7 Changing rights and

Transcription

1 7 Changing rights and freedoms: Aboriginal peoples INQUIRY QUESTION How have the rights and freedoms of Aboriginal people and other groups in Australia changed during the post-war period? Indigenous Australians have struggled since European invasion in 1788 to retain their rights and freedoms and to have these recognised by the new governments which gained power in Australia. State and later Commonwealth governments implemented policies ranging from protection in the mid nineteenth century to selfdetermination and reconciliation in the late twentieth century. Within this framework, Indigenous Australians have experienced discrimination, inequality, lack of opportunity and denial of control of their own lives and those of their children. They have also been politically active and achieved some significant changes in the struggle for recognition, for justice for the Stolen Generations and for legal acknowledgement of their land rights. A photograph taken on 13 February 2008 as thousands of people gathered to hear the Australian Government s apology to the Stolen Generations

2 7.1 Changing government policies over time segregate: to set apart or isolate from the main group according to race, religion and so on protection: a policy aimed at managing Aboriginal people by separating them from the larger community and imposing strict controls on their lives c.1869 to 1937: Protection From the mid nineteenth century, Australian colonial and state governments adopted protective legislation and policies to control and segregate Aboriginal people from the white population, and from each other. Government policies were enforced by white protectors who administered the reserves and missions and had wide-ranging powers. In the name of protection, governments directed where and how Aboriginal people should live. Government policies of protection denied Aboriginal people their independence and their basic human rights. Governments justified this by arguing that they were civilising and defending the morality of the defenceless Aboriginal community. The protection of Aboriginal people involved control of: sõ movements of Aboriginal people permission was needed to leave or enter fenced reserves and missions where life remained harsh and poor sõ leisure and sporting activities traditional customs and celebrations were forbidden, recreational time was closely watched with an emphasis on Christian worship as the main community activity sõ work, earnings and possessions of Aboriginal people the protector was the legal owner of all personal property including the wages received. Aboriginal people had to apply to spend money that was placed for them in a compulsory savings account, even to buy basic items such as food and clothing. sõ marriages and family life permission to marry had to be granted, traditional names were forbidden and children were separated from their families and sent to schools where they could be trained for work as farm labourers or household servants (see the Stolen Children section on pages ). By the 1920s it was clear that the policies of protection had led to dispossession, despair and a rapid decline in the size of the Aboriginal population. In New South Wales, the Aboriginal Protection Board closed down the reserves and stations on land at Singleton, Bateman s Bay, Wingham and Grafton. These and other sites were the homes of Aboriginal people whose links with that land stretched back thousands of years. This traditional Aboriginal land was now needed for the Soldier Settler Scheme (see page 88) and the Aboriginal people were once again removed. SOURCE 7.1 A description of life on a reserve A number of Aborigines openly defied direction to work and were fined or locked up for their efforts. Generally controls were rigid... The reserves were complete worlds with their own laws, courts, police and gaols. The reserve superintendents were at once policeman, judge and jury... R. Broome, Aboriginal Australians Black Responses to White Dominance, , Allen & Unwin, Sydney, 1982, pp Using source 7.1 and the text, explain how the policy of protection affected the daily and community life of Aboriginal people. 2 Suggest what some of the long-term consequences would be for people living under such conditions. 252 Retroactive 2

3 SOURCE 7.2 In 1934 the Minister for the Interior appealed for homes, with white families, for half-caste and quadroon children. A member of the public wrote asking for the child marked with the cross. quadroon: a racial term used to classify Aboriginal people of mixed ancestry; a quadroon would be one quarter Aboriginal assimilation: policy which forces people to conform to the attitudes, customs and beliefs of the majority of the population status: a person s rank or social position 1 Identify the reason the children in source 7.2 need homes. 2 Explain what source 7.2 suggests about community attitudes during the years of the protection policy to 1965: Assimilation In 1937 the Commonwealth Government held a national conference on Aboriginal affairs. The conference concluded that the way forward was to ensure that people not of full blood were absorbed into towns and cities and the wider white community. According to this new policy of assimilation, Aboriginal people would lose their cultural identity but have their status raised. During the war years there was some improvement in conditions for Aboriginal people, and some change in community attitudes: sõ 1941 child endowment payments were granted to Aboriginal families not living a nomadic lifestyle. sõ 1942 Aboriginal people became eligible for old age and invalid pensions. sõ 1943 Certificates of Exemption were issued to Aboriginal people as a step towards full citizenship, but also required a denial of family ties and Aboriginal cultural identity. In post-war Australia, poverty, discrimination and the lack of opportunity continued to exclude Aboriginal people from the broader community. By 1951, all the Australian states had accepted the principles of assimilation but they had failed to deal with the discrimination that remained in education, housing, employment and health. Aboriginal people continued to live on the fringes of white society amidst widespread racism. CHAPTER 7 Changing rights and freedoms: Aboriginal peoples 253

4 SOURCE 7.3 Certificate of Exemption of James Bloxsome SOURCE 7.4 Excerpt from an article by Michael Sawtell, a member of the Aborigines Welfare Board of NSW in 1958, in Dawn magazine, explaining the issuing of Certificates of Exemption We cannot be expected to grant citizenship to wild tribal aborigines living say, in Arnhem Land, or the Kimberley coast. Later on, when the detribalised aborigines have worked for the white man and learned something of the way to work and live decently in what we call civilisation, then the Welfare Boards all over Australia... may issue to such approved persons of aboriginal blood, Certificates of Exemption, which makes them full citizens... M. Sawtell, The purpose of Exemption Certificates a form of initiation, in Dawn magazine, published by the Aborigines Welfare Board, vol. 7, serial 6, June 1958, p. 7. SOURCE 7.5 The artist Sally Morgan s interpretation of the Certificate of Exemption, or Dog Tag, is shown in her artwork titled Citizenship, created in Explain the purpose of the Certificate of Exemption, as indicated in source Compare the interpretations of the Certificate of Exemption in sources 7.4 and Retroactive 2

5 SOURCE 7.6 Portrait of Albert Namatjira 1956 by William Dargie, Australia, b Oil on canvas, s 76.4 cm. Purchased Collection: Queensland Art Gallery The treatment of Albert Namatjira clearly demonstrated the shortcomings of the Assimilation Policy. Albert Namatjira, an Arrernte man of the Northern Territory, became a widely acclaimed artist during the 1930s. His landscape paintings captured the splendour of central Australia and so appealed to a nation forging an identity. His work was represented in all the state art galleries and collected internationally. In 1954 Namatjira was presented to the Queen in recognition of his contribution to Australian cultural life. In the following year, Namatjira s Aboriginality denied him the right to build a home in Alice Springs. In 1957 Namatjira became the first Aborigine from the Northern Territory to be granted Australian citizenship. In the year following that, he was jailed for supplying alcohol to his cousin who was not a citizen, and so still restricted by laws that made Aboriginal people wards of the state. SOURCE 7.7 Photograph of an Aboriginal family in Brown s Flat, near Nowra, in 1959, showing the type of housing that was typical of Aboriginal people s dwellings in the mid twentieth century SOURCE 7.8 The definition of assimilation changed when it became clear the original aims of the policy were not being achieved. (a) From the 1961 Native Welfare Conference: All Aborigines and part-aborigines are expected eventually to attain the same manner of living as other Australians and live as members of a single Australian community enjoying the same rights and privileges, accepting the same responsibilities, observing the same customs and influenced by the same beliefs, hopes and loyalties as other Australians. (b) From the 1965 Aboriginal Welfare Conference: The policy of assimilation seeks that all persons of Aboriginal descent will choose to attain a similar manner and standard of living to that of other Australians and live as members of a single Australian community. SOURCE QUESTION Compare the two definitions of assimilation in source 7.8. Identify the difference in the words used. CHAPTER 7 Changing rights and freedoms: Aboriginal peoples 255

6 SOURCE 7.9 Daryl Tonkin, a white Australian bushman, describes his experiences in the Aboriginal community of Jackson s Track, Victoria, in the mid twentieth century, and the impact of changing government policies on Aboriginal communities. When it came to blackfellas the Board had the final say. It was as if the Blackfellas were their property, and the Board could do with them as they saw fit. The blackfellas were their wards, and they seemed to believe their wards were wretched people who weren t capable of making their own decisions, weren t good for much, couldn t be trusted. They were a responsibility, a duty, a burden. There was no way to stop the Board from telling the blackfellas what to do. They were like the police, with power to do just about anything they wanted to... Without considering how the blackfellas felt, the policy of the Board was to separate the people from each other, put them singly in white neighbourhoods, hope they would somehow turn white themselves and disappear altogether... Before they lived at the Track, most of them had come from mission stations where they weren t allowed to lift a finger to take care of themselves without being told what to do. At the Track, they had taken care of themselves in a traditional way: they hunted for much of their food, they built their own houses, fetched their own water, collected their own fuel. They worked for their own money to pay for clothes and staples, taxis and entertainment if they wanted it. Even though they did not live on top of each other at the Track, they never acted as individuals, but always as a community, sharing the food and fuel and water, helping each other with their huts, swapping tools and utensils as well as kids, since every adult was an uncle or an aunty to every kid. C. Landon & D. Tonkin, Jackson s Track: Memoir of a Dreamtime Place, Viking, 1999, pp. 256 and 268. integration: Commonwealth Government policy denoting respect for all cultures and willingness to accept their expression within the broader community self-determination: the right of a group to choose and control its own destiny and development 1 Using source 7.9, identify ways in which the changes in government policy affected Aboriginal people s way of life. 2 Explain how the Jackson s Track memoir is a useful primary source for historians examining government policy on Aboriginal communities. c.1965 to 1972: Integration The Commonwealth Government announced its policy of integration in 1965 and then did little towards implementing it. The policy meant that Indigenous people would be able to voice and openly celebrate their cultural differences. Following the success of the 1967 Referendum, Prime Minister Harold Holt ( ) was in a position to create laws that would help make integration a reality. He established the Council for Aboriginal Affairs and put the Office of Aboriginal Affairs within the Prime Minister s Department. At the same time, his government did not provide the funding needed to meet Indigenous people s expectations for improvement resulting from both the changed policy and from the Referendum result. Subsequently, Prime Minister William McMahon ( ) took a less sympathetic approach towards Indigenous issues (see page 274). A lack of commitment to integration policy meant that change was slow and inconsistent. A new integration framework did not really emerge to replace the old assimilation framework. The value of Aboriginal culture and identity was still not being recognised within the broader Australian community to c.2005: Self-determination The most important policy change came in 1972 with the election of the Whitlam Labor government and the introduction of its policy of self-determination. This was a policy of facilitating Indigenous people s involvement in decision making for and management of their communities. The policy of self-determination, to be administered through the newly created Department of Aboriginal Affairs (DAA), marked the first significant involvement of the Commonwealth Government in policy making and the provision of support for Aboriginal people. For Aboriginal Australians, this change in government policy brought a formal end to the remnants of protection and assimilation and the beginnings of structures like land 256 Retroactive 2

7 SOURCE 7.10 ATSIC s objectives as listed in Section 3 of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission Act 1989 (Cwlth) councils and national representative bodies that would facilitate Indigenous Australians control of their own affairs. Representative bodies established in the 1970s and 1980s were: sõ the National Aboriginal Consultative Committee (NACC) ( ). The Whitlam government established the NACC and Indigenous people voted for their representatives to this body. The government consulted the NACC on Indigenous issues and the NACC provided advice to the government. This marked the first significant participation of Indigenous people as advisers to the Commonwealth Government and so was of symbolic importance, even if its advice was not implemented. sõ the National Aboriginal Conference (NAC) ( ). The Fraser government ( ) continued the policy of self-determination, which it referred to as selfmanagement. It introduced the NAC in 1977 to replace the NACC, which had been disbanded after conflict with the DAA over the extent of its role and authority. Once again, it was Indigenous people who voted for the members of this body. The NAC was weakened by its failure to mobilise support from Indigenous people themselves and, like the NACC before it, by ongoing conflict with the DAA. sõ the Aboriginal Development Commission (ADC) ( ). Initially chaired by Charles Perkins (see page 359), the ADC consisted of 10 government-appointed Indigenous commissioners. It administered housing and business loans and grants to Indigenous people. In 1990 the House of Representatives defined the principles of self-determination as: Aboriginal control over the decision-making process as well as control over the ultimate decision about a wide range of matters including political status, and economic, social and cultural development. It means Aboriginal people have the resources and the capacity to control the future of their own communities within the legal structure common to all Australians. One of the ways it sought to achieve this was through the creation of ATSIC. ATSIC ( ) Introduced by legislation during the Hawke government ( ), the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) provided the formal structure through which Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples could play a role in decision making on Indigenous issues. ATSIC s nationwide role was to advise governments, to fight for Indigenous rights and to take responsibility for and deliver most of the programs and services for Indigenous people funded by the Commonwealth Government. The objects of this Act are, in recognition of the past dispossession and dispersal of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and their present disadvantaged position in Australian society: (a) to ensure maximum participation of Aboriginal persons and Torres Strait Islanders in the formulation and implementation of government policies that affect them; (b) to promote the development of self-management and self-sufficiency among Aboriginal persons and Torres Strait Islanders; (c) to further the economic, social and cultural development of Aboriginal persons and Torres Strait Islanders; and (d) to ensure co-ordination in the formulation and implementation of policies affecting Aboriginal persons and Torres Strait Islanders by the Commonwealth, State, Territory and local governments, without detracting from the responsibilities of State, Territory and local governments to provide services to their Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander residents. SOURCE QUESTION Explain how the above objectives express the policy of selfdetermination. ATSIC provided advice to the Commonwealth Government on issues affecting them, including the performance of other government bodies. In the late 1990s, the Commonwealth Government was providing about $1.6 billion per year for ATSIC s programs. About one-third of this funding replaced funding which would normally be available through other programs and about 10 per cent of ATSIC s expenditure was on the provision of services which perhaps should have been provided by state or local governments. CHAPTER 7 Changing rights and freedoms: Aboriginal peoples 257

8 reconciliation: a Commonwealth Government policy aimed at improving relationships between Indigenous and non-indigenous Australians. Its key features were a recognition of past injustices and an understanding of how relationships between Indigenous and non- Indigenous Australians have been shaped by past events, policies and attitudes. SOURCE 7.11 Mind map showing the key issues to be tackled as identified by the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation Understanding country Controlling destinies Agreeing on a document The Howard government ( ) was less committed to self-determination, which it labelled self-empowerment, than its predecessors. ATSIC s management and funding decisions had been criticised for a number of years. The government abolished ATSIC in 2005 and transferred responsibility for its funding and programs to other government departments. Debate focused on whether ATSIC s objectives would be best served by the creation of another Indigenous organisation or by mainstreaming, that is, by using mainstream government departments to deliver them. The end of ATSIC seemed to suggest the end of the policy of self-determination, although Australia s two main parties, to varying degrees, still support Indigenous selfmanagement and self-empowerment to late 1990s: Reconciliation The Hawke government ( ) identified reconciliation as an important goal for the period leading to the centenary of Australian Federation in On 2 September 1991, the federal Parliament unanimously passed the Council for Reconciliation Act. The Act established the 25-member Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation with representatives from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups as well as from industry, agriculture, the union movement, employers, the media and the major political parties. The Council aimed at having all Australians recognise Improving relationships The key issues of reconciliation Responding to custody levels Valuing cultures Sharing histories Addressing disadvantage that Australia s Indigenous people were the original owners of the land; that they have suffered ongoing social and economic disadvantage as a result of having their land taken from them; and that this has resulted in Indigenous people missing many of the benefits of life that other Australians take for granted. The Council lobbied for recognition of customary law, self-government for Indigenous Australians, compensation for past injustices, a settlement of native title issues (see pages 281 5) and recognition within the Constitution of Indigenous people s rights. The Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation planned its final major public event in Sydney for May 2000, but many Australians felt powerless in the absence of more positive government enthusiasm for the process. Reconciliation awaits the achievement of justice with regard to Indigenous land rights and to equity with other Australians in health, living conditions, education and employment. SOURCE 7.12 A 1991 cartoon by Geoff Pryor commenting on government policies towards Indigenous Australians 1 Briefly explain the point the cartoonist is making in source Identify the techniques the cartoonist uses to convey his message. 258 Retroactive 2

9 practical reconciliation : Prime Minister Howard s policy of viewing the reconciliation process in terms of the outcomes it achieved in health, education, employment and living standards. The policy also means that people neither work to understand past injustices nor accept responsibility for past wrongs. Explain means give reasons for something, especially in terms of cause and effect relationships. Late 1990s to c.2004: Practical reconciliation Prime Minister John Howard responded by advocating what he called practical reconciliation, which focused on gaining equality in health, education and living standards. Although these were worthy goals, critics expressed their concerns that this meant failing to encourage understanding of issues relating to past injustices and expecting Indigenous people to accept this. By the end of the twentieth century, Indigenous people were still seeking justice in housing, health, land rights, and within the legal system. Australia s governments have yet to develop the policies that will effectively deliver equity and justice to Indigenous people. SOURCE 7.13 Cartoon by Peter Nicholson published in the Australian on 30 August : Intervention On 21 June 2007, Prime Minister Howard announced his government s intention to intervene in 64 Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. The aim of the intervention policy was to protect children threatened by violence and abuse. Critics of this policy say that imposing solutions from outside will only meet resistance and could potentially signal a return to practices similar to those of the protectionism of another era. ACTIVITIES CHECK YOUR UNDERSTANDING 1 Create a flowchart to illustrate the changing government policies for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Include the relevant time periods and a definition for each policy in your flowchart. 2 Explain why the policy of assimilation failed to improve the living conditions and opportunities for Indigenous people. 3 Outline the similarities and differences between the policies of assimilation and integration. 4 Identify two barriers that have prevented the policy of reconciliation from achieving its aims. COMMUNICATE 5 Imagine it is the 1970s and you wish to explain to the broader Australian community the reasons government policy on Indigenous issues needs to change. Write a letter to a newspaper explaining the benefits of the new policy of self-determination for Aboriginal people and for Australia. 6 Using ideas from the political cartoons in this unit, design your own cartoon to make a comment on a government policy towards Aboriginal Australians. Decide on the message of the cartoon, the characters you will create and the techniques you will use to communicate your ideas. CHAPTER 7 Changing rights and freedoms: Aboriginal peoples 259