A 'sorry' budget - about $3 billion

With perhaps the exception of some members of the National Indigenous Council and a small number of Indigenous liberal recruits who benefited under a coalition government, I feel confident in saying that Indigenous Australians were united as one on November 24 in support of a common cause: a Labor Party victory at the federal poll.

In the final analysis, of most importance to me, were three definitive announcements: a 5.9 per cent swing on a two-party preferred basis to Labor (Labor unseating the Coalition); 5.8 per cent swing in Bennelong (Maxine McKew unseating John Howard); and 10.5 per cent in Longman (Jon Sullivan unseating Mal Brough).

I know it’s not chivalrous to gloat over a win in any sporting contest but I’m sure I’ll be forgiven by family and friends just this once for what was an extraordinary outpouring of jubilation from me and which I imagine would have been audible to my neighbours.

I’m not sure of the demographics of the street I live in but gauging by the lack of proportionate excitement I gathered they may have had their money on the losing team.

This win was not only an emphatic statement from workers united against the unfair Industrial Relations laws but a confirmation I believe from a broad spectrum of Australians rediscovering their national ethos of giving everyone a “fair go”.

And I include in that national ethos the suite of controversial Indigenous policies; the Northern Territory intervention, abolition of ATSIC, canning of CDEP (work for the dole) and CHIP (community housing infrastructure program) and many other crucial long running programs that were critical to Indigenous Australians, that most caring Australians felt the outgoing government had also been heavy handed with.

I sat transfixed to the television set and heard John Howard concede to his shocked supporters from the Sydney Wentworth Hotel ballroom and waited for the man of the moment, “Kevin 07”, to present his acceptance speech from the Suncorp Stadium venue in Brisbane.

Although he said he would govern for all Australians, including Indigenous Australians, it just didn’t have that charismatic ring to it that matched the Paul Keating acceptance speech back in 2003.

Keating announced at 11.30pm on the close of polls on that famous night: "This is the sweetest victory of all. This is a victory for the true believers" - to celebrate a win achieved primarily because of John Hewson's proposal to introduce a goods and services tax.

Although it has only been a few short days it seems like a lot of water has passed under the bridge since Kevin Rudd gave his acceptance speech and every day since there has been growing conjecture and disquiet among journalists and Indigenous leaders in newsrooms and in Indigenous communities on whether he will say “sorry”.

Speaking on ABC radio, former ATSIC chairman Lionel Quartermaine says Mr Rudd, in the past week, has skirted around answering questions on Labor's Indigenous policy.

"He was asked that, if he was to get in and become Prime Minister, would he say ‘sorry’ and he went around that. He didn't actually say 'Yes, I'm going to say sorry', he said a whole range of other words which disappoints me," Mr Quartermaine said.

"So therefore I don't think that Kevin Rudd is going to deliver on Indigenous affairs at all."

Mr Quartermaine was obviously referring to the interview Rudd gave to 3AW’s Neil Mitchell when asked if he’d say “sorry” to Indigenous Australians if he became Prime Minister.

Rudd: Well, the substance of it will be sorry, apology, but frankly if you ask me for the precise form of language …

Mitchell: No, I'm asking for that one word, because this is where the Prime Minister has been targeted. Will you use the word sorry?

Rudd: Yeah, I said in the debate against the Prime Minister at the beginning of the campaign that were we elected to form the next government of Australia, I will as Prime Minister of the country of course express an apology, and I make no bones with that.

Mitchell: But the Prime Minister has already done that. Will you say sorry?

Rudd: Well, apology is sorry, it's the same thing.

Interestingly Rudd has stated in recent days that his government will make a formal apology to Indigenous Australians early in its first term. "It will be early in the parliamentary term," Mr Rudd said. "We will frame it in a consultative fashion with communities and that may take some time." His deputy Julia Gillard made the same pledge earlier, saying it was Labor policy to say "sorry".

In an unexpected change to the staid views of John Howard, and perhaps a pleasant sign of things to come, Liberal leadership hopeful Malcolm Turnbull, speaking on ABC radio, has backed the Labor Government’s moves to say “sorry” to Indigenous Australians.

Mr Turnbull says John Howard’s failure to say sorry was a mistake. "Clearly we should have said sorry then," he said. "Unquestionably that was an error I'd say, about a friend, John Howard. I think John got himself into a bit of a semantic tangle there. And you know, getting into semantics about regret versus sorry, that's a waste of time. But having said that it's one thing to say sorry, you should do that, but the critical thing is getting the substance right."

Mr Howard offered his "deep and sincere regret" for past wrongs against the Aboriginal community but baulked at saying "sorry".

Mr Rudd is under pressure to use the symbolically-important word but says he is yet to decide on the exact wording of his statement.

We’re not even a month into the term of the Rudd’s administration and still there is enormous interest and conjecture on this singular debate that commenced as government policy at the turn of the 19th century and involved forcefully removed mixed race children from their Aboriginal parents.

I firmly believe that Rudd needs to say the word “sorry” as a starting point and then set up a specific pool of money to remunerate those affected for their loss and suffering.

So what is the magical dollar figure that would go a long way to putting closure to this darkest and disturbing chapter in Australia’s history?

The answer is simple - a $3 billion capped budget.

I believe this is achievable and very cost effective and will not cost a single cent of tax payer’s money as I will show.

I also believe the $15+ billion surplus that the frugal Howard government created will be maintained, if not exceeded, every year for the next three years and beyond by the self confessed “economic conservative” Kevin Rudd.

Howard secured this outstanding financial surplus windfall through the GST (10 per cent of all economic transactions) and the large mining boom in Western Australia and Queensland that has fed the insatiable appetite of India and China for our natural resources, especially iron ore and coal. Those two super powers are only in the early stages of their grand economic plan and as such their demand for our natural resources has a lifespan of another decade at the very least.

I recommend the government place $5 billion as an endowment (bequest) fund in a fixed term interest bearing account for a period of six years (capped) for those who identify as being victims of the stolen generation. The $500 million that it would generate (in interest at 10 per cent) each year for the six-year term of this government would be $3 billion (capped) and would be expended within the time frame of this governments term of office.

After that term the government, which Labor should will hopefully hold for two terms, can simply withdraw the $5 billion from the interest bearing account and redistribute the money into another project - preferably an Indigenous specific one.

Under this proposal the government will not lose any tax payer’s money to fund this project - but will simply quarantine a third of its surplus for a fixed time. Remembering of course the following year an additional surplus of $15 billion plus will go into their coffers to adequately address any tightening of the belt that may have occurred as a result of this generous but necessary action to put closure on the stolen generation issue.

If you wish to look for a precedent of funding of a similar cause in Australia - check out the Redress Scheme currently operating in Queensland. The Queensland Government has introduced the Redress Scheme to provide ex gratia payments to people who experienced abuse and neglect as children in Queensland institutions.

Up to $100 million will be available for payments, legal and financial services to applicants and for practical assistance in completing applications.

The Queensland government acknowledged that while neglect and abuse was found to have occurred in some institutions covered by the Forde Inquiry into the Abuse of Children in Queensland institutions, this was not necessarily the case with all institutions.

Rudd should head the words of the famous American cultural anthropologist Margaret Mead who once said; "Never believe that a few caring people can't change the world. For, indeed, that's all who ever have."