people to help heal these wounds.' Aboriginal children with eager faces proudly held their own work in the colourful banners carried by groups of students from primary schools and secondary colleges from Geraldton in the north to Albany in the south. An historical drama performed by the Aboriginal dance group Panemar moved the audience deeply as they recited the wrongs of the past and called for unity in reconciliation. Police Commissioner Barry Matthews reiterated the word 'sorry' for police mistakes in the past. Premier Richard Court repeated State Parliament's pledge to assist reconciliation, but rejected the idea of a treaty as divisive. The speakers included many Aboriginal men and women who had become role models for their prowess in film and TV, singing, dancing, art, police and community work and academic areas. As Aboriginal parents and children mingled with the crowd, any shyness was soon overcome in the atmosphere of friendship and respect for their achievements in preservation of the land in the past and the sharing of their heritage and culture in the present. The anniversary of Sorry Day was also celebrated in Forrest Place on May 26, with Ningali Lawford as MC, with the spectacular Dindima Dance Company and Yirra Yaakin Aboriginal Choir, Coexistence Choir and prominent speakers. Brisbane, June 4th 2000 -- By Jean O'ConnorIt was an awesome historic gathering - the largest demonstration ever witnessed in Queensland. They came in their thousands to Brisbane from all over Queensland - from Cape York in the north, from the gulf and the far outback to be there on June 4th, to register not only with their feet but with their hearts their response to the call by the Queensland Reconciliation Council to come together and march across the William Jolly Bridge with them. Some seventy thousand people responded. The previous week around 500 thousand Australians had marched across the Sydney Harbour Bridge. Together with the thousands of citizens who responded in South Australia - this passionate response has shown the world that the Australian people themselves are fair dinkum about recognising the injustices of the tortured past and to become personally engaged in the ongoing processes in conjoint deliberations at all levels to lay the design and fabric of a future society where the aspirations of all citizens, black and white can be adequately fulfilled. The journey of this honourable alliance has just begun. The journey will be long and hard and will require faith and fortitude along the way. Together we can do it. Adelaide June 12 -- By Irene Gale AMToday we took part in a wonderful, happy, strong, cooperative Walk for Reconciliation across the bridge over the River Torrens in the heart of Adelaide. The police estimate of numbers was 55,000 and I wouldn't be surprised if there were more than that. The number was mentioned several times during the speeches, so I wondered if that would affect the number which the media later reported. In the event, most of them said "at least 50,000", so it made a change from their usual habit of grossly under-estimating the numbers present. The march was postponed from its original date, due to bad weather then. Because of this the event was not so well publicised, and being a long weekend many had gone on holiday. There were many people who would have been there had they not made prior arrangements, or who were unaware of the new date. However, long after the head of the march reached Elder Park, there were masses of people still streaming across the bridge. A wonderful, memorable (and sunny) day - and the icing on the cake was that an organiser, Shirley Peisley, was awarded an Order of Australia for her work for indigenous people in a wide range of areas of activity (very well-earned!). Shirley has dedicated her life to working for indigenous rights. As a teenager she was to the fore in the 1967 Referendum campaign, having already suffered a great deal of racism. It was very appropriate that she welcomed everyone to Elder Park. We heard many fine and moving speeches and songs, and a good feeling for the future was engendered. Two children, one Indigenous and one white, beautifully read out the Pledge of Reconciliation.
When Dorothy Kotz, State Minister of Aboriginal Affairs spoke, several people called out with suggestions for improvement in (State) Government performance, in particular expressing their distress at the events surrounding the building of the Hindmarsh Island bridge at Kumarangk. Leader of the Opposition, Mike Rann, said that the Prime Minister was "diminishing before our eyes" and described the moving experience of meeting an old Ooldea woman who had been stolen from her family, and then returned to her home land to see native title granted. Uniting Church minister Ken Sumner reminded us that "it's all about the land. Without the land we will die." It was a wonderful day where people shared their vision of a just future, and protested against the past and the present mean-spirited Prime Minister. Many placards called upon him to ‘unchain his eyes'. It's the biggest gathering of people I've ever seen in Adelaide. Surely after Sydney, Perth, Melbourne, Brisbane and now Adelaide - and no doubt many other towns throughout the country - the government MUST get the message!!! Bringing Them Home (back to top)The National Inquiry into the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children was asked to take into account the principle of self-determination. Self-determination is a collective human right of peoples. It can mean many things: freedom from political and economic domination by others, self-government and freedom to make decisions about family, community and country. It can take many forms, from regional agreements to community constitutions, depending on each community's need and aspirations. Scope of the InquiryThe Inquiry had four terms of reference:
The Inquiry found many witnesses were taught to feel contempt for Aborigines. Those who knew their own heritage transferred that contempt to themselves. The Inquiry found that many children were told they were unwanted, rejected or that their parents were dead, when this was not true. The Inquiry found 'assimilation' was rigorously pursued by most authorities and by non-indigenous foster and adoptive families. In particular, children and their families were discouraged or prevented from contacting each other. Indigenous children have been forcibly removed from their families and communities since the very first days of European occupation of Australia. In that time not one indigenous family has escaped the tragic effects. Most families have suffered over one or more generations by the removal of one or more children. The Inquiry also found that conditions of missions, government institutions and children's homes were often very poor. Resources were too insufficient to provide any improvements or to keep children properly clothed, fed and sheltered. Sexual abuse was rampant and the welfare officials failed in their duty to protect indigenous wards from these abuses. Excessive physical abuse was also common. The indigenous community received little or no wages and education was essentially a preparation for menial labour. Human Rights BreachesThe Inquiry concluded that forcible removal involved human rights breaches and the denial of common law protections to indigenous families and children. Governments have a responsibility to respond with "reparation" to those affected. "Reparation" is the appropriate response to gross violations of human rights. According to international legal principles, reparation has five parts.
Source: "Bringing them Home" Report. Help Stop the Land Theft (back to top)You've done the walk, signed a sorry book and pledged yourself to reconciliation. Now it's time to put your commitment to reconciliation into action. When outback Australia was divided into huge cattle stations, many Aboriginal people managed to stay on their land, becoming the unpaid workforce for the cattle industry. However when equal pay was introduced in the 60's, white workers were employed instead, and Aboriginal people had to get off their land. Aboriginal groups struggled for many years to get back small areas of land to live on, and pastoralists have been compensated for this land. To hold title to land, Aboriginal groups must become corporations. However if the Aboriginal corporation then fails to put in annual returns, even when there is no income from the land, the corporation can be deregistered - and can no longer hold title to their land. Many people do not read or write English, understand the requirements or have the means to have the paperwork done for them. Aboriginal corporations are being deregistered without people realising what is happening, sometimes processed through a court in a different state! Currently, 600 Aboriginal corporations face deregistration, or have been deregistered. The loss of connection to land can be significant in any claim to native title rights or access. The dispossession continues. It's up to us!At this stage Senator Herron has no intention of amending the legislation - It's up to us to change his attitude. Write to the Minister and ask, as a matter of urgency, that changes be made to ensure it does not victimise disadvantaged communities; and that there be a review of the deregistrations that have occurred. Write to: Senator John Herron, Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs, Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600. Nuclear Falling Out (back to top)By Marcus PriestDumping the world's radioactive waste in Australia's outback could benefit Aborigines by "economically empowering" them, according to the deputy chairman of the Reconciliation Council. Sir Gustav Nossal said jobs, educational opportunities and a foundation for Aborigines could all flow from Pangea, if they agreed to a global dump on their land. Sir Gustav, Australian of the Year and a consultant to Pangea, said the "many benefits" could include job opportunities in the early survey work, drilling, maintenance and supervision of the rail corridor and the site. His comments, expressed last year at a University of Western Australia's Conference on Nuclear Waste Storage, and reiterated recently in a telephone interview, brought protests from environmental and Aboriginal groups. A leader of a community close to where the dump could be located accused Sir Gustav of not having the Aborigines' welfare at heart. "He is only thinking about himself and this project, not the environmental health of many people in the area," Jigalong Community Council chairman Brian Samson said. WA Greens MLC Giz Watson said Sir Gustav should resign from either Pangea or the Reconciliation Council. She said being a paid consultant for Pangea and deputy chairman of the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation was a conflict of interest. Sir Gustav, also on Pangea's audit panel, has said previously that the Pangea concept would give Australia a "leadership role in solving the problems of nuclear weapons and waste." He went on to say employment opportunities in remote parts of Australia were minimal. "The opportunities for stock work are shrinking and I know a large part of the Aboriginal leadership is very interested in mining development and related projects," he said. "In that context there is a very large scope for a company such as Pangea to be a very significant booster to Aboriginal people in terms of employment generation." But Brian Samson said other ways of developing economic enterprise in Aboriginal communities were needed, rather than putting a nuclear waste dump in their backyard which would have long term environmental effects, not just short term economic benefits. Greenpeace anti-nuclear campaigner Jean McSorely said there was a conflict of ideas, if not of interest, in Sir Gustav's position. "How can he be working for reconciliation between Aboriginal people and the rest of Australia while at the same time asking them to take a large chunk of the nuclear waste of the Western world?" she said. "Sir Gustav has been justly praised for his exceptional work but it is absurd for any community, let alone the Aboriginal community, to become the world's nuclear rubbish bin." Sir Gustav defended the comments, saying he had not been speaking on behalf of the Reconciliation Council. He said he did not necessarily endorse the project - Aboriginal and Australian people generally, had to agree to it. US National Missile Defence Proposal (back to top)Beginning in 1996, the Clinton Administration put forward a three stage plan for developing and deploying its proposed national missile defence. The proposed system is far removed from President Reagan's vision of a space-based shield against all attacks. Instead, the Clinton plan is designed to deal with small attacks of a few tons of warheads at most. Until late in 1999, this was the Clinton Administration's three stage proposal:
A New Goal: "Expanded" C-1In late 1999, however, the Clinton Administration decided to pursue a new alternative, skipping the 20 interceptor deployment and going straight to 100 interceptors, probably in Alaska, in what officials called an "expanded C-1 architecture". Additional upgrades to five early-warning radars were also approved. All 100 interceptors will not be ready by 2005, when the system is scheduled to begin operating; that goal would probably not be reached until 2007. As part of the system, the US plans to deploy a new satellite-based launch detection system called Space-based infrared System High, or SBIRS High. It will replace the current Defence Support Program (DSP) early warning satellites, providing first reports of any missile launch by orbiting high above the Earth to detect exhaust plumes from firing boosters. It could be ready in 2005, in time to work with an initial national missile defence. While significantly improved over its DSP predecessor, SBIRS High does not fundamentally alter space-based detection systems and capabilities. The US also intends to deploy Space-based Infrared System Low, or SBIRS Low, which - if it works- will expand substantially the role of satellites in missile defence. Using two types of infrared sensors, SBIRS Low is designed to track missiles throughout their trajectory and guide interceptors in-flight to the incoming warheads. Deployment of these satellites was scheduled to begin in 2006 - 2007, but is likely to be delayed. It requires a far greater number of satellites, 24, versus six for SBIRS High. More significantly, unlike SBIRS High, SBIRS Low would violate the ABM treaty, which prohibits space-based sensors capable of tracking and providing targeting information to interceptors. Star Wars ReduxMany advocates of missile defence decry the limited nature of the Clinton Administration's goal of a two site, 250 interceptor national missile defence system. Instead, these advocates call for expanded plans that involve space-, sea- and air-based components. Although the capabilities of their schemes are more modest than plans during the 1980s, their proposals hearken back to President Reagan's highly controversial Strategic Defence Initiative. The original "Star Wars" proposal developed under the Reagan Administration called for hundreds of space-based lasers and thousands of ground-based interceptors. it was replaced by "Brilliant Pebbles", which would have involved placing a thousand or more small interceptors in orbit around the earth, each one constantly watching for a missile launch. With the demise of the Soviet Union, and the possibility that new threats could emerge, the Bush Administration developed a new proposal that attempted to deal with a limited nuclear strike or an accidental launch. Called GPALS for Global Protection Against Limited Strikes, this system required three layered components: a ground-based national missile defence, a ground-based theatre missile defence, and a space-based global defence based on the Brilliant Pebbles idea. It is this type of layered system that many missile defence supporters advocate today. however, the extremely high cost of such systems has and will likely continue to undercut support for these proposals. In 1996, the Senate Budget Committee estimated it would cost up to $184 billion to build and maintain a system similar to GPALS. Other missile defence advocates offer alternatives to the Clinton Administration proposal, including sea-based options, proposals to attack missiles soon after launch in what is called "boost-phase intercept", or a combination of the two. These options may deserve further research, but they are not a part of the Clinton Administration decision this year. before a decision is made to deploy any missile defence, however, the four criteria set out by the Clinton Administration must be carefully considered. (Source: Council to Reduce Nuclear Weapons) NMD LettersDear Alexander Downer, The organizations signed below are writing with respect to the imminent visit of US Secretary for Defence, William S. Cohen, to urge you to make the strongest possible expressions of concern with respect to US proposals to deploy a National Missile Defence (NMD) system, which when tested over last weekend failed completely. National Missile Defence has been criticized as being at the same time, both ineffective, probably physically impossible, and at the same time destabilizing. Expressions of strong concern over it have been made at the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty Review Conference in New York, by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, by the European Union, France, Germany, Sweden, Portugal, by the Non-Aligned Movement, by the New Agenda Coalition, and others. Russia has threatened that if the Us violates the ABM treaty, as deployment of NMD would, it will "tear up" arms control agreements to date. China will almost greatly increase the size of its currently minimal nuclear deterrent force if NMD is deployed. Both these developments will lead the world back to nuclear arms racing. Within the US, 50 US Nobel prize-winners (half the Nobel prize-winners in the US) have written to President Clinton to ask that NMD not proceed. the American Physical Society, the top physics body in the US, has expressed the almost unanimous opinion that NMD as proposed is physically impossible. The Australian Senate on 29th June, passed a motion calling on the US not to proceed with NMD. It called for:
In view of both the clearly destabilizing effects of the deployment of NMD and of its highly problematic technical aspects which mean that it will make no contribution (or a negative one) to security of either the US or US allies including Australia, we urge you to make the very strongest representations to Defence Secretary Cohen when he visits this coming weekend. A similar letter with the same signatories was sent to William S Cohen. Signed John Hallam, Friends of the Earth, Australia Australian Government takes step on Debt Relief for world's poor. (back to top)by Mark Zirnsak, Social Justice Development Officer, Uniting Church The Australian Government has responded to the constant urging of the Australian Jubilee 2000 Debt Relief Campaign with a significant step in the right direction. On Good Friday the Treasurer, The Hon Peter Costello, and Minister for Foreign Affairs, The Hon Alexander Downer, announced that Australia would provide 100% debt cancellation for Nicaragua and Ethiopia when they receive debt relief from the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative co-ordinated by the IMF and World Bank. Nicaragua owes Australia $5.7 million and Ethiopia owes Australia $12.6 million. The announcement is in line with earlier announcements made by the US, UK, Germany, Italy and France. The Government statement came three weeks after national actions by the Jubilee 2000 Campaign saw thousands of supporters take to the streets urging the Australian Government to take action. The announcement also declared that the Australian Government has been "strongly advocating that the enhanced HIPC Initiative should be implemented quickly and effectively to enable eligible countries to receive debt relief as soon as possible". Announcement comes as a surpriseThe Australian announcement came as a surprise as in late March the Treasurer had refused to meet with over 40 representatives from ten Churches and three Catholic secondary colleges within his own electorate that went to his electoral office to present cardboard chains signed by more than 3000 supporters of the campaign in the electorate. The Treasurer had also written to the Moderator of the Uniting Church in Australia (Victoria) stating that it was "naive" to believe that debt relief was the whole solution to global poverty. The Jubilee 2000 Campaign has not argued that debt relief is the whole solution to global poverty, just one significant step that needs to be taken. In the words of the Secretary General of the UN, Kofi Annan, who said in London in early April: "Let us be clear that without a convincing programme of debt relief to start the new millennium, our objective of halving world poverty by 2015 will be only a pipe dream". Not all good newsOn the negative side, the announcement has not yet cost the government anything, as the promised debt relief will not be granted until Nicaragua and Ethiopia are granted debt relief through the HIPC Initiative, which could be a couple of years away. Further, the Government has failed to mention Vietnam, a World Bank and IMF recognised heavily indebted poor country that owes Australian $57 million directly. Vietnam is currently not eligible to be granted debt relief through the HIPC Initiative, but to the limited debt relief granted so far by the developed world creditors. According to Global Development Finance figures for 1997, Vietnam was only able to pay US$907 million in debt service of the US$2,439 million debt service payments due. In fact to meet its required debt service payments, Vietnam would need to commit 48% of its government revenue to debt service. mr Costello has argues that Vietnam is not a heavily indebted poor country. The Jubilee 2000 Debt Relief Campaign believes that the HIPC Initiative is inadequate in:
On the issue of the speed at which debt relief is being delivered, it was expected that 11 countries would have reached the HIPC Initiative "decision point" by the time of the World Bank and IMF meetings in April. However, only Uganda, Bolivia, Mauritania, Mozambique and Tanzania had reached their decision points and no country has reached completion point. "Decision Point" is where the amount of debt relief to be granted is decided upon and "completion point" is where the debt relief is granted. Thus, ten months after the G7 made their promised to deliver a greater level of debt relief, only five countries had reached the decision point, these five countries will have only 40% of their combined debt cancelled and they will still pay an estimated US$565 million dollars every year to foreign creditors - almost as much as they will spend on health care. At the same time Uganda has one of the highest levels of HIV infection in the world; in Bolivia 60% of the population has no access to basic sanitation and Mauritania has an adult literacy rate of 38%. In Tanzania approximately a third of the country's children are malnourished, and under half are enrolled in primary school. Japan undermining Debt ReliefJapan has been lagging behind other countries in being willing to provide for debt relief and has been pressuring poor countries to reject debt relief under threat of losing all foreign aid from Japan. What you can doLetter -writing action sheets for writing to the Japanese Government, urging them to join with the other countries supporting a greater level of debt relief are available. A letter-writing action sheet for writing to our own Government welcoming the steps they have taken on debt relief, but urging them to go further, especially on Vietnamese debt, are also available. Anyone interested in obtaining a copy of either sheet should contact Mark Zirnsak of the Uniting Church in Australia (Victoria) on (03) 9251 5265 or e-mail mark.zirnsak@vic.uca.org.au
|
Site updated
|
|
Opinions expressed on this website do not necessarily reflect those of the APC
This site Copyright of the Australian Peace Committee , contact
APC-SA |
One of the songs was written about the Colebrook Home
where so many South Australian Aboriginal children grew up after they were taken
from their families. There were many people with tears in their eyes as they
listened. Kirstan Power, of Tandanya, warmly welcomed all "grandmothers,
grandfathers, mothers, fathers, aunties, uncles, brothers and sisters" and said
that "reconciliation belongs to us all - a dream shared."