The white-anting of ATSIC has been brought about by the usual suspects

That's why smart ATSIC commissioners, the big land councils, such as the Northern and Central Land Councils and many people working in Aboriginal affairs, are happily endorsing Latham's new policy thrust.

They are happy to sacrifice ATSIC not because it has failed but because it was a model of limited self-determination which had much to offer, and did much good work, before Howard smashed it with the creation of ATSIS.

They would understand the sort of sentiments uttered by Bob Beadman at the beginning of this column.

They remember when ATSIC was able to deliver its programs and talk about a rights agenda. When, they ask, did you last see the word treaty in a mainstream media headline?

They remember life before ATSIS.

They happily concede ATSIC has been battered and bruised. Poisoned by perception.

The new debate frees them from defending an organisation that is a shadow of its former self. It allows them to concentrate upon building upon its successes.

They concede it has had its failures, like all government agencies. But it has not failed.

They know they can fashion a new organisation that builds on both those successes and those failures and the new debate may just deliver a better model of self-determination.

They know the debate offers them the opportunity to inform anyone who is prepared to listen about the true history and record of achievement of ATSIC... and the murky world of ATSIS.

It's a history few Australians know.

Fair dinkum.