Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Black or white - a man’s home is his castle

By Jocelynne Scutt - posted Friday, 13 July 2007


It established “homemaker” programs to provide domestic education to residents. It puts into effect the principle that weather conditions, including temperature, family constellations and social organisation should be taken into account. No point in having one lavatory per household, if the household consists of more than the “white” standard of two adults and two or three children. No sense in having garden taps easily turned on by children, where puddles can transmit disease or dripping faucets can be accessed by both thirsty children and family pets.

Where Indigenous Australian funds have been used to build roads and streets, these are effectively private roadways, owned by the Indigenous communities whose funds have built them. These rights do not come with, or only by reason of, the permit system. Rather, they are owned as any Australian organisation would consider ownership lies with buildings and other appurtenances constructed from funds gained by public benevolent organisations or charities.

Would “mainstream” charities countenance government assertion of ownership over their property, simply because the funds or some of them came by way of government grants? Hardly. Would churches accept troops or police coming onto their land because the built environment came through funding from government, or through the absolute tax exemptions (a huge hole in government revenue) extended to churches? Not likely.

Advertisement

Yet Indigenous Australians are expected to put up with two wrongs. First, the assertions of those who know little or nothing about government funding and grants to Aboriginal communities and organisations and, hence, make allegations of “too much money” and failure to utilise monies effectively. Second, the coming on to property of police and military via private roads and streets - roads and streets owned by Indigenous Australian communities.

Ironically, successive Australian governments have expected Indigenous Australians to provide roads, streets and utilities from funding labelled “Aboriginal”. Now, the Howard Government ignores this reality and conducts its business as if the roads, streets and utilities have come from general public funds akin to the funding of roads, streets and utilities for “white” Australia.

By rights, Aboriginal communities are entitled to keep strangers off their roads and streets, and to deny them access to electricity, water and buildings. They have a right to say “no” to security forces entering their property via their private roads and streets. Yet “private” does not apply to their roads, their streets, their utilities, for it has no meaning where the current Australian government is concerned.

As Indigenous Australians have known for more than 200 years, what goes for “white” Australia doesn’t go for them.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

21 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Jocelynne A. Scutt is a Barrister and Human Rights Lawyer in Mellbourne and Sydney. Her web site is here. She is also chair of Women Worldwide Advancing Freedom and Dignity.

She is also Visiting Fellow, Lucy Cavendish College, University of Cambridge.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Jocelynne Scutt

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 21 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy